To the Teacher
This two-part lesson consists of two readings which review gun violence through the lens of public health. The first reading provides an overview of U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy’s declaration of gun violence as a public health crisis, discussing the overall goals of the public health advisory. The second reading explains what it means to approach gun violence as a public health issue, and it examines how some grassroots activists are responding to the Surgeon General’s advisory. Questions for discussion follow each reading as well as an art-based activity to complete once finished reading both articles.
Photo by Natalie Chaney on Unsplash
Reading One — Gun Violence is Declared a Public Health Crisis
In the summer of 2024, for the first time in the nation’s history, U.S. Surgeon General Vivek Murthy declared that gun violence was a national public health crisis. In a June 25, 2024 story for Reuters, political reporters Susan Heavey and Doina Chiacu explained the Surgeon General’s announcement, writing:
The U.S. surgeon general declared gun violence in the country a public health crisis on Tuesday, calling on Americans to act to prevent rising firearm-related deaths and their cascading effects, particularly on Black Americans, young Americans and other populations.
In the first-ever public health advisory on gun violence, the nation's top public health official, Vivek Murthy, outlined what he called devastating and far-reaching consequences to the public's well-being and called for more research funding, better mental health access and other steps such as secure storage to reduce harm.
"Firearm violence is an urgent public health crisis that has led to loss of life, unimaginable pain, and profound grief for far too many Americans," he said in a statement.
Murthy said the impact of gun violence spreads far beyond the staggering number—50,000 a year—of lives lost. It impacts millions of people who have been shot and survived it, as well as those who have witnessed gun violence, lost family members or who learn about through the news.
Murthy’s announcement came alongside a 40-page report from the Surgeon General office on the scope of firearm violence. The report also provided a list of recommendations for policymakers and community leaders. The recommendations included improving community level education on gun violence, instituting universal background checks on firearm sales, and implementing bans on assault weapons.
The advisory is decades in the making. As early as 1979, United States public health officials had identified reducing the number of privately-owned handguns in the country as a priority for the health of the country. Their efforts, however, encountered opposition. In the 1990s, research characterizing firearm violence as a public health issue drew the ire of the gun lobby who pushed Congress to curtail funding to research on the topic.
The effort to stymie government officials’ attempts to reduce gun violence have continued since, impacting even the Surgeon General himself. In a June 2024 article for the Associated Press, federal healthcare policy reporter Amanda Seitz wrote “[it] was the [National Rifle Association], and Republicans who enjoy the powerful gun lobby’s support, that almost derailed Murthy’s confirmation as Surgeon General a decade ago. Murthy became quieter on the issue of gun violence after his past statements almost cost him the job.”
After Murthy was dismissed by former President Donald Trump, then renominated under current President Joe Biden, he has faced calls from advocacy groups to stand up on the issue. Among these advocates was a group of four former surgeon generals, who in 2022 called for a report on gun violence and public health to be produced.
In a June 2024 article for the New York Times, mental health reporter Ellen Barry detailed the goals of the Surgeon General’s move to label gun violence a public health crisis. Barry wrote:
The position of Surgeon General functions largely as a bully pulpit, tasked with communicating scientific findings to the public. Occasionally, warnings from the Surgeon General have succeeded in shifting the national conversation, as in a landmark 1964 report about the health risks of smoking.
After that announcement, Congress voted to require a printed health warning on cigarette packs, and smoking began a 50-year decline. In 1964, around 42 percent of adults smoked daily; by 2021, 11.5 percent did.
Dr. Murthy said he saw a public health campaign against gun violence as a similar challenge, requiring a combination of education and awareness campaigns, culture shifts and policies. “There wasn’t one single strategy that ultimately worked with tobacco,” he said. “That’s what I’m thinking here, too….”
Dr. Mark Rosenberg, a gun violence researcher who helped establish the C.D.C. ‘s National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, said he had consulted with Dr. Murthy on the advisory and welcomed it. Dr. Rosenberg said he was fired in the late 1990s under pressure from Republicans who opposed the center’s research….
“I’m delighted that the surgeon general has been able to release this report,” he said. To translate the recommendations into law, he added, “we’ve got a huge fight ahead of us.
[https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/25/health/gun-violence-surgeon-general.html]
The United States experiences one of the highest rates of per capita gun violence in the world for a wealthy nation. The gun death rate reached 10.6 deaths per 100,000 people in 2016. That figure was far higher than the rates of gun death in other wealthy nations such as Canada (2.1 per 100,000), Australia (1.0), Germany (0.9), and Spain (0.6), making the issue of firearm violence a crucial one to address.
For Discussion:
- How much of the material in this reading was new to you, and how much was already familiar? Do you have any questions about what you read? What personal connections, thoughts, or feelings did you have about what you read?
- According to the reading, what does United States Surgeon General Vivek Murthy hope to accomplish in declaring gun violence a public health crisis?
- According to the reading, how does firearm violence in the United States compare to other wealthy countries? What did you think of these statistics?
- What recommendations is the Surgeon General making to policymakers to reduce gun violence?
- According to the reading, a creative “combination of education and awareness campaigns, culture shifts and policies” will be necessary to reduce gun violence across the country. What do you think would be the most effective ways to address this issue? What recommendations would you make to elected leaders?
Reading Two – What Happens If We Treat Gun Violence as a Public Health Issue?
The significance of the Surgeon General’s announcement lies in Murthy’s attempt to shift the issue of gun violence away from being seen solely as a political issue and instead viewing it as a key public health concern. But what are the implications of this shift in perspective?
In a September 2023 article for National Institute of Health’s newsletter, associate editor Dana Talesnik outlined what a public health approach to gun violence calls would entail. Talesnik noted: “The four-step public health plan—one that has proven effective in dramatically reducing deaths from other epidemics such as car crashes and HIV/AIDS—involves gathering data to measure incidence; identifying risk and protective factors; developing and testing interventions; and implementing what works.”
In a June 2024 article for CBS News, reporters Dan Snyder and Stephanie Stahl covered the reaction to Murthy’s advisory from community leaders in Philadelphia aiming to reduce gun violence. Snyder and Stahl wrote:
“This is an exciting day,” Michelle Kerr-Spry, of Mothers In Charge, said. “We have been working toward this for a very, very long time.”
Kerr-Spry said while there is work to be done in keeping guns out of young people’s hands, they also have to do more to change the mindset of these kids and teens when it comes to guns….
“We need to look at the trauma that a lot of our young people live in, they live in this persistent traumatic state. And so their response is often very violent,” Kerr-Spry said.
“The more we can provide resources, mental health resources, workforce development, financial literacy, and just activities for our young people to stay active and stay out the way, the better off we’ll be,” [Rickey Duncan, who is the founder and CEO of the NOMO Foundation] said.
The surgeon general’s advisory doesn’t come with any direct funding to address gun violence issues. But it does make recommendations for leaders. There are things from enhancing community support and education, to calls for banning assault weapons and instituting universal background checks.
In a December 2022 article for Temple University’s newspaper Temple Now, student journalists Ashleigh DeLuca and Jonny Hart interviewed Jessica Beard, a trauma surgeon and public health researcher about some less-expected approaches to reducing gun violence. DeLuca and Hart wrote:
Beard [advocates] for place-based interventions that include investing in the development of green spaces, tree cover and parks and improving building edifices and vacant lots. While it might be confusing at first to hear a trauma surgeon championing neighborhood beautification projects, she explains that the risk of getting shot is a place-based risk. Philadelphia neighborhoods that were redlined in the past are now the places where people have the highest risk of being shot.
Beard references the research of Eugenia South, Beard’s peer and fellow medical professional, as clear evidence that place-based interventions are a necessary component to addressing American gun violence. South’s research focused on providing interventions to vacant lots and abandoned homes in marginalized communities across Philadelphia and studying the results of these changes. In the communities where South’s team planted gardens, cleaned up trash and improved the façade of vacant buildings, her team observed a dramatic decline in gun violence.
[https://news.temple.edu/news/2022-12-07/how-to-solve-American-gun-epidemic]
Framing firearm violence as a public health issue can lead to creative and holistic efforts to reducing such violence in neighborhoods across the country. While the politics of passing significant gun control laws at the national level remain daunting, local leaders dealing with the violent use of firearms in their communities are hopeful that Surgeon General Murthy’s advisory on the issue will mark a turning point in their efforts.
For Discussion:
- How much of the material in this reading was new to you, and how much was already familiar? Do you have any questions about what you read? What personal connections, thoughts, or feelings did you have about what you read?
- According to the reading, what are the four steps in a public health approach to addressing gun violence? What do you think might be examples of each step that Dana Talesnik outlines?
- In your opinion, how does using the lens of public health change how we think about gun violence? Do you think this shift in perspective is helpful or unhelpful? Explain your position.
- How have some community leaders reacted to the Surgeon General’s declaration of gun violence as a public health crisis? What are some of the changes are they calling for? What did you think of their proposals?
Post-Reading Activity:
For this activity, students may work independently, in pairs, or in groups based on what they identify as their needs and what you know about their interpersonal style and academic needs.
Using the ideas presented in both readings, invite students to treat gun violence as a public health crisis and present their ideas for possible interventions. Students may present their ideas as an essay, speech, poem, poster or any other creative medium that is appropriate considering materials and time available in your classroom.
Give students at least 25 minutes to work on their gun violence interventions proposal. Then invite students to share their ideas with one another.
Thank students for sharing.
–Research assistance provided by Sean Welch