Health Promotion: Individual vs. Government Roles in Society

This essay delves into the ongoing debate surrounding the roles of government and individuals in health promotion, particularly in addressing chronic diseases and lifestyle behaviors. It examines the argument that individuals bear the primary responsibility for their health, highlighting the effectiveness of personal influence and the potential limitations of government interventions. The essay also explores the counter-argument, emphasizing the government's crucial role in implementing public health initiatives, providing accessible information, and protecting individuals from harm. It discusses specific examples such as smoking cessation programs, calorie labeling, and smoke-free laws, illustrating the government's capacity to influence behavior and promote societal well-being. Ultimately, the essay presents a nuanced perspective, recognizing the importance of both individual responsibility and governmental action in creating a healthier society.

RUNNING HEAD: Health Promotion
Health Promotion

Health Promotion 1
All across the world, an unsustainable burden of chronic disease has been created with disparities
across race, geography, income, gender and education as a result of poor lifestyle behaviors such
as physical inactivity, obesity and low diet quality. An important role is played by the
government in addressing the health of the population and lifestyle behaviors, reducing chronic
disease and health disparities. The government involvement areas include research, surveillance,
access to health care, programming, guidelines for physical activity and diet and quality
assurance. This essay discusses the statement that the government should have little or no role to
play in determining people’s behavior. Promotion of health is the responsibility of the individual.
This statement is true to some extend as the government can take a number of steps for
determining people’s behavior but ultimately, it is the responsibility of individuals to promote
health. When promotion of health is undertaken by individuals, they are supposed to be more
effective as people understand and get influenced by such promotion very easily. On the other
hand, when government takes steps for promoting health and guiding the behavior of individuals,
such actions are not given much importance and same path is followed by individuals until a ban
is executed on such products or actions. From one individual to another, slowly it the health
promotion can have a wide reach and can bring healthier results for the public (1).
Moreover, the ultimate role in health promotion is of the individuals and not of the government.
If an individual pledges to promote health, it can start it by introducing certain rules at work. It
will assist the employer in reducing the medical costs associated with the employees and will
promote healthier lives for the employees (2). Such strategies binds an individual to adopt a
healthier life as it becomes a requirement for survival in the workplace or severe penalties may
impose. If such responsibility is adequately met by the individuals, they have the capability of
bringing a complete change in the society (3).

Health Promotion 2
Moreover, certain insurance programs are introduced by the government for the promotion of
healthy future of the individuals. Individuals cannot promote a program on such a large scale as
undertaken by the government but they have greater influencing power than the government. For
example, if the employers in the organization makes such rules that employees will be rewarded
for good behaviors (such as smoking cessation and exercising) and on the other hand, they will
get punished in case their behavior is a bad one (gaining excess weight, continuing to smoke,
etc.) (4). The implementations of health promotion policies at the organizational can be helpful
as large number of people can be targeted at a single time. They will have no other choice than to
comply with each and every aspect of such policies for sustaining in the organization (5). Such
working population might not get that much influenced through he steps taken by the
government. Therefore, even if there is no role of government in determining behavior of the
individuals, it will not have any major effects. Huge expenditures are made by the government in
taking such actions; however, it can bring better results at the individual level. They can be
guided by the government but the adoption of a healthier lifestyle will always remain their own
choice.
An important role is played by the individuals in developing personal skills in context of health.
After government plays their part by the formulation of public policy, now it becomes the
responsibility of the individuals to act in accordance with the delivered policies such as not
smoking in public areas. The government has planned, implemented and managed the
infrastructure for the purpose of creating supportive environments for health in the form of
infrastructures such as hospitals, community centres, parks, etc. It is the responsibility of the
individuals to make better health choices by way of maintain and using the environment. This
can be done by them by putting waste in the bins provided by the government, going on a walk

Health Promotion 3
every day, going for regular check- ups in the nearby government hospitals at low prices. The
individuals are responsible for promoting the community activities that promote health and show
active involvement in the various actions taken by the community. This can be done in the form
of promoting fun runs, engaging in community discussions regarding health.
The role of the government is limited to the development of policies and provisions of funding
towards the development of personal skills. The more important responsibility is with the
individuals who look for developing their own skills in the context of health. They are enabled
for taking charge of their own health such as researching the behavioral choices for their health,
acting in accordance with the advice from the health practitioners, enrolling in various
community programs, etc. (6).
The role of the government in the re- orientation of health services is limited up to the creation
and funding of the policies around the prevention and promotion of health. They train primary
sector for health promotion along with its cure and create awareness through tv advertisements.
However, further it is the responsibility of the individuals to make healthy choices. They are also
supposed to help others in doing the same including contribution in health promotion (7).
Individuals can fulfill a number of roles and different levels of responsibility in the context of
health promotion. The health promotion starts at the individual level by fulfilling the
responsibility of promoting one’s own health. For this, firstly, they need to become educated
regarding health, specifically the protective and risk behaviors. Furthermore, the individual is
also responsible for the protection of health of the individuals around them. This includes the
promotion of health at school, to peers and family. For example, children should be assisted by
the parents in making healthier choices and in having a healthy environment. Another example

Health Promotion 4
constitutes of a peers who are encouraged by a teenager for participating in physical activities
along with assisting them in the avoidance of alcohol use and smoking (8). In other words, in
case of promotion of health, an individual is responsible for the actions of people around them in
an active manner. Moreover, there is variation in the role of an individual on the basis of their
position in the society. For example, there is a different role of a child from that of a parent, but
both of them can play an active role in health promotion. Similarly, a healthcare practitioner has
a larger role in health promotion as they are considered to be the sources of authoritative
knowledge and are therefore responsible for their respective clients and for the promotion of
health to the wider community and not only those existing in their immediate environment.
Those who are regarded as the role model in the society such as elite athletes are capable of
easily promoting health in the society. When people watch their role models promoting
something, they easily get influenced by it. However, there is no such influence and impact of
the acts of government on the minds of people. Furthermore, celebrity health specialists ore
celebrity chefs are in a privileged position for promoting health among the individuals.
Individuals are now in a better position to promote health with the help of technology as it offers
a number of methods for doing so. It can be done by individuals by writing a blog with
information related to health (9). The use of social media can also be made for sharing health
related information and own research can be performed into health regarding the issues that are
relevant to them (10). Such actions can ensure wider health promotion and encourage individuals
to take their role and responsibility for the promotion of health (11). This helps in concluding
that there is no importance of the role of government in determining the behavior of people.
Individuals have the capability of widely promoting health along with influencing the health of a
number of people (12).

Health Promotion 5
However, it is also argued that the role of government should not be minimized or eliminated in
determining people’s behavior. This is due to the fact that individuals do not always behave in
the interest of their own and community. Some of the behaviors are completely undesirable and
need to be prevented. As far as public health is concerned, certain practices are undertaken by
the individuals such as tobacco use which severely affects their health. Lack of physical activity
and poor diet are some of the reasons that cause obesity in individuals (13). Public health
initiatives undertaken by the government include efforts for promoting open and free information
for the purpose of facilitating informed decision making, protecting individuals from being
harmed by groups and other individuals and facilitating societal action for promoting and
protecting health. Such initiatives of the government empowers people by providing free and
open information for making informed choices and reducing the probability that hidden
information or misinformation will endanger health. The approach used by the individuals in
health promotion does not have a large reach. However, the government can extend its
operations related to health promotion on a wider scale which is not possible at an individual
level (14).
The disclosure of factual information and prevention from the dissemination of misleading or
inaccurate information is not an easy task at the level of an individual. Laws are required for
undertaking health promotion practices and extending its reach so that everyone can understand
what options should be chosen by them for keeping their health protected. Government can
undertake practices such as requiring calorie labelling in restaurants which have the capability of
encouraging various companies to offer and people to select more healthy food options. Such

Health Promotion 6
transparency required by the laws is often valued by the people irrespective of the health effects
(15).
The information provided by the government is considered to be more authentic than the
information provided by the individuals. However, such wider power lies only with the
government. The power of such information is visible from the fact that a large number of people
have been encouraged to quit smoking as the result of graphic warnings on the packages of
tobacco and advertising related to anti-tobacco. Clear information is conveyed by the pack
warnings regarding the health effects of tobacco usage thereby creating a visceral and visual
counter to the misleading and often aggressive information spread by the tobacco companies,
which have been found guilty of purposely misleading public regarding the health effects of
tobacco (16).
Another role of government in determining the behavior of the individuals included protecting
them from the preventable harm that is caused by groups or other individuals. Others may get
affected as a result of the right of the individual to engage in specific conduct. It is the
responsibility of the government to take into consideration the protection of individuals from the
unhealthy environments, whether the health risk sources are natural or the creation of
organizations or people (17).
Therefore, it is argued that for certain issues, government may be the only entity which has the
capability of promoting the greater good of people by reconciling economic and social interests.
Applying a limit on the promotion of alcohol and tobacco assists individuals by minimizing its
consumption and provides advantages to the companies by way of increasing the productivity of
workforce and reducing the overall healthcare costs. The employees and shareholders of the

Health Promotion 7
alcohol and tobacco companies are benefitted as a result of increased use of such products, but it
also increases the economic, medical, and social costs for the society along with illness and
deaths caused due the usage of these products. It is the responsibility of the government to act in
response to such factors and to take steps for health promotion (18).
The smoke free laws demonstrate the increasing acceptance of the actions that protect
individuals from the conduct of others. Laws cannot be introduced by individuals for binding
others for not undertaking certain practices. The introduction of such laws are often found to be
controversial, with rivals foretelling reduced profits for hospitality industry and criticizing
contravention of personal freedoms. However, such laws gain acceptance when people start
recognizing the health benefits arising out of it (19).
Furthermore, individuals can only create awareness at their level regarding the factors causing
hazardous effects on the health. However, the government is capable of taking action by
eliminating the hazardous elements from being used that cause harmful effects on the health. For
example, actions have been taken by the government for the purpose of preventing harm caused
by others through the elimination of artificial trans fats from the food supplies which in turn
protects the individuals from the contributor to cardiovascular disease (20). The ignition
interlock devices necessitated by the government in the vehicles protects the public from the
convicted truck drivers.
The role of government in determining people’s behavior is important as government is capable
of taking population- wide action for such protection and promotion. For the protection of public
health, the actions of government are more effective and efficient means than the actions of
individuals. Floridization of water, immunization mandates, micronutrient fortification of flour

Health Promotion 8
and iodization of salt are all the examples of this type of actions which can only be taken by
government and not by individuals (21). All these actions created controversies at the initial
stages but now they have been widely accepted because they help in saving money and reducing
disability, illness and death.
These actions have the capability of serving entire community and cannot be feasibly
implemented by the individuals on their own. The public health actions that are most
controversial consider the regulation of behavior of individuals in a way which can improve their
own health. The Government is always interested in a healthier population which is the reason
behind the provision of knowledge to the individuals so that they can make right decisions and
does not cause harm to their health. There have been some controversial issues such as taxing,
limiting portion sizes and decreasing access to sugar- sweetened beverages. Similarly, laws
related to the use of helmet on motorcycles and seatbelt in cars demonstrate the balancing acts
performed by the government between individual rights and health benefits have and related
financial costs for the purpose of enforcement (22). However, such enforcements reduce societal
costs, prevent deaths and traffic injuries.
The public health actions taken by the government have a number of potential benefits including
health care, economic and productivity gains along with certain intrinsic benefits of healthier and
longer lives. It is the responsibility of the government to protect the individuals through the
dissemination of accurate information and implementation of effective public health actions. The
failure of the government in the protection and improvement of the health of people result in the
sufferings of the society. Promotion and marketing by the government at a large scale results in
the acknowledgement of a number of individuals (23). However, the overall economic
development resulting due to these actions are often ignored by not giving due importance to the

Health Promotion 9
role of government. However, it the responsibility of the government to make the
implementation of effective health measures that results in increasing the information available
to the general public. This assists individuals in making right decisions, promoting health,
protecting people from harm and creating an environment which supports healthy behaviors. The
individuals and whole society is benefitted from the public health actions by resulting in
financial, health and productivity gains.
Therefore, it can be concluded that there are conflicting views on the topic that “the government
should have little or no role in determining the behavior of people. Promotion of health is the
responsibility of the individual”. Some argue that promotion of health undertaken by individuals
is supposed to be more effective as people understand and get influenced by such promotion very
easily. This is due to the fact that ultimate role in health promotion is of the individuals and not
of the government. Government can guide individuals but the adoption of a healthier lifestyle
will always remain their own choice. Government’s role is limited to the development of policies
and provisions of funding towards the development of personal skills. More important
responsibility is with the individuals who look for developing their own skills in the context of
health. They can easily promote health at school, to peers and family (24).
However, it is also true that role of government should not be minimized or eliminated in
determining people’s behavior. This is because that the behavior of the individuals is not always
in the interest of their own and community. Government can undertake promotion of health at a
large scale by disseminating information to make informed decision making, formulating laws
and plans, which is not possible at the individual level. More authenticity is assumed in the
information provided by the government than the information provided by the individuals.

Health Promotion 10
Governments also have the ability of protecting the individuals from preventable harm resulting
in benefits for the individuals and entire society.
Therefore, individuals and government have their own role in the promotion of health and both
are equally important. None of the role can considered to be less important as both complement
each other. Promotion of health can take place effectively only when both government and
individuals will seriously perform their roles. Therefore, it cannot be said that ‘the government
should have little or no role to play in determining people’s behavior. Promotion of health is a
responsibility of the individual.’

Health Promotion 11
References
1. Naidoo J, Wills J. Foundations for Health Promotion-E-Book. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2016
Feb 19.
2. Kilpatrick M, Sanderson K, Blizzard L, Nelson M, Frendin S, Teale B, Venn A. Workplace
health promotion: what public-sector employees want, need, and are ready to change. Journal
of occupational and environmental medicine. 2014 Jun 1;56(6):645-51.
3. Harbin T. Evaluating Workplace Health Promotion. Journal of Management. 2016
Dec;4(2):1-0.
4. Baum F, Fisher M. Why behavioural health promotion endures despite its failure to reduce
health inequities. Sociology of health & illness. 2014 Feb 1;36(2):213-25.
5. Lovell S, Egan R, Robertson L, Hicks K. Health promotion funding, workforce recruitment
and turnover in New Zealand. Journal of primary health care. 2015;7(2):153-7.
6. Eldredge LK, Markham CM, Ruiter RA, Kok G, Parcel GS. Planning health promotion
programs: an intervention mapping approach. John Wiley & Sons; 2016.
7. Edelman CL, Mandle CL, Kudzma EC. Health Promotion Throughout the Life Span-E-Book.
Elsevier Health Sciences; 2017 Jul 25.
8. Johnson K. Smoking, alcohol and obesity: Health promotion opportunities relevant to acutely
ill vascular and urology patients. Links to Health and Social Care. 2017 Nov 28;2(2):52-65.
9. Park H, Reber BH, Chon MG. Tweeting as health communication: health organizations’ use
of twitter for health promotion and public engagement. Journal of health communication.
2016 Feb 1;21(2):188-98.
10. Loss J, Lindacher V, Curbach J. Online social networking sites—a novel setting for health
promotion?. Health & place. 2014 Mar 1;26:161-70.