The Fund supports networks of state health policy decision makers to help identify, inspire, and inform policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund supports two state leadership programs for legislative and executive branch state government officials committed to improving population health.
The focuses on creating an affordable health care system built on strong primary care and partnerships that improve health outcomes for all.
Keep up with news and updates from the Milbank Memorial Fund. And read the latest posts from our staff and guest authors.
The Fund publishes The Milbank Quarterly, as well as reports, issues briefs, and case studies on topics important to health policy leaders.
The Milbank Memorial Fund is a foundation that works to improve population health and health equity.
September 2, 2026
Quarterly Article
Lisa Carter-Bawa
Aug 13, 2026
Jun 4, 2026
May 31, 2026
Back to The Milbank Quarterly
Policy Points:
Context: Despite substantial evidence that stigma produces measurable health inequities across conditions and populations, stigma remains absent from major social determinants of health (SDOH) frameworks. This absence persists even though discrimination—one manifestation of the broader stigma ecosystem—is already classified as an SDOH.
Methods: Drawing on fundamental cause theory, we derive five criteria for SDOH classification and systematically evaluate stigma against each. We synthesize evidence from systematic reviews and meta-analyses across HIV, mental illness, lung cancer, obesity, and structural stigma research. Lung cancer serves as a running exemplar throughout.
Findings: Stigma meets all five criteria for SDOH classification: structural embedding in policies and institutions, health impact through multiple pathways extending well beyond health care systems, contribution to systematic health inequities, modifiability through multilevel intervention, and measurement feasibility through validated instruments. We identify five pathways through which stigma produces population health harm: resource deprivation, social exclusion, constrained health care access and quality, physiological stress and weathering, and diminished agency and identity.
Conclusions: We propose the stigma-as-social-determinant (SSD) classification framework as a policy translation tool that specifies the infrastructure needed to operationalize formal recognition. Critically, because stigma operates as a fundamental cause whose health effects extend far beyond clinical encounters, policy translation must not flow primarily through health care systems. Anti-stigma policy must engage housing, employment, education, and social policy alongside—not subordinate to—health care reform.