Race Standards From a Substantive Point-Of-View, \"Race/Ethnicity

¶ … Race Standards

From a substantive point-of-view, "Race/Ethnicity and the 2000 Census: Implications for Public Health" details the changes made in the terms of public health record keeping as mandated by the 1997 revised U.S. Office of Management and Budget Standards (Sondik et al., 1709). The duration of the article then explores the ramifications of these changes, both as they actually are and as they will be perceived to be due to difficulties presented with the implementation of these fairly new changes in previously existent standards. The fundamental alteration produced by the 1997 Office of Management and Budget, of course, is that the new set of standards being used will allow for individuals to claim multiple races while filling out census information which is used for the purpose of instituting and adhering to health information policy. While it has always been possible to report that an individual considered himself or herself to be comprised of more than one race in the standards that were used prior to the 1997 change, people's race would still be recorded via the "follow-up question," which asks "which race best represents them" (Sondik et al., 1710). The 1997 standards, however, enables people to identify themselves as multiracial and to outline which specific races they are comprised of.

There were several methodological considerations for this particular article, which were primarily concerned with ascertaining how people identify themselves by race in census reporting. The need to do so, of course, was readily identified early on in the text, in which a series of racial disparities was used to cite endemic health differences with potentially devastating diseases such as HIV and its proclivity towards groups of Whites, Blacks, and Hispanics. Furthermore, the study demonstrated how the 1997 standards' ability to allow people to identify themselves as multiracial could significantly impact the results of a health survey. This fact was suitably proven via a the usage of statistics comparing the incidence of cigarette smoking among, respectively, groups of whites, groups of American Indians and Alaskan Natives, and multiracial groups comprised of American Indians/Alaskan Natives and Whites.

One of the most interesting components of this particular article, however, involved the discussion of how and why certain racial groups are identified by people. A host of factors for doing so were considered, including both actual and perceived benefits that could be gained from identifying with a potential group from a social standpoint. Additionally, there were political considerations as well -- such as the agendas of groups of people that were aiming to strengthen their factions and desired ends for producing a society devoid of race. Other factors that were taken into consideration in determining how and why people categorize themselves as part of a particular racial group have to do with who is doing the actual reporting -- which may vary depending on the specific circumstances such as those germane to birth statistics and death statistics, which may be at variance with the racial identity of the actual person's choice who is either born or has died (Sondik et al., 1712).