Using The Power Of Media To Influence Health Policy And Politics

I need a 120 word message for each of the questions/themes down below. Must include references for each one. must have a question for the class at the end of each one. Read instructions carefully. Should be 5 words message of 120 words each, then a question at the end, then references. Content for the writing will be attached.

1. What are some advantages and disadvantages of the one-to-many model and the many-to-many model?

2. Who Controls the Media?

3. Media as a Health Promotion Tool

4. Effective Use of Media

Using the Power of Media to Influence Health Policy and Politics

Beth Gharrity Gardner, Barbara Glickstein, Diana J. Mason

“Power relations … as well as the processes challenging institutionalized power relations are increasingly shaped and decided in the communication field.”

Manual Castells

In the 2008 Presidential campaign, social media did for the Obama campaign what the then new media of television did for John F. Kennedy in 1960. From the onset of his campaign, then U.S. Senator Barack Obama (D-IL) enlisted the support of Chris Hughes, a founder of Facebook, and David Axelrod, a former partner in the public relations firm ASK Public Strategies. Hughes and Axelrod built a team that marshaled every tool in the social media and marketing toolbox to create and sustain the Obama campaign. The campaign was ahead of competitors in using social media to connect with a growing audience of followers on Facebook, Twitter, and blogs. In the general election, then Senator Obama had 118,107 followers on Twitter, outpacing his opponent John McCain’s 2865 followers by a factor of 40 to 1 (Lardinois, 2008). He used social media to build a grassroots movement that resulted in his historic victory (Talbot, 2008).

By the 2012 Presidential elections, the majority of social media users expected candidates to have a social media presence and stated that social media provided information that influenced their voting decisions (Steele, 2012). These trends among voters, and young voters in particular, were not lost on the Romney and Obama campaigns. By the eve of the 2012 conventions, both campaigns were regularly updating blogs on their websites and posting to Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. As in 2008, Obama drastically outpaced all of his competitors in the volume of messages sent, the number of followers or fans, and in social media response (e.g., shares, views, and comments) (Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project Staff, 2012; Shaughnessy, 2012). Voters also played a larger role in communicating campaign messages. In 2012, the top five trending political topics on Facebook were “Barak Obama,” “Mitt Romney,” “voted,” “four more years,” and “Paul Ryan” (Groshek & Al-Rawi, 2013). Social media is now fully integrated into political campaigning and engagement (see Chapter 48).

The use of social media has not been limited to political campaigning. Launched immediately after Obama’s 2008 win, Change.gov provided a website for people to share their ideas for improving legislation before it was signed into law. This sent the message that Obama had no intention of being limited by a traditional media operation as President. Rather, he was going to continue to engage people in supporting his agenda for the nation through multiple channels. When health care reform was teetering from a growing army of dissenters blocking its passage, he continued using social media to mobilize supporters to pressure Congress to act before the April 2010 recess. President Obama also took to the road and held town meetings in key communities because he knew that these meetings would garner reports on primetime television and radio and take a front-page position in newspapers. He could count on the primetime news including a sound bite and visual image of him speaking before a crowd of enthusiastic Ohioans. The personal appearances were a way to get his message to those who were not yet social media enthusiasts and to reinforce it with those who were already his followers on Twitter and 121Facebook. In 2014, when the open enrollment window for signing up for health insurance drew to a close, Obama appeared on the show “Between Two Ferns,” an online parody of celebrity interviews hosted by comedian Zach Galifianakis, to urge young adults to go to Healthcare.gov to sign up for health insurance. This unlikely appearance garnered coverage across traditional and social media platforms.

New digital information and communication technologies have dramatically changed how and what we think about communicating with others, whether connecting with family or building a grassroots political movement to push policymakers to pass new laws. Even traditional media outlets are now augmenting their work with all sorts of social media to extend their reach, impact, and, in some cases, survival. Legislators are routinely launching blogs, using Facebook, and tweeting to make their voices heard and to connect with their constituents. This chapter looks at the integration of traditional and social media as powerful tools for nurses to harness in shaping health policy and politics. Throughout, we draw insights from contemporary and past cases to highlight the role of media in influencing health policy and politics.

Seismic Shift in Media: One-to-Many and Many-to-Many

In the 21st century there has been a seismic shift in the way media is created and distributed. For many years, the dominant paradigm in media was a model in which one broadcaster sent a message out to a mass audience. This broadcast model is referred to as the one-to-many model. This model has been challenged by the Internet and user-generated content in which many people create media and distribute it to their individualized networks. This new model is sometimes referred to as the many-to-many model because it provides opportunities for feedback and interaction, features that have led to the ubiquitous use of the term “social media.”

We now have convergence media, or the interweaving of traditional and social media. Rather than these platforms remaining separate, traditional and networked media are working side by side. For instance, even though the New York Times in print or even as an app is mostly a one-to-many broadcasting media model, the newspaper’s blogs, videos, and comment sections reflect the digital side of the newspaper as a networked media platform. News organizations exclusive to the online environment have been created and some veteran print publications have moved entirely or mostly online, but the degree of convergence is unclear (Hindman, 2009).

Mass Media: the One-to-Many Model

Traditional media in radio, television, film, and newspapers was based on the idea that one broadcaster would try to reach as many audience members as possible. However, for those interested in influencing health policy and politics through the media there were many advantages and some significant disadvantages to the one-to-many model of broadcast media (Abramson, 2003).

Radio, film, and television have all been used to communicate messages about health to consumers and policymakers alike. What all these media share is the ability to broadcast a message to a mass audience, sometimes in the millions or tens of millions. When there were few media outlets it was possible to repeatedly broadcast a consistent message to a wide audience. The use of mass media has been a major tool in health promotion campaigns because it reaches a large audience and is capable of promoting healthy social change (Institute of Medicine, 2002; Wakefield, Loken & Hornik, 2010).

There are also disadvantages to mass media communications. Large corporations own media outlets and control what goes out through their channels and the expense of buying time or space in major media outlets can be prohibitive, especially for nonprofit organizations. Mass media campaigns, by definition, are intended to reach a wide audience but are not as effective at reaching target populations. For example, a mass media campaign about HIV prevention may reach a wide audience but fail to reach the specific population that is most vulnerable to infection. However, political operatives have developed increasingly sophisticated approaches to segmenting and targeting specific electoral districts with mass media when they want 122to pressure a policymaker who may hold a deciding vote on an important bill. Such organizations buy commercial time on the dominant television station in that policymaker’s district. However, what no form of mass media does very well is allow users to create and distribute their own content with the messages they find most important.

Many-to-Many: User-Generated Content and the “Prosumer”

The rise of the Internet, and specifically websites that rely on users to generate content, are part of a new landscape of media creation and distribution. The early Internet featured websites that were one-way flows of information. The paradigm-shifting quality of the Internet began to emerge with the rise of Web 2.0, a term popularized by Tim O’Reilly (2005) at a conference in 2004. Web 2.0 refers to a range of Internet practices based on information-sharing, social networks, and collaborations, rather than the one-way communication style of the early era of the Internet. The key idea with the concept of Web 2.0 is that people are using the Internet to connect with other people, through their old face-to-face networks and through newly formed online social networks and communities of interest.

Prosumption is a term that some people use to describe this shift. Prosumption is the idea that producing and consuming are combined in this new many-to-many paradigm. Rather than an elite few who produce media for a mass audience to consume, now we are all both producers and consumers, or prosumers of media. The many-to-many paradigm refers not to a new form of technology but to a new way that people make use of that technology (Ritzer & Jurgenson, 2010). Social media tools may work best by enabling the development of communities of interest and social networks that successfully narrowcast, as opposed to broadcast, to like-minded individuals. Only time will tell how the many-to-many model will permeate the political communication landscape. Regardless, the collaborative, information-sharing Internet practices have broad implications for health media, policy, and politics, but they do not mean the end of mass media.

The Power of Media

A now classic example of the power of media in shaping health policy arose during the first months of William Jefferson Clinton’s presidency when he tried but failed to enact health care reform legislation despite campaigning on a policy platform that sought to guarantee comprehensive health care coverage for every American. In 1993, he proposed the Health Security Act to Congress and the public with the hope that this would become a landmark legislation. Clinton’s proposal initially had substantial public support, because many believed the country had a moral imperative to extend health care coverage to all who live in the United States. However, according to an analysis by the Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania (1995), one of the primary factors that unraveled the legislation’s progress was the Harry and Louise campaign (a series of television advertisements about two fictional characters, Harry and Louise), which was sponsored by the Health Insurance Association of America (HIAA), an ardent opponent to the President’s plan.

Actors portrayed a white, middle-class couple voicing grave concerns about the bill. They said, “Under the President’s bill, we’ll lose our right to choose our own physician,” and “What happens if the plan runs out of money?” Although the ads were not the only reason for the demise of the Clinton plan, the Harry and Louise television spots encouraged fear and negativity within the span of 60 seconds. Suddenly, it seemed as though many of the Americans who had been concerned about the growing numbers of uninsured would become more concerned about how the bill would affect their own health care options and withdraw their support from the Act. What few people realize is that even though a large segment of the population remained convinced that the health care system needed major change, the commercials convinced decision makers that public sentiment was against the reforms. This is one of the things that make the media so powerful: media discourse impacts policymaking because policymakers “assume its pervasive influence” (Gamson, 2004, p. 243). The target audience for the Harry and Louise ads was not the 123public directly; rather, it was policymakers and those who could influence how the public perceived the issue, such as journalists. The ads originally aired in the country’s major media centers: Washington, DC; Los Angeles; New York City; and Atlanta. They were seen and reported on by journalists. In fact, the ads and the issue under debate got more airtime by becoming part of the journalists’ news stories (West, Heith, & Goodwin, 1996). Many people saw the ads or heard about them through viewing them on the evening news, not as a paid advertisement.

The Harry and Louise commercials are an example of the power of the media in policy and politics. It was a deliberate media strategy to reframe a public policy issue and mobilize a public constituency around it. The media saturate large numbers of people with images that directly or indirectly influence their opinions, shape their attitudes and beliefs, and transform their behavior (McLuhan, 1964). As such, understanding what is and is not shifting in the templates of message production, dissemination, and consumption is crucial for understanding media impacts.

Media campaigns such as these often rely on invoking viewer reactions through the use of misleading or extreme characterizations of legislation or opponents. Recent research suggests that such uncivil discourse is on the rise, especially in nontraditional media, such as talk radio and political blogs (Sobieraj & Berry, 2011; Jamieson, 2012). Given the traditional news values of controversy and conflict, such talk in new media channels may be especially likely to gain coverage from other media outlets. Another longstanding pathway to mass influence is through large media advertising expenditures. The amount of spending on political advertisements is often the largest segment of lobbying expenditure for sponsoring organizations. In 2014, an estimated $2.6 billion was spent on political advertising (Kantar U.S. Insights, 2014). Media advertising campaigns often conceal sponsorship with ambiguous or misleading names and may use cloaked websites to enhance the effectiveness of their deception. Cloaked websites are published by individuals or groups who conceal authorship to deliberately disguise a hidden political agenda (Daniels, 2009). The lack of transparency of political advertising has a Machiavellian quality to it. Although advertisements for a political candidate are required to include a statement from the candidate that he or she authorized the ad, no such requirement exists for transparency of sponsorship of ads advocating policy positions.

Who Controls the Media?

The traditional media industry has been owned by six major corporations that, prior to the growth of social media, controlled 90% of the news Americans read, saw, or heard (Lutz, 2012). In 2003, the Federal Communications Commission voted to ease the restrictions on cross-ownership between different news entities, permitting one corporation to own the primary television, radio, and newspaper outlets in a community. This enabled a single corporation to control messages and put forth a particular perspective. CNN founder Ted Turner objected to this consolidation of corporate media power, arguing that allowing this cross-ownership “will extend the market dominance of the media corporations that control most of what Americans read, see, or hear” and “give them more power to cut important ideas out of the public debate” (Harris, 2005, p. 83).

The gap created by the declining revenue streams and reduced newsrooms for traditional or legacy media are starting to be filled by actors building new news operations and resuscitating long-standing ones. For instance, the Kaiser Family Foundation launched its own nonprofit news organization, Kaiser Health News, in 2009. Their content is now regularly carried in traditional news outlets. Newer digital news outlets are also gaining revenue and recruiting talent from traditional media news staffs. Revenue is recently coming from entrepreneurs who are investing in the media industry; for example, Amazon.com founder Jeff Bezos purchased the Washington Post in 2013. Although traditional news media continue to face revenue challenges, the largest numbers of journalists producing original reporting still come from the newspaper industry (Mitchell, 2013; 2014). In this more digital and diversified media field, the pathways to 124getting on the public’s agenda may be more complex but many of the traditional media still adhere to familiar lines of influence.

Social media can actually drive traditional media to cover issues that major newsrooms may not deem worthy of their limited space and time, thus advancing political advocacy. One success story is that of the YouTube video campaign, Kony 2012, launched by Invisible Children, seeking to spur international awareness of the actions of Ugandan warlord Joseph Kony and his Lord’s Resistance Army. Within a few days the video drew millions of viewers and spread to other social media such as Twitter, where it became the top story. Within weeks, the Senate introduced a bipartisan resolution condemning Kony. According to Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), “This is about someone who, without the Internet and YouTube, their dastardly deeds would not resonate with politicians. When you get 100 million Americans looking at something, you will get our attention” (Wong, 2012).

According to a survey conducted a week after the video’s release, the way people learned about this story varied strikingly by age cohort. Around half of young adults (aged 18 to 29) who had heard about the video first did so through social media, compared with an even mix of social and traditional news sources for those aged 30 to 49. Traditional media, especially television, informed most adults aged 50 and over (Rainie et al., 2012b).

The ownership of the Internet (e.g., online infrastructures, operating systems, and search engines) is following consolidation patterns similar to traditional media, with a few large companies such as Apple, Google, Yahoo!, Facebook, and Microsoft dominating the field (Freepress.net, 2014). Nonetheless, the more decentralized structure of the Web may better enable citizens to not only break news, but shape it. This bodes well for nurses who have not always been able to garner media attention for their issues. A study commissioned by Sigma Theta Tau and published in 1998 documented nursing’s invisibility in the media. The Woodhull Study on Nursing and the Media found that nurses were included in health stories in major print media (newspapers and news magazines published in September 1997) less than 4% of the time, even when they would have been germane to the story. And even more disturbing, nurses were represented in health care industry publications (such as Modern Healthcare) less than 1% of the time.

These findings may indicate a systematic journalistic bias against nursing. They also arise because nurses have not been proactive in accessing traditional media. Social media provides an opportunity for nurses to not wait for traditional media to value their perspectives. Nurses can use social media to create and distribute messages, to engage others to care about an issue, and to discuss issues from various vantage points. Given that the annual Gallup Poll continues to find that Americans rate the honesty and ethical standards of nurses higher than any other profession (e.g., in 2013, 82% for nurses, 69% for physicians, 21% for newspaper reporters, 8% for members of Congress), nurses have a unique opportunity to send persuasive messages (Gallup, 2014).

If nurses want visibility, they must become cyberactivists. Cyberactivists are people who want to create change in a variety of issues and have taken up the use of new media technologies and strategies that characterize Web 2.0 (McCaughey & Ayers, 2003), fusing the old and new media methods to allow for the widest range of engagement with the public. It has never been easier to become a cyberactivist because new digital technologies have lowered the motivational thresholds for activism, making it much easier to create, join, and coordinate groups (Shirky, 2008; Polletta et al., 2013). Nursing organizations are particularly well positioned to mount focused social media campaigns because they already have a list of people who can begin the spreading of messages. However, social networks are becoming crowded, so getting noticed requires a thoughtful strategy.

Distributed Campaigns

Obama’s social media campaign strategy was a distributed campaign, a bottom-up rather than a top-down approach to political campaigns that depends on a message spreading from the grassroots rather than broadcasting and control by the campaign staff (Ozimek, 2005). These campaigns are designed 125to involve more than core supporters. Distributed campaigns seek to engage swing voters and to provide opportunities for core supporters to craft messages that may appeal to these swing voters more effectively than messages created by campaign staff, thereby strengthening the commitment of core supporters to the campaign. E-mail, blogs, and other social media are used by campaign staff to initiate a dialogue that is subsequently developed by a broad community of supporters. Additionally, supporter-generated content such as more personalized Facebook groups and YouTube videos can be incorporated into the campaign.

Evidence supports the potential for distributed campaigns. In terms of shaping political communication, a 2012 Pew Internet and American Life Project survey found that 66% of social media users (estimated to be 39% of all American adults) are politically active on these sites, by posting links to political stories, encouraging others to vote, or encouraging others to take political action (Rainie et al., 2012a; Smith, 2013). In terms of consuming political information, a 2013 Pew survey indicates that approximately half of Facebook and Twitter users obtained news on those sites (Holcomb, Gottfried, & Mitchell, 2013).

Distributed campaigns provide people with tools for activism such as petitions to sign, e-mail scripts to send, or letters to sign and send to legislators. Organizations, such as Democracy in Action ( salsalabs.com/democracyinaction ), are available to help build the capacity of groups that want to develop action tools for reaching diverse audiences in distributive campaigns. Living in a media-saturated world can sometimes feel like being in a cacophony of conflicting voices. The challenge is how to use these powerful tools most effectively.

Linking in to Existing Communities

Most people regularly find information online from sources that are familiar or already aligned with their views (Hindman, 2009). Similarly, popular search engines such as Yahoo! and Google structure or filter links in a way that facilitates this return to the familiar and the mainstream. One way to work both with and around these patterns may be to link into existing communities of interest and social networks rooted in friends and family. In the Kony 2012 case discussed earlier, Senator Chris Coons (D-DE) told reporters that his 12-year-old twins and his 11-year-old daughter alerted him to the issue (Wong, 2012), which they and their peers most likely learned about through social media (Rainie et al., 2012b). Just as they have offline, the networked worlds of friendship, family, hobbies, and leisure groups may routinely overlap with political engagement and communication.

Such overlap is evident in data from the 2013 University of Southern California Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism’s national digital future survey (Center for the Digital Future, 2013). In 2013, 16.7% of Internet users identified themselves as a member of an online community, defined as “a group that shares thoughts or ideas, or works on common projects, through electronic communication only.” More than half of these groups were devoted to members’ hobbies (62%). Other groups were social (39%) or professional (33%) with only 12% described as political. However, 85% of online community members said they used the Internet to participate in communities related to social causes (this was up 10% from 2007 and 40% from 2006); and nearly three quarters said they had participated in new social causes since they joined an online community.

Friends, family, and communities of interest may convince those who might not otherwise join a cause to join because they help to either create concern about the cause or motivate the individual to shift from concern to participation (Polletta et al., 2013). As these exchanges are increasingly enabled through social media networks, traditional media avenues for getting on the public’s agenda are being restructured.

Getting on the Public’s Agenda

One of the most important roles that the media plays is getting issues on the agendas of the public and policymakers. What the mainstream media do or do not cover is equally powerful in determining which issues policymakers take into consideration. But the mainstream media’s role in defining what 126is mainstream appears to be diminishing due to three interrelated factors: the abundance of new social media platforms, the lowered costs of producing media campaigns that can directly reach the public, and the downsizing among traditional news media outlets that may be undermining the quality of their reporting. The news-consuming public has responded to these interrelated trends. A survey conducted by the PEW Research Center early in 2013 found that nearly a third of people abandoned a particular news source because it was no longer providing the quality information they had come to expect (Enda & Mitchell, 2013). The Digital Future Report (Center for the Digital Future, 2013) also found that 30% of Internet users stopped a subscription to a newspaper or magazine because they could get the same information online. Additionally, more people are seeking out news stories they hear about via social media, even when they weren’t looking (Mitchell, 2014). Most American adults (73%) get news from family and friends through word of mouth, but now around 15% are getting it from family and friends through social networking, and the percentage relying on social media is even higher for 18- to 29-year olds (nearly 25%) (Mitchell, 2013).

News as Entertainment: Infotainment

The news media remain instrumental in getting issues onto the agenda of policymakers and generating the political campaign interest that encourages citizens to the voting booths (Groshek & Dimitrova, 2011), but non-news entertainment television programs can also mobilize public constituencies around an issue. Although the Internet has become a more important source for entertainment among Internet users, television remains the primary source for entertainment (Center for the Digital Future, 2013). This may be caused by the fact that television continues to be the dominant form of media in most people’s lives, despite the rise of other forms of media online. In 2013, the television was on around 35 hours per week in the average American household (Nielsen Reports, 2013). Teenagers still spend more time watching TV than they do online (Rideout, Foehr, & Roberts, 2010). The Internet may be where people go to find out about a health issue, but they often first become aware of the issue through television and films.

Turow (1996) points out that non-news television entertainment that often stereotypes power relationships may be more successful than the news in shaping people’s views of issues. Highly viewed TV presentations of health care hold political significance that should be assessed alongside news. Medical and nursing dramas on broadcast and cable television, such as Grey’s AnatomyER, and Nurse Jackie, are often important sources of information about health and health policy for a wide audience. Researchers Turow and Gans (2002) systematically evaluated one television season of four hour-long medical dramas and found that health care policy issues appeared regularly in the programs. Evidence from a national telephone survey indicates that the percentage of regular viewers of the show ER who were aware that HPV is a sexually transmitted disease was higher (28%) one week after viewing an episode of the show about HPV than before seeing the show (9%). Even 6 weeks after viewing the episode, 16% had retained this knowledge. This capacity to quickly get a message out to millions of people through an hour-long drama is part of the reason that many health advocates work to get their particular issue included in a storyline of a major network drama.

Documentary Films

Documentary films, in conjunction with online campaigns, are influencing health policy and politics while achieving mainstream commercial success. For example, two documentaries, The Invisible War(2012) and Service: When Women Come Marching Home (2011) were groundbreaking in creating public conversations about military sexual assault. Both were viewed by members of Congress and used as organizing tools nationally to get the public behind an agenda to change the military’s practices. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY), Senator and Chairwoman of the Personnel Subcommittee on the Armed Services Committee, cited The Invisible War as shaping her decision to draft a bill to overhaul military sexual-assault policies by removing the chain of command from prosecuting 127sexual assaults. Although the bill was defeated in March of 2014, her yearlong campaign drew many supporters and put the issue firmly on the political agenda.

Media as a Health Promotion Tool

Media can promote health in three ways: public education, social marketing, and media advocacy. The first two are often used to help people change their health behaviors by acquiring important information they lacked (public education) or through visual or verbal messaging that can shift a person’s attitudes and values (social marketing). Both can also be used in political campaigns and to shape public policy, but media advocacy specifically targets public policy.

Media Advocacy

Media advocacy is the strategic use of media to apply pressure to advance a social or public policy initiative (Dorfman & Krasnow 2014; Wallack & Dorfman, 1996). It is a tool for policy change by mobilizing constituencies and stakeholders to support or oppose specific policy changes. It is a means of political action. It differs from social marketing and public education approaches to public health, as noted in Table 14-1. Media advocacy defines the primary problem as a power gap, as opposed to an information gap, so mobilization of stakeholders is needed to influence the development of public policies.

TABLE 14-1

Media Advocacy Versus Social Marketing and Public Education Approaches to Public Health

Media Advocacy Social Marketing and Public Education
Individual as advocate Individual as audience
Advances healthy public policies Develops health messages
Changes the environment Changes the individual
Target is person with power to make change Target is person with problem or is at risk
Addresses the power gap Addresses the information gap

Adapted from Wallack, L., & Dorfman, L. (1996). Media advocacy: A strategy for advancing policy and promoting health. Health Education Quarterly, 23(3), 297. Copyright 1996 by Sage Publications. Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications.

The success of Mothers Against Drunk Driving (MADD) illustrates the power of media advocacy. MADD was formed in 1980 at a time when a drunk driver could kill a child and it would not be treated as a crime. MADD developed a policy agenda aimed at preventing drunk driving. It developed a Rating the States program to bring public attention to what state governments were and were not doing to fight alcohol-impaired driving. Then, just after Thanksgiving (the beginning of a period of high numbers of alcohol-related traffic accidents), MADD representatives held local press conferences with their state’s officials and members of other advocacy groups to announce the state’s rating. Local and national broadcast and print press brought the story to an estimated 62.5 million people. Subsequently, lawmakers in at least eight states took action to address drunken driving (Russell et al., 1995).

Today, MADD’s website ( www.madd.org ) provides information in a number of areas: policies that people can endorse, a walk to raise funds to support the organization’s work, a link to its Twitter page, and news about drunk driving initiatives. Getting on the news media’s agenda is one of the functions of media advocacy (Dorfman & Krasnow, 2014). With numerous competing potential stories, media advocacy employs strategies to frame an issue in a way that will attract media coverage. For example, MADD often created media events by putting a wrecked car in front of a local high school a few days prior to a prom. Journalists flocked to these events and the visual impact of the wrecked car got people’s attention. The news accounts and parental outrage that resulted from these media events eventually led to wide social support for the concept of the designated driver and harsher penalties for driving under the influence.

How a message is presented is as important as getting the attention of the news media. Debates surrounding the passage and implementation of the Affordable Care Act demonstrate this point. It certainly got on the media’s agenda, but many 128important messages were lost in the news coverage that emphasized the controversies such as death panels and horror stories of individuals finding their insurance policies cancelled.

Framing

Getting an issue on the agenda of the public and policymakers and shaping the message requires framing. Framing “defines the boundaries of public discussion about an issue” (Wallack & Dorfman, 1996, p. 299). Even more simply put, a frame is a “thought organizer” (Gamson, 2004, p. 245). Reframing involves breaking out of the dominant perspective (or frame) on an issue to define a new way of thinking about it that can lead to very different ideas about potentially effective policy responses. Reframing requires working hard to understand the dominant frame, the values that underpin it as well as its limitations, and then exploring new frames.

Framing applies to all messaging and policy work, whether changing staffing policies in a hospital or promoting legislation that will remove soft drinks from schools. Framing for access to the media entails shaping the issue in a way that will attract media attention. It helps to attach the issue to a local concern, anniversaries, or celebrities or to make news by holding events that will attract the press, such as releasing new research at a press conference (Jernigan & Wright, 1996). Linking to issues already on the political agenda or the media’s agenda (as newsworthy) can also be advantageous to gaining access. Most importantly, it requires some element of controversy (albeit not over the accuracy of an advocate’s facts), conflict, injustice, or irony. The targeted medium or media will shape how the story is presented. For example, television requires compelling visual images. If a broad audience is to be reached, a powerful, brief message on television can provide a quick frame for an issue and influence how people will view it, but the interactive nature of social media provides the opportunity for others to continue to reframe a message, helping people to break out of a dominant frame.

Framing for content once you are in front of the media is more difficult than framing for access. A compelling individual story may gain visibility in some media, but there is no guarantee that the reporter or social media activists will focus on the public policy changes that are desired. Wallack and Dorfman (1996, p. 300) suggest that this reframing can be accomplished by the following:

• Emphasizing the social dimensions of the problem and translating an individual’s personal story into a public issue

• Shifting the responsibility for the problem from the individual to the executive or public official whose decisions can address the problem

• Presenting solutions as policy alternatives

• Making a practical appeal to support the solution

• Using compelling images and symbols that resonate with the values of the audience

• Using the authentic voices of people who have experience with the problem

• Anticipating the opposition and knowing all sides of the issue

Focus on Reporting

Few journalists have the time and the editorial support or the breadth and depth of knowledge about science to provide thorough reporting on health issues that have policy implications. This often results in less-than-adequate reporting on important issues, such as how communities should respond to the West Nile virus. Roche (2002) examined print media coverage of the approaches to reducing the mosquito population to reduce the incidence of, and mortality from, West Nile encephalitis. None of the newspapers or magazines examined gave any information about risk of mortality from pesticide exposure or a cost analysis of this approach. Roche concluded that the public is “operating ‘in the dark’ in evaluating the question of whether pesticides should be deployed.”

Nurses can assist journalists and cyberactivists by both reframing health policy issues and providing the depth of detail that others may lack. For example, a journalist covering a story on the nursing shortage has focused on the faculty shortage and the need to produce more nurses. You could help the journalist to see that framing the story as purely 129one of a supply issue, getting more people into the pipeline, misses the important issues of retention of existing nurses. While talking with this journalist does not ensure that your frame will be incorporated into the journalist’s story, you can publicize the frame you believe is important through your blog, Facebook page, or Twitter account.

One strategy is to facilitate information exchange in the public arena by becoming news makers, aggregators, or curators of health news. Posting links to news articles and research on critical policy issues on social media sites, such as Facebook, makes the news easy to find. As searching for health information has become the third most popular online activity for all Internet users 18 and over (Zickuhr, 2010), nurses are positioned to explain complex health policy issues by breaking them down. This can be done not just for information sharing but also for civil engagement so that people will act, whether by having a conversation with a co-worker about the issue or contacting government representatives. Facebook friends, including other nurse colleagues, can share on Facebook, which reposts these articles to their personal networks to widen the community. Social networking can generate a buzz and create conversations about an issue or policy. It is digital activism and it has enormous potential to build networks, propagate power, and frame issues.

Effective Use of Media

The following recommendations provide readers with a starting point for effectively using traditional and social media.

Positioning Yourself as an Expert

Health policy was once the domain of a limited field of experts setting the agenda for everyone else. The rise of user-generated content signals a radical departure from this approach. It signifies a profound transformation in what it means to be an expert and who is an expert. New media provides nurses with platforms to reach the public as media makers and aggregators of reliable health research information.

Gain Credentials.

There are many types of credentials, although they are typically thought of as degrees from educational institutions, work titles, and affiliations. Some institutions require that their employees notify them of any interaction with the media, but this may be unnecessary if you don’t name the institution in your interview or other communication. For example, you could be a nurse in women’s health at a community hospital.

Become an Expert in Your Field.

Becoming the go-to person who is the expert on a topic or particular field is another way to establish yourself as an expert. You can establish this by launching your own professional website, blog, and Twitter and Facebook pages, as well as by meeting with local journalists who cover health.

Use Personal and Clinical Experience.

Part of why MADD’s campaign has been compelling is their strategic use of stories from women whose children have been killed as a result of drunk driving. These bereaved mothers involved with MADD have transformed themselves into experts on the policy of driving while intoxicated and have used their experience to make this point with policymakers. Similarly, people who were infected with HIV/AIDS in the 1980s and believed that the federal government was acting too slowly to move treatment through clinical trials made themselves experts on the science of the disease and by using a variety of tactics including personal accounts of their illnesses, forced policymakers to speed up the time for drugs to reach the market. The Internet facilitates the rise of this kind of expertise.

Getting Your Message Across

Getting your message to the appropriate target audience requires careful analysis and planning. For example, you might want to target a message to local homeowners, many of whom watch a particular TV station’s evening news. To get television coverage, you must have a visual story. California nurses staged a media event on a senior health issue by staging a “rock around the clock” marathon, with seniors in rocking chairs outside an insurance 130company. They received press coverage of the event, which elicited some supportive letters to the editor as well as some negative press from seniors who said that they were stereotyping older adults. See Box 14-1 for guidelines for getting your message across in traditional media, and Box 14-2 for ways to use social media tools to reach an audience.

Box 14-1

Guidelines for Getting Your Message Across

The following guidelines will help you shape your message and get it delivered to the right media:

The Issue

• What is the nature of the issue?

• What is the context of the issue? (e.g., timing, history, and current political environment)

• Who is, or could be, interested in this issue?

The Message

• What’s the angle or the “so what”? Why should anyone care? What is news?

• Is there a sound bite that represents the issue in a catchy, memorable way?

• Can you craft rhetoric that will represent core values of the target audience?

• How can you frame nursing’s interests as the public’s interests (e.g., as consumers, mothers, fathers, women, taxpayers, and health professionals)?

The Target Audience

• Who is the target audience? Is it the public, policymakers, or journalists?

• If the public is the target audience, which segments of the public?

• What medium is appropriate for the target audience? Does this audience watch television? If so, are the members of this audience likely to watch a talk show or a news magazine show? Or do they read newspapers, listen to radio, or surf the Internet? Or are they likely to do all of these?

Access to the Media

• What relationships do you have with reporters and producers? Have you called or written letters or thank-you notes to particular journalists? Have you requested a meeting with the editorial board of the local community newspaper to discuss your issue and what the members of the board might think about reporting on it?

• How can you get the media’s attention? Is there a hot issue you can connect your issue to? Is there a compelling human interest story? Do you have a press release that describes your issue in a succinct, compelling way? Do you have other printed materials that will attract journalists’ attention within the first 3 seconds of viewing it? Are there photographs you can take in advance and then send out with your press release? Can you digitalize the images and make them available on a website for downloading onto a newspaper?

• Whom should you contact in the medium or media of choice?

• Are you prepared? Are you news conscious? Do you watch, listen, clip, and track who covers what and how they cover it? What is the format of the program, and who is the journalist? What is the style of the program or journalist?

• Who are your spokespersons? Do they have the requisite expertise on the issue? Do they have a visual or voice presence appropriate for the medium? What is their personal connection to the issue, and do they have stories to tell? Have they been trained or rehearsed for the interview?

The Interviews

• Prepare for the interview. Obtain information on your interviewer and the program by reviewing the interviewer’s work or talking with public relations experts in your area. Select the one, two, or three major points that you want to get across in the interview. Identify potential controversies and how you would respond to them, and rehearse the interview with a colleague.

• During the interview, listen attentively to the interviewer. Recognize opportunities to control the interview and get your primary point across more than once. What is your sound bite? Even if the interviewer asks a question that does not address your agenda, return the focus of the interview to your agenda and to your sound bite with finesse and persistence.

• Try to be an interesting guest. Come ready with rich, illustrative stories. Avoid yes or no answers to questions.

• Know that you do not have to answer all questions and should avoid providing comments that would embarrass you if they were headlines. If you don’t know the answer to a question, say so and offer to get back to the interviewer with the information.

• Avoid being disrespectful or arguing with the interviewer.

• Remember that being interviewed can be an anxiety-producing experience for many people. This is a normal reaction. Do some slow deep-breathing or relaxation exercises before the interview, but know that some nervousness can be energizing.

Follow-up

• Write a letter of thanks to the producer or journalist afterward.

• Provide feedback to the producer or journalist on the response that you have received to the interview or the program or coverage.

Box 14-2

Using Social Media

Mobile Text Messaging

Mobile and particularly text messaging is the ideal medium for communicating with everyone equally, regardless of their age, gender, or economic status. To get started, do the following:

• Create a subscriber base with zip codes so text alerts can be targeted to subscribers; you can then ask people in a specific Congressional district to contact their representative about an important issue.

• Send alerts about a news item, an action, or a “meet-up”—the calling of a gathering of people for a shared interest.

• Send a link to a website or local news item.

• Feature a text-alert campaign on your website homepage.

Blogging

Blogs are great ways for you to share your opinions and ideas on health and social topics and to bring attention to important issues. The following are some tips for blogging:

• Be creative.

• Engage your audience and invite readers to get involved.

• Tell important stories.

• Share your process (how your organization works).

• Share successes and challenges.

• Write short, action-oriented posts.

• Link to interesting local news.

• Find your niche.

• Be a subject matter expert.

• Be conversational.

• Write like you’d talk to your neighbor.

One website that provides easy tools for starting a blog is  www.wordpress.com .

Facebook ( www.facebook.com )

Facebook provides a vehicle for building and growing a community. Lots of people are on Facebook to stay connected with friends and family. You can also create a Facebook page for your professional life, since mixing the two can be problematic if you’re a clinician.

• Create a page for your organization or specific causes or issues; updates may include a new action item and a new goal.

• Upload relevant videos, photos, and articles.

• Turn your cause into a campaign.

• Set an achievable goal, and find a creative way to engage people to invite their friends.

• Host short-term causes.

• Use the announcements feature to keep followers informed.

• Always send new info.

• Keep it short.

• If one idea doesn’t work too well, don’t be afraid to shut it down and try a new idea!

Twitter ( www.twitter.com )

Twitter asks one question, “What are you doing?” Answers must be under 140 characters in length and can be sent via mobile texting, instant message, or the Internet.

Photo and Video Sharing Sites: YouTube ( www.youtube.com ) and Flickr ( www.flickr.com )

Photos and videos can provide important visual messages, enabling issues to get on the public’s agenda by drawing attention to a cause. YouTube has created an online video community. Flickr is a way to manage and access photos.

Blogging and Microblogging

Increasingly, blogs are used as ways to communicate personal experiences and opinions. Theresa Brown is an oncology nurse living and working in Pittsburgh. Her first career was as a doctorally prepared English professor before deciding that she wanted to work more closely with people. She wrote a narrative about a dying patient that was published on the first page of the New York TimesScience section, which until then had been dominated by physicians’ narratives. She was then invited to contribute to the Times’ health blog, Well. As a result, issues of concern to practicing nurses received regular visibility through her posts. Her expertise as a nurse in cancer care is clearly valued by those who post responses to her blog entries.

Twitter, an example of microblogging, is a great way for nurses to listen as well as to talk to others on a very direct level. Twitter allows users to post short, 140-character messages (called tweets). For longer conversations, people use hashtags (# symbols) to track topics. People are very creative in the way they use Twitter and it holds a great deal of potential for nurses. For example, a Twitter TweetChat is a prearranged chat that happens on Twitter through the use of Twitter posts (tweets) that include a predefined hashtag to link those tweets together in a virtual conversation. There is even a URL that provides a schedule of health-related TweetChats ( www.symplur.com/healthcare-hashtags/tweet-chats/ ). When you can’t attend a conference but know the hashtag that is being used by those in attendance, you can search for it on Twitter, read the live tweets, and join the discussion by tweeting from wherever you are. It represents both a media and a marketing tool. Each presenter’s remarks and recommendations can reach a wider audience.

You can also use Twitter to convey a position on legislation that is up for a vote on the local, state, or national level to inform public debate on how this policy will impact the health and well-being of individuals and communities. Also, you can use Twitter and other social media to link to relevant data supporting a particular position and to see what others are saying about this policy: Is it positive? Negative? Misinformed? Journalists frequently use Twitter to find sources of information on stories they are covering or to simply uncover new stories. Following key health journalists can provide opportunities for recommending yourself or other nurses as experts on specific topics or to help them to reframe their stories.

Digital Media and Social Networking Sites (SNS)

The development of Web 2.0 has meant increased participation and media attention on virtual communities, most frequently in social networking sites (SNS) such as Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Google+, and MySpace. The impact that SNS will have on health policy is still emerging but there are some intriguing early examples of the advantage they may hold for advocacy. For instance, Facebook is emerging as an important venue for debate about health policy, and not just among people typically thought of as policymakers. The health care reform battle sparked a huge number of for- and against-themed pages, such as Ohio Against Health Care Reform (81 fans), Wyoming for Health Care Reform (247 fans), and the perennial Facebook meme, “I bet we can find 1,000,000 people who support/oppose” health care reform. Although measuring the effectiveness of such Facebook campaigns remains elusive, we will likely see more of this type of activity as health care reform is implemented.

Not everyone understands the potential of social media for shaping advocacy. Lovejoy and Saxon (2012) examined the content of tweets from the 100 largest nonprofit organizations in the United States, 24% of which were health-oriented. The authors identified three primary communication functions: information, community, and action. They found that the bulk of communications sent information (58%), 26% reinforced community via more interactive messages, and only 16% promoted some form of action such as donating, volunteering, or 132engaging in advocacy. Guo and Saxton (2014) applied the same typology to investigate the tweets of 188 civil rights and advocacy organizations and had strikingly similar findings: 67% information, 20% community, and 12% action. Research on nonprofit organizations’ use of social media has also shown that the interactive features of Facebook are often underused (Waters et al., 2009). These studies suggest that nonprofit organizations are not yet as successful at reinforcing and building an online community and then mobilizing it.

Analyzing Media

The first obligation that all nurses have is to be knowledgeable consumers of media. Nurses must seek out unbiased information before taking positions on policy issues and be able to critically evaluate media messages, assess who controls the media, and identify whose vested interests are being protected or promoted. Nurses should add  www.mediachannel.org  and  www.freepress.net  to their Internet favorites and evaluate their sources.

133

Getting to know the nature and quality of a particular journalist’s or cyberactivist’s work can help you to decide how much to trust it. Ask the following questions:

• Do they frequently misrepresent issues?

• Are their stories sensationalized or exaggerated?

• Do they present all sides of an issue with accuracy, fairness, and depth?

• Can you substantiate wild claims through sites such as  www.factcheck.org ,  www.snopes.com , and  www.urbanlegends.about.com ?

What is the Medium?

The first step is to ask yourself from where you get your information and news.

• What is the reputation of the television or radio station, program, newspaper, or website? Is it known for balanced coverage of health-related issues? Is it partisan?

• Does it cover international and national, as well as state and local, issues?

• Is it a credible source of information about health issues and policies?

These questions provide a basis to judge whether or not the information and news you are getting is credible and representative of a broad sector of public opinion. You will need a sample of various media presentations of the issue to evaluate their messages and effectiveness.

Who is Sending the Message?

Part of understanding what the real message is about comes from knowing who is behind the message and why. You could interpret the real message behind the Harry and Louise commercials against President Clinton’s health care reform legislation once you knew they were sponsored by the HIAA. If the legislation had passed, the majority of insurance companies would have been locked out of the health care market.

For news media, ask the following questions: Who owns this medium? Who sponsors the website? What are the owner’s biases? In addition, more and more newspapers and online venues are using the Associated Press (AP), or other major national papers, as their source for stories. The AP does not investigate; they attend events, accept news releases, and file reports. If newspapers are using abridged stories from other papers, the news slant or bias of the other paper reflects the bias or slant of the paper you are analyzing. As newspaper and television newsroom budgets get slashed, few news outlets are able to afford investigative journalism. To preserve this important aspect of journalism, nonprofit investigative news organizations have arisen to fill the void, such as the online Kaiser Health News, founded and supported by the Kaiser Family Foundation, and ProPublica, supported by a major multiyear commitment of funding by the Sandler Foundation. While Kaiser Health News is specific to health, ProPublica is not but does cover health issues. For example, it published a series of reports on the excessive delays in the California State Board of Registered Nursing’s actions on complaints against nurses who were found guilty of drug abuse, sexual assaults on patients, and homicides ( www.propublica.org/series/nurses ). The reporting by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Charles Ornstein and Tracy Weber resulted in the governor removing several board members who were up for reappointment and the executive secretary resigning.

What is the Message, and What Rhetoric is Used?

What is the ostensible message that is being delivered, and what is the real message? What rhetoric is used to get the real message across? In 2009, pollster Frank Luntz of the Luntz Research Companies leaked a 28-page memo of sound bites and rhetoric designed to stop the Washington takeover of health care to Politico. The memo, entitled “The Language of Health Care,” is reminiscent of the analysis Luntz provided to Republicans for the 2004 presidential campaign and that was used by the Republicans to win legislative battles and political campaigns in 2006. His 2009 analysis provides insight into the language used to frame health care reform by federal policymakers. For example, he proposed that the phrase that “would ‘scare people more’ about the future of American healthcare” was: “That the government will decide what treatment I can or can’t have” (Luntz, 2009, p. 24).  PolitiFact.com  chose “a government takeover of health care” as the 2010 Lie of the Year because it played a key 134role in public opinion about the ACA (Adair & Holan, 2010). Rhetoric relies on “words that work” and those that do not work based on polling results. One of the words not to say was: private health care/free market health care. Instead, the document advocated the phrase: patient-centered health care.

Every issue has spin doctors who develop believable messages based on focus groups and polling. As messages are repeated in the media, they become believable. It is essential to be attentive to the language used in media messages whether delivered directly by policymakers, pundits, or advocates, and to evaluate the credibility, bias, and intentions of these sources. What and whom should we believe?

Images also convey important messages. As Luntz’s (2005) New American Lexicon notes, “Language is your base. Symbols knock it out of the park. The American people cannot always be expected to directly grasp the connection between your policies and your principles. Symbols bridge this gap, so use them” (Section 2, p. 2). The document promotes the obvious symbols of the American flag and Statue of Liberty. But consider the symbols used by health insurance companies to advertise to employed individuals and families. These ads use pictures of healthy active adults and bright-eyed children rather than images of obese individuals or people disabled by arthritis to attract new members to their insurance products. These are examples of targeted media messages in which images are symbols to augment carefully crafted rhetoric to sway a target audience to believe or act in a particular way.

Is the Message Effective?

Does the message attract your attention? Does it appeal to your logic and to your emotions? Does it undermine the opposition’s position?

Is the Message Accurate?

Who is the reporter or cyberactivist and what reputation do they have? Are they credible, with a reputation for accuracy and balanced coverage of an issue? What viewpoints are missing? Whose voice is represented in the message or article?

Responding to the Media

One of the most important ways to influence public opinion is to respond to what is read, seen, or heard in the media. Letters to the editor or call-ins to talk radio programs can be powerful ways to reframe an issue or put it on the public’s agenda.

Op-eds (thought to be derived from opposite the editorial page or opinion editorial) allow a more in-depth response to current issues and provide a way to get an issue on the public’s agenda. Although they may be solicited by a newspaper or magazine, local community papers often are eager to receive op-eds that describe an important issue, include a story that illustrates the local impact of the problem, and suggest possible solutions.

Tips for successful op-eds include:

• Keep it short and within the word limit specified by the publication.

• Hook it to a national event if the publication or website has a national focus, or to a local event for local publications.

• Have a timely topic, concisely and clearly written in a conversational style, and with an unexpected or provocative slant.

• Include details or clinical examples to bring the commentary alive.

• Use data to support your argument

• Define the problem, possible solutions and include a call to action.

Similarly, letters to the editor should be written immediately after the original story is published and follow the publication’s guidelines for letters. They should be concise and make a specific point relevant to the article.

Calling in to talk radio provides another opportunity for sharing your perspectives. Identify yourself as a registered nurse and stay on the line while the host or program guest responds to your point or question. You may need to correct a misunderstanding or offer additional clarifying information.

Finally, it is always a good idea to contact a journalist to thank him or her for a good story. If you have a blog, be sure to link to the story in a post. If you see a tweet you like, you can retweet it to others who follow you. If you are on Facebook and like 135someone’s posting, you can click on the Like icon and continue the spread of the posting.

Conclusion

Nurses have not always been taught how to use the media as a health promotion tool. Harnessing the traditional and new social media will provide opportunities to shape healthy public policies and engage in political activism.

Discussion Questions

1. What are your major news sources? What are the potential biases of these sources?

2. How is framing and rhetoric shaping media discussions of a current health or social policy issue? What are the competing frames or rhetoric? How else might the issue be framed?

3. If you were to talk with a journalist about an issue of concern to you, how would you frame the issue? What language or images would you use for the frame?

References

Abramson A. The history of television, 1942 to 2000. McFarland: New York; 2003.

Adair B, Holan DB. PolitiFact’s lie of the year: “A government takeover of healthcare.”. [Retrieved from]  www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2010/dec/16/lie-year-government-takeover-health-care/; 2010.

Annenberg Public Policy Center of the University of Pennsylvania. Media in the middle: Fairness and accuracy in the 1994 health care reform debate. Annenberg Public Policy Center: Philadelphia; 1995.

Barklow TK, Ziering A, Dick K. The invisible war. Distributed by Roco Films Educational: Sausalito, CA.; 2012.

Center for the Digital Future. The 2013 digital future report: Surveying the digital future, year eleven. USC Annenberg School: Los Angeles; 2013 [Retrieved from]  www.digitalcenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/06/2013-Report.pdf.

Daniels J. Cloaked websites: Propaganda, cyber-racism, and epistemology in the digital era. New Media & Society. 2009;11(5):659–683.

Dorfman L, Krasnow ID. Public health and media advocacy. Annual Review of Public Health. 2014;35:293–306.

Enda J, Mitchell A. Americans show signs of leaving a news outlet, citing less information. The Pew Research Center Project for Excellence in Journalism: The state of new media 2013. 2013 [Retrieved from]  stateofthemedia.org/2013/special-reports-landing-page/citing-reduced-quality-many-americans-abandon-news-outlets/.

Freepress.net. Who Owns the Media?. [Retrieved from]  www.freepress.net/ownership/chart; 2014.

Gallup, Inc. Honesty/Ethics in Professions. Gallup [Survey conducted Dec. 5-8, 2013]. [Retrieved from]  www.gallup.com/poll/1654/honesty-ethics-professions.aspx; 2014.

Gamson WA. Bystanders, public opinion, and the media. Snow DA, Soule SA, Kriesi H. The Blackwell companion to social movements. Blackwell: Malden, MA; 2004:242–261.

Groshek J, Al-Rawi A. Public sentiment and critical framing in social media content during the 2012 U.S. Presidential campaign. Social Science Computer Review. 2013;31(5):563–576.

Groshek J, Dimitrova D. A cross-section of voter learning, campaign interest and intention to vote in the 2008 presidential election: Did Web 2.0 matter? Communication Studies. 2011;9:355–375.

Guo C, Saxton GD. Tweeting social change: How social media are changing nonprofit advocacy. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly. 2014;43(1):57–79.

Harris J. To be our own governors: The independent press and the battle for “popular information.”. Cohen ED. News incorporated. Prometheus Books: Amherst; 2005.

Hindman M. The myth of digital democracy. Princeton UP: Princeton, NJ; 2009.

Holcomb J, Gottfried J, Mitchell A. News use across social media platforms. Pew Research Journalism Project. [Retrieved from]  www.journalism.org/2013/11/14/news-use-across-social-media-platforms/; 2013.

Institute of Medicine. Speaking of health: Assessing health communication strategies for diverse populations. National Academies Press: Washington, DC; 2002.

Jamieson KH. Cable news networks increase amount and public accessibility of incivility. FlackCheck.org. [Retrieved from]  www.flackcheck.org/press/press-release-incivility-in-public-discourse/; 2012.

Jernigan DH, Wright PA. Media advocacy: Lessons from community experiences. Journal of Public Health Policy. 1996;17(3):306–329.

Kantar US. 2014 U.S. political ad spend & share. [Retrieved from]  us.kantar.com/public-affairs/politics/2014-political-media-projections/; 2014.

Lardinois R. Obama’s social media advantage. ReadWriteWeb. [Retrieved from]  www.readwriteweb.com/archives/social_media_obama_mccain_comparison.php; 2008.

Lovejoy K, Saxton GD. Information, community, and action: How nonprofit organizations use social media. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication. 2012;17(3):337–353.

Luntz F. The new American lexicon. The Luntz Research Companies: Alexandria, VA; 2005 [Retrieved from]  www.dailykos.com/story/2005/2/23/3244/72156.

Luntz F. The language of Healthcare in 2009. [Retrieved from]  content.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1896597,00.html; 2009.

Lutz A. These 6 corporations control 90% of the media in America. Business Insider. [Retrieved from]  www.businessinsider.com/these-6-corporations-control-90-of-the-media-in-america-2012-6; 2012, June 14.

McCaughey M, Ayers M. Cyberactivism: Online activism in theory and practice. Routledge: New York; 2003.

McLuhan M. Understanding media: the extensions of man. McGraw Hill: New York; 1964.

Mitchell A. Overview. Pew research center project for excellence in journalism: The state of new media 2013. [Retrieved from]  stateofthemedia.org/2013/overview-5/; 2013.

Mitchell A. Overview. Pew Research Center Project for Excellence in Journalism: The state of new media 2014. [Retrieved from]  www.journalism.org/2014/03/26/state-of-the-news-media-2014-overview/; 2014.

Nielsen Reports. A look across media: The cross-platform report Q3 2013. [Retrieved from]  www.nielsen.com/us/en/reports/2013/a-look-across-media-the-cross-platform-report-q3-2013.html; 2013, December 3.

O’Reilly T. What is Web 2.0: Design patterns and business models for the next generation of software. [. O’Reilly136Retrieved from]  www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/oreilly/tim/news/2005/09/30/what-is-web-20.html?page=1; 2005, September 30.

Ozimek T. Distributed campaigns: Using the Internet to empower action. Mason D, Leavitt J, Chaffee M. Policy & politics in nursing and health care. 5th ed. Elsevier Saunders: St. Louis; 2005.

Pew Research Center’s Journalism Project Staff. How the presidential candidates use the web and social media: Obama leads but neither candidate engages in much dialogue with voters. Pew Research Center. Project for Excellence in Journalism. [Retrieved from]  www.journalism.org/2012/08/15/how-presidential-candidates-use-web-and-social-media/; 2012, August 15.

Polletta F, Chen PCB, Gardner BG, Motes A. Is the Internet creating new reasons to protest? Klandermans B, Steklenburg J, Roggeband C. The future of social movement research: Dynamics, mechanisms, and processes. University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis; 2013.

Rainie L, Hitlin P, Jurkowitz M, Dimock M, Neidorf S. The viral Kony 2012 video. Pew Research Internet Project. [Retrieved from]  www.pewInternet.org/2012/03/15/the-viral-kony-2012-video/; 2012.

Rainie L, Smith A, Schlozman KL, Brady H, Verba S. Social media and political engagement. Pew research Internet project. [Retrieved from]  pewInternet.org/Reports/2012/Political-Engagement.aspx; 2012.

Rideout VJ, Foehr UG, Roberts DF. Generation M2: Media in the lives of 8- to 18-year-olds. Kaiser Family Foundation: Menlo Park, CA; 2010.

Ritzer G, Jurgenson N. Production, consumption, prosumption: The nature of capitalism in the age of the digital “prosumer.”. Journal of Consumer Culture. 2010;10(1):13–36.

Roche JP. Print media coverage of risk-risk tradeoffs associated with West Nile encephalitis and pesticide spraying. Journal of Urban Health. 2002;79(4):482–490.

Russell A, Voas RB, DeJong W, Chaloupka M. MADD rates the states: Advocacy event to advance the agenda against alcohol-impaired driving. Public Health Reports. 1995;110(3):240–245.

Shaughnessy H. Will the US election be won on Facebook? Forbes Online. [Retrieved from]  www.forbes.com/sites/haydnshaughnessy/2012/02/02/will-the-us-election-be-won-on-facebook/; 2012.

Shirky C. Here comes everybody: The power of organizing without organizations. The Penguin Press: New York; 2008.

Smith A. Digital politics: Pew research findings on technology and campaign 2012. Pew research Internet project. [Retrieved from]  www.pewInternet.org/2013/02/20/digital-politics-pew-research-findings-on-technology-and-campaign-2012/; 2013.

Sobieraj S, Berry JM. From incivility to outrage: political discourse in blogs, talk radio, and cable news. Political Communication. 2011;28(1):19–41; 10.1080/10584609.2010.542360.

Steele C. Election 2012: How social media will convert followers into voters. PC News. [Retrieved from]  www.pcmag.com/slideshow/story/293078/election-2012-how-social-media-will-convert-followers-into-v; 2012.

Stotter PL, Rock M. Service: When women come marching home. Distributed by Women Make Movies: New York, NY; 2011.

Talbot D. How Obama really did it: The social-networking strategy that took an obscure senator to the doors of the White House. Technology Review. 2008, September/October [Retrieved from]  www.technologyreview.com/web/21222.

Turow J. Television entertainment and the U.S. health-care debate. Lancet. 1996;347(9010):1240–1243.

Turow J, Gans R. As seen on TV: Health policy issues in TV’s medical dramas. The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation: Menlo Park, CA; 2002.

Wakefield MA, Loken B, Hornik RC. Use of mass media campaigns to change health behavior. Lancet. 2010;276(9748):1261–1271; 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60809-4.

Wallack L, Dorfman L. Media advocacy: A strategy for advancing policy and promoting health. Health Education Quarterly. 1996;23(3):293–317.

Waters RD, Burnett E, Lamm A, Lucas J. Engaging stakeholders through social networking: How nonprofit organizations are using Facebook. Public Relations Review. 2009;35(2):102–106.

West DM, Heith D, Goodwin C. Harry and Louise go to Washington: Political advertising and health care reform. Journal of Health Politics, Policy and Law. 1996;21(1):35–68.

Wong S. Joseph Kony captures Congress’ attention. Politico. [Retrieved from]  www.politico.com/news/stories/0312/74355.html; 2012.

The Woodhull Study on Nursing and the Media. Healthcare’s invisible partner: Final report. Sigma Theta Tau: Indianapolis, IN; 1998.

Zickuhr K. Generations 2010. [Retrieved from]  www.pewInternet.org/2010/12/16/generations-2010/; 2010.

Online Resources

Center for Health Media and Policy.

www.centerforhealthmediapolicy.com.

Kaiser Health News.

www.khn.org.

Freepress.

www.freepress.net.

Media Channel.

www.mediachannel.org.

Pew Internet Research Project.

www.pewInternet.org.

Pew Research Center for People and the Press.

www.people-press.org.

.

What treatment modalities would be appropriate for James at this time?

Chapter 46

Sixty-two–year-old James White is accompanied to the clinic today by his wife and son. James has had increasing problems with his memory for the past several months and has rapid mood swings for no apparent reason. His wife says that “he’ll go outside in the garden without his clothes on, and his speech is difficult to understand.” His son reports that at times James flaps his arms a lot and notices that he is unable to cut his food or tie his shoes. James was diagnosed with heart failure approximately 6 months ago.

a.            How would you explain to the White family what is occurring with James?

b.            What treatment modalities would be appropriate for James at this time?

What are your thoughts on the Collaborative Spiritual Care Conversations presented in Craigie?

Positive Spirituality in Health Care

Nine Practical Approaches to Pursuing

Wholeness for Clinicians, Patients, and

Health Care Organizations

 

 

Positive Spirituality in Health Care

Nine Practical Approaches to Pursuing

Wholeness for Clinicians, Patients, and

Health Care Organizations

Frederic C. Craigie, Jr., PhD

Maine-Dartmouth Family Medicine Residency, Dartmouth Medical School,

and Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine,

University of Arizona College of Medicine

M i l l C i t y P r e s s

M i n n e a p o l i s , M N

 

 

Copyright © 2010 by Frederic C. Craigie, Jr., PhD.

Mill City Press, Inc. 212 3rd Avenue North, Suite 290 Minneapolis, MN 55401 612.455.2294 www.millcitypublishing.com

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the author.

ISBN – 978-1-936107-48-3 ISBN – 1-936107-48-1

Cover Design by Wes Moore Typeset by James Arneson

Cover art © 2008 Caren Loebel-Fried www.carenloebelfried.com

Printed in the United States of America

 

 

To Heather, Matthew, and Tom Craigie. The spirit and commitments of your lives inspire me

and make the world a better place.

 

 

Index of Strategies……………………………………………….. xi

Acknowledgments………………………………………………. xiii

Foreword………………………………………………………….. xvii

Introduction…………………………………………………………. 1

The Context

1. Perspectives on Spirituality……………………………… 17

• Defining spirituality • So what, then, is spirituality? • Dimensions of spirituality • Suffering

2. Why Spirituality Matters………………………………… 53

• Spirituality is intimately related to health, wholeness, and well-being

• Spirituality mediates choices in health behaviors • Spirituality often frames the ways that people

cope with adversity and pursue the journey toward wellness/wholeness

• Spirituality is important because people want to be known in this way by their caregivers

Contents

 

 

3. Who Provides Spiritual Care?…………………………. 85 • Patient and clinician perspectives on spiritual care • Contributions to spiritual care by providers

of health and wellness care

4. Three Arenas of Spiritual Care……………………….. 97 • The personal arena • The clinical arena • The organizational arena • Three interlocking pieces

Nine Practical Approaches to Bringing Positive Spirituality into Health

and Wellness Care

Personal: Connections with What Matters to You

5. Stay connected with your purpose………………….. 123 • Spiritual aliveness • Aliveness and purpose • Staying connected with purpose

6. The moments of your life: Cultivate qualities of character…………………………………………………..145 • Positive Psychology • Discovering qualities of character • Working with qualities of character

7. Ground yourself in healing intention and presence….. 163 • Intention and presence • Cultivating intention and presence

 

 

Clinical: Connections with What Matters to Your Patients

8. Pick one or two areas to inquire about people’s spirituality……………………………………….. 189

• Two types of spiritual inquiry • Practical clinical approaches to spiritual inquiry • When in the course of human events

9. Partner with patients in pursuing what they care about……………………………………………………. 217

• A template for collaborative spiritual care conversations • Goals: What matters to you and where do you want to go? • Approaches: How are you going to get there? • Next steps

10. Be attuned to recurring themes of transcendence and valued directions……………………………………. .263

• Transcendence and valued directions • Spiritual care toward transcendence and valued directions • Approaches to transcendence • Encouraging patients in valued directions

Organizational: Connecting with the Shared Energy of People Working Together

11. Honor organizational mission and values………… 313

• Mission and values • Developing an understanding of mission and values • Mission and values as part of organizational life • Organizational specialists

 

 

12. Cultivate community………………………………………331 • Community in health care organizations • Positive qualities of community in health care

organizations • Cultivating community

13. Exercise empowering leadership……………………… 347

• Leadership and spiritual care • Windows on health care leadership: Voices of clinicians • Qualities of spirited health care leadership • Becoming a leader

Afterword………………………………………………………… 370

Appendix I: A Dozen of Fred’s Favorite Spirituality and Health Websites………………………… 372

Appendix II: A Fiddler’s Dozen of Fred’s Favorite Books on Spirituality and Health Care………………… 376

About the Author……………………………………………… 381

Index……………………………………………………………….. 383

 

 

 

 

 

Index of Strategies

1: Find your personal statements 136 2: Write your own origin story 137 3: Create a statement of personal mission 141 4: Describe your own approach to present awareness 143 5: Identify your own signature strengths of character 156 6: Nurture your own character 161 7: Be well 177 8: Pursue a practice of re-focusing and renewal during the day 179 9: Create a personal affirmation 181 10: Use conversational templates for spiritual inquiry 198 11: Identify conversation-openers 206 12: Adapt spiritual inquiry to the circumstances where

you see people 214 13: Get patients talking about what they care about 237 14: Elicit patients’ wisdom and competence 250 15: Express your own wisdom in some new ways 255 16: Collaborate with patients in defining next steps 259 17: Experiment with one or two approaches to transcendence 301 18: Invite patients to define key role values 305 19: Talk about the mission 323 20: Keep talking and develop a wider view of mission

and values 327 21: Define positive qualities of workplace community 340 22: Choose some next steps in building goodness in your

workplace community, and bring a colleague into the conversation 345

 

 

23: Be guided by your own evolving definition of leadership for spiritual care 363

24: Pick one or two points of growth for yourself as a leader with soul 367

 

 

xiii

Acknowledgments

Anyone who looks back along a journey that has been worth taking can see a remarkable collection of fellow travelers who have offered encouragement and support. This is certainly the case with me.

My closest associates in the work of spirituality and health care in the last several years have been my faculty colleagues at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine; Howard Silverman, MD MS, David Rychener, PhD, Victoria Maizes, MD, Tieraona Low Dog, MD, Patricia Lebensohn, MD, Moira Andre and Andrew Weil, MD. Thank you all for your friendship, for the affirmation that spirituality is really central on the path toward healing and wholeness, and for your enlightened conversation about how we invite spirit into the work that we do. I am also particularly grateful to Dr. Maizes for her kind and generous Foreword.

My ideas about spirituality and health care have been greatly en- riched over the years by the stories and dialogue from the fellows in Integrative Medicine at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine. Among many hundreds of such exchanges, I have included material (with generous permission) from Barbara L. Bakus, DO, Angela Lynn Barnett, MD, Katherine Bayliss, MD, Suzanne Bertollo, MD, MPH, Trevor M. Braden, MD, Christine Bugas, DO, Rosemarie Butterfield, MD, Gary Conrad, MD, Kathalina A. Corpus, MD, Deborah A. Dunn, MD, MPH, Susana Escobar, MD, Paula Renee Fayerman, MD, FCFP, Vani Gandhi, MD, Janet Lewis, MD, Jill Mallory, MD, Mark D. Moon MD, David Moss, MD, Amy Pabst, MD, Robert A. Pendergrast, Jr., MD, MPH, Mary Ellen Sabourin, MD, Christina Louise Stroup, MD, MS, and Joseph Zirneskie, MD.

Among my local colleagues and friends, I am ever grateful to three people in whom I always find wisdom and inspiration in the conversation about spirituality and health; Diane S. Campbell, MD, Elizabeth B. Hart, MD, and Richard F. Hobbs, III, MD, FAAFP, DABMA.

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

xiv

My 1996 sabbatical colleagues at the Seton Cove in Austin, Texas, helped with the formation of my ideas about organizational soul and have remained dear to me over the years: Sr. Mary Rose McPhee, DC, Jan and Ed Berger, Leslie Hay, and Travis Froelich.

The leadership and staff of the community health centers in my exemplary practice research will remain anonymous because of the protocols of doing this kind of research. You are still out there, though, providing great health care to Maine people and caring about one another, and you have my sincere respect.

For miscellaneous permissions and words of feedback and support; Amy Madden, MD, Priscilla Abercrombie, RN, NP, PhD, Larry A. Willms, MD CCFP, Harold G. Koenig, MD, MHSc, Sara Roberts, PA-C, Margaret J. Wheatley, EdD, Christina Puchalski, MD, MS (and the George Washington Institute for Spirituality and Health), Everett L. Worthington, Jr., PhD, Robert D. Enright, PhD, Lynn Underwood, PhD, Gowri Anandarajah, MD, Lee G. Bolman, PhD, Kay Gornick (Prairie Home Productions), Renee Anthuis, AAFP, and Douglas Harper (the Online Etymology Dictionary).

Thanks to my community of writers for their feedback and support. Led by the irrepressible Bill O’Hanlon, MS, they also include Mary Beth Averill, LICSW, Ph.D, Sandy Beadle, Adele V. Bradley, MA, LCMHC, Niel Cameron, Hope W. Hawkins, Ryan Nagy, Lisa Robertson, and Robin Temple.

The late David B. Larson, MD was a generous collaborator on early meta-analytic research on spirituality and health, and helped to form my professional direction and passion in this area. The late Thomas Nevola, MD set in motion some conversations in Central Maine that have evolved into a vital Department of Pastoral Care at the Augusta campus of MaineGeneral Medical Center, and a 23-year annual symposium that bears his name.

The cover image, Tree of Life, was graciously provided by the artist, Caren Loebel-Fried. The bird nestled in the tree is a phoenix, the mythical firebird that symbolizes renewal in the traditions of many world cultures. Readers can see more of Caren’s stunning work at http://www.carenloebelfried.com/. Hearty thanks to the broadly-

 

 

Acknowlegments

xv

talented Matthew Craigie for the portrait on the back cover. Thanks also to Mark Levine and the staff at Mill City Press. A

pleasure to work with. My wife, Beth, remained patient and cheerful over the winter of

2008-2009 with her husband impersonating a piece of furniture, planted ten feet away from the pellet stove, staring at the laptop. She is also among the wisest, most spiritually grounded, and up- lifting people I have ever been blessed to know.

 

 

xvii

Foreword

Physicians and other health care providers are invited into the most intimate moments of people’s lives. Birth, death, sexuality, and loss of bodily and mental functions are revealed in the therapeutic union created between patient and clinician. Within this context, but often missed or ignored, are spiritual questions. Buried just below the surface of most clinical encounters lie questions related to meaning, to faith, and to larger existential matters. “Why did this happen to me?” “I have been a devout Christian (Jew, Muslim, etc.); why would God give me cancer?” “My father was a good man; how could he now be stricken with Alzheimer’s, with his dignity lost and all that he valued gone?”

Doctors and nurses have often sidestepped these questions as not part of our domain as health care providers. Indeed, many of these questions are not answerable. Rainer Rilke in his timeless book Letters to a Young Poet suggests that we learn to “love the questions themselves.” While this may be good advice for the questioner, how does it relate to the health professional? By bearing witness, by acknowledging the unspoken questions, we provide an oppor- tunity to our patients for growth. Challenges of all kinds hone our development as human beings. They can serve as tests that provoke us to express our finest selves.

Parallel to our human potential for physical prowess and in- tellectual capacity, we have a wellspring of spiritual strength from which to draw. This may be of profound importance not only in times of crisis; it may be the waters that sustain us through our ordinary day to day existence as well. Whether wrestling with pain from osteoarthritis, an addiction to alcohol or drugs, a depression, or even boredom, spiritual resources can help us surface from the depths. Indeed, spiritual answers may serve as our most powerful approach to overcome life’s obstacles, offering us direction, hope, meaning, and renewal.

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

xviii

Expressions of profound gratitude may also be of a spiritual nature. “I am so deeply grateful for this healthy baby” is not only a common sentiment among new parents; it is often experienced as a spiritual event. The middle-aged woman challenged by years of diabetes may feel similarly blessed to “see my daughter graduate from college.”

Health professionals can certainly refer to others with more training, expertise and even comfort. But they must recognize the subtle hints that are often the only expression of the agonizing questions being asked. Medical educators have suggested sets of questions that can be taught to students and residents so that they take a good spiritual history. While these questions serve to enhance comfort and are a good starting point, they may imply that one can either include or exclude a spiritual history the way one decides on the need for a sexual history or a mental status exam depending on the presenting problem. Like Dr. Craigie, I believe the more ap- propriate model is an embodiment model of spirituality. Framed this way, we acknowledge the presence of the spiritual domain in whatever is going on.

In this wonderfully researched and written book, Dr. Fred Craigie leads by example, weaving together compelling stories that reveal to us how spirituality impacts health. He reviews decades of research and makes a compelling case for health care providers to delve into this part of their patients’ lives. He reminds us, with vivid cases, how these conversations enrich our lives as well as those of our patients. He reminds us that our patients want us to be present, to listen generously and with compassion, and to provide realistic hope. While we may all recognize these attributes of good medicine, he points out that when these elements are present, our patients feel spiritually cared for.

Dr. Craigie then proceeds to teach us nine approaches to bringing spirituality into healthcare. He frames his approaches in three domains: personal, clinical, and organizational. The personal reveals how we can stay connected with a higher purpose, how we

 

 

Foreword

xix

can cultivate our own character, and ways to ground ourselves in the context of a healing intention. The clinical covers practical approaches to working with patients. This includes history taking and partnering with patients as they discover and pursue what is meaningful to them. It also includes learning to recognize and support transcendence in others. Finally, Dr. Craigie challenges us to include the organizational level by honoring mission and values, by cultivating a workplace community that attends to the spiritual domains, and by exercising empowering leadership.

I have worked with Dr. Craigie for a decade now. He has taught spirituality and medicine in the Fellowship Program at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine since its inception in 2000. He is beloved by the more than 500 fellows who studied with him and found his teaching of supreme value. I am confident that you will have a similar experience.

Ultimately, Dr. Craigie enriches us with his years of experience teaching spirituality to health providers. He gives us a frame to use and language we need to help us be more comfortable and focused in providing spiritual care. He reminds us of the value of simply sitting with another human being and witnessing their journey. And in the end, it is our patients who benefit by feeling seen and acknowledged for who they are and for what is important to them.

Victoria Maizes, MD Executive Director, Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine Associate Professor of Medicine, Family Medicine, and Public Health University of Arizona

September 2009

 

 

1

Introduction

“I know that this is important, but I really can’t picture myself doing it.”

The warm morning sun, along with fresh-roasted Vera Cruz coffee, took the chill out of the air as we sat together in a small outdoor plaza. A circular fountain muffled the sounds of passing cars; craggy mountains were striking against a blue sky in the distance.

My colleague, a family physician, was speaking about her misgivings about incorporating spirituality in her practice of medicine.

“I see how prominent all of this has become…” she said, “… hundreds of articles, courses in medical schools, protocols for spiri- tuality assessment… but it still seems daunting to have those kinds of conversations with the people I see day in and day out.”

“Tell me about a patient you have seen in recent times who has touched you in some way,” I asked.

She paused, watching a cactus wren swoop down to grab a wayward muffin fragment.

I saw an elderly man in the office with two of his middle aged children, a son and a daughter. A new patient, the first time I had met any of them. The man had had a stroke a few months before and was alert but had great difficulty communicating. His kids brought him in because he was sick… he really looked under the weather… and they were concerned about whether he was developing pneumonia.

I took care of the medical business… he was sick but didn’t have pneumonia… and in this visit that was otherwise pretty matter-of-fact, I thought I saw some real tenderness in the way the son helped his father down from the exam table. I said something like “You folks really look fond of your dad… tell me a little about him.”

They immediately brightened, telling me how he had raised them as a single parent after the death of their mother and how he had always insisted on being self-employed so he would have the flexibility of being

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

2

there for them with school and everything else that kids do. We spoke for a short time about a few more details… the dad had worked in the woods, built a modest home, eventually had a small taxi business and was known in his community as someone who would be generous and patient. The daughter concluded, “We never had very much money, but even when we were hungrier than we would want to be, we always knew we were loved.”

Hearing this, the dad broke into a broad smile, too. You could see how much he cherished his children, and I think it really meant something to him to have them tell those things to his doctor. When we left the room, they all heartily shook my hand and the children said how glad they were that I was now his doctor.

“In times like those,” she reflected, “I am reminded about what a privilege it is to be able to be a part of people’s lives.”

“I can see,” I suggested, “that you already know something about good spiritual care.”

HESITATION ABOUT SPIRITUAL CARE This story is far from unique. My experience is that the health care clinicians I have known… physicians, nurses, behavioral health spe- cialists, alternative medicine practitioners and many others… are generally aware of the rising tide of interest in spirituality in health care, but often lack a clear sense of what this might mean for them. They warm to the idea of spirituality in health care, but are not sure how this idea can find its way into the day to day practice of their professional work. Principally, the hesitation about spiritual care that I hear from health care clinicians takes three forms.

Time First, some clinicians say that they are held back by time. The as- sumption is that good spiritual care requires extended conversations that take more time than the fast pace of health care allows. “I’m booked every ten to fifteen minutes all day,” an internist points out;

 

 

Introduction

3

“How can I make the time to talk with people about their spiritual lives and struggles without ending up staying late into the evening?”

Of course, time can sometimes be an ally in providing spiritual care. The time that clinicians have to get to know someone in a health care visit, and, more broadly, the time that clinicians have to get to know people in continuity relationships can help with the development of healing relationships and the exploration of spiritual issues.

I would argue, however… and we shall discuss… that clock time does not have a necessary relationship with good spiritual care or with healing. In workshops, I sometimes ask participants to identify events in their lives where someone has touched or influenced them in a meaningful way. The stories I hear typically encompass very little time. An unforeseen reaction of charity when someone knew that they had done wrong. A word of recognition about someone’s efforts out of the public eye. A comment pointing to inner resources and inviting someone to let their light shine more brightly.

Medical intuitive Caroline Myss PhD reports a dramatic story that was told to her about a patient who had made his way back from very serious depression.1 The patient said that his healing journey really began when he had decided to kill himself. He had concluded that life was not worth the pain he was feeling and he had worked out plans to end it all. On his way to his appointed demise, he had to walk a few city blocks and found himself stopping at a crosswalk, along with vehicle traffic going the same way. A woman who was driving the first car in line stopped for him and their eyes met. She smiled. He crossed the street and she drove off, but the warmth of that momentary human contact gave him a glimmer of hope and led him to question his plans. The man later recounted that the woman “brought me back to life with that smile.” Dr. Myss’ comment is that the woman “channeled grace” to the dis- traught man. A four-second spiritual intervention!

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

4

Skills The second hesitation I hear from health care clinicians about spiritual care has to do with skills. The assumption is that good spiritual care requires theological sophistication and specialized knowledge and training in models of spiritual assessment and in- tervention. “Chaplains spend years learning these things,” a social worker asks; “How can I do justice to people’s spiritual issues without that kind of background?”

Of course, spiritual care does involve skills. What do you say to a man with a life-compromising illness who tells you that God has abandoned him and he wishes to die? There may not be a single right response to this situation, but some responses are less good or better than others. Skills and approaches to such situations are learnable; perhaps this is why you have picked up this book.

I would suggest, though… as we shall also discuss… that spiritual care by health care givers is not fundamentally defined by skills and techniques. At its foundation, spiritual care by health care givers is about intention and presence. The word I typically use is “embodiment;” the way in which a healing spirit is embodied in the person and presence of the health care giver. You can have the greatest and most sophisticated spiritual skills possible, but without healing intention and compassionate presence, you are likely not to get very far with the abandoned man with the life-threatening illness.

This foundational role of intention and presence should come as good news to health care givers for two reasons. First, there are encouraging data that these things matter in the process of health and healing. Second, most health care givers have these things in spades. I find very consistently that people choose health care careers because it is important to them to make a difference in the lives of other people. The family doctor who was originally a public health nurse in a rural clinic in Guatemala and wanted to learn medicine to be able to serve people in a more substantial

 

 

Introduction

5

way. The medical assistant who works at an inner city clinic in the neighborhood where she grew up as an expression of giving back to her community. The physical therapist who was deeply im- pressed and appreciative of the care given him by an older physical therapist… now a mentor… who worked with him after a mo- torcycle accident.

The “origin stories” of people serving in health care often point to events that have cultivated or nurtured a spirit of caring and a commitment to healing. The system of health care, with its admin- istrative demands and productivity requirements, may sometimes dampen this spirit, but in most clinicians, the spirit remains in at least humble form. Even among physicians who are substantially disillusioned with the medical care system, I often hear comments such as, “I really feel bitter and burned out with the superfluous things in my job, but my saving grace is that when I close the door and I’m there with a patient, I feel some of the same energy and joy in connecting with people that I did when I started out.”

I believe that affirming the compassionate values and basic people skills that health care givers bring to their work is essential in the conversation about spirituality in health care. Some of the greatest wisdom comes not from outside, but from within.

This book, then, balances affirmation and skill development. Affirmation of the values and skills that are already there, along with conversation about some specific additional approaches that can enhance the ways that health care givers provide spiritual care.

Fear The final hesitation I hear from health care clinicians about spiritual care has to do with fear. Unlike concerns about time and skills, the hesitation about fear is largely unspoken. Health care givers may express some apprehension or concern that engaging in con- versations about spiritual topics will take up inordinate and un- available amounts of time, but the issue of fear runs deeper than that. I think it has to do with fear of invalidation.

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

6

Most of us who have graduate degrees and health care credentials have been able to be professionally successful because we are good at controlling the world around us. A physician can orchestrate a multidimensional workup of a series of medical complaints and mobilize a large cast of characters to carry it out. An acupuncturist knows the subtleties of depths and qualities of pulses, which, to the rest of us, would be completely incomprehensible. A caseworker knows the eligibility criteria for various types of health care and public assistance and can work with systems to help patients take advantage of the resources that are available. All of us can generally put our personal feelings and distractions aside in order to do what we need to do.

We take pride in our abilities to know what we are doing. It is a source of validation that we know what we are doing.

Venturing into the uncertain territory of spiritual care calls this into question. An oncologist recounts,

The patient and his wife came back for the second visit after his cancer diagnosis and he said that he was so angry at God for doing this to him… and he certainly was angry. I really didn’t have any idea what I could say that would be helpful… do I tell him that God really didn’t cause his cancer? Do I just reflect back to him what he said? I think maybe I’d be pretty angry at God, too. The two of them left just as upset as when they came in, and that’s hard to take.

For most of us, this is a painful place to be… having had the experience of not knowing what to do, and fearing that we were therefore unable to help somebody at a point of their suffering and need.

I’m not sure that fear completely goes away, and I would not make the claim that this book will enable readers to pursue spiritual care with complete confidence, comfort and assurance. After all, fear is often a fellow traveler on any journey that is worth taking. My hope, however, is that the affirmation that you already bring a great deal of wisdom to this enterprise, along with our ex-

 

 

Introduction

7

ploring together some additional concrete perspectives and skills, will strengthen and empower you in your own unique approach to spiritual care.

SPIRITED CONNECTIONS The main body of this book is organized into three sections, rep- resenting three interrelated arenas in which we may bring positive spirituality into health and wellness care. They are; our personal spirituality as clinicians and human beings, the clinical approaches we pursue in supporting the spirituality of patients, and the orga- nizational spirituality that is expressed in the culture and values of health care organizations.

The personal arena: Connecting with what matters to you

If the foundation of spiritual care by health care givers is about intention and presence, then our own spirituality holds utmost im- portance. The issue is not that we need to follow some prescribed or formal spiritual path, but rather that we need to connect with the things in our lives that matter the most to us.

We will review data suggesting that pursuing our own deepest values and cultivating personally meaningful qualities of character promote wholeness and well-being. Do you value compassion? Be compassionate. Do you value gratitude? Be grateful. Do you feel most alive when you are serving somebody else? Serve. Do you pride yourself on bringing a spirit of peace to people in conflict? Bring peace. Whatever it is that you most cherish about how you wish to live your life, it is the connection and expression of those qualities that help you to be centered and grounded. When you are centered and grounded, your presence with people… and the spirit that you bring to your work… will be palpably different from when you are not. When you are really present with people, you are already providing good, foundational, spiritual care.

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

8

The clinical arena: Connecting with what matters to your patients

For most of us, our clinical work with people in health and wellness care is the focus of our professional mission. We may bring a variety of personal motivations to our work… a curiosity for science, a passion for leadership, a desire for financial stability, a joy in a camaraderie of caregivers… but ultimately, the work we do is focused on healing suffering people and fostering wellness and wholeness in all of us.

We will consider approaches to spiritual care in the clinical arena in considerable detail. The common theme or direction of these approaches is supporting people on their own unique spiritual journeys by helping them to connect with what matters most to them. Where does the patient in front of you find meaning and purpose? What is her life “about?” What does he hope the legacy of his life would be? What does she consider sacred? What is he really passionate about? What sustains her in hard times? Answers to such questions, as we shall see, provide a vital backdrop for patients’ choices about health practices, a template for patients’ charting the places where they will invest their time and heart, and a wellspring of wisdom and direction in adversity.

The organizational arena: Connecting with the shared energy of people working together

Organizations have souls as much as people do. Organizational soul comes by a variety of names; “spirit,” “atmosphere,” “culture,” “tone,” “environment,” and so forth. Some organizations “have it,” some do not, and the difference is usually palpable.

I suspect that you have experienced (or perhaps heard from other people) about great places to work, and experienced (or heard from others) about places where work was pretty demoralizing. Prac- ticing in and living near the state capital of Maine, I have known a large number of state employees over the years and heard their stories about work. Occasionally I hear about state departments

 

 

Introduction

9

where people really believe in what they are doing… protecting a watershed, preserving a historic past, providing educational services for teenage mothers… and work together with a spirit of respect, support and joy. I hear of other state departments or units where people are predominantly putting in their time until they are fully vested in the retirement system, and where the workplace spirit seems to nurture suspicion, micromanaging, backbiting, and pro- tecting one’s own turf. Clearly, the former group of departments will support the health and well-being of employees better than the latter group, and I would bet a pair of Red Sox tickets that the former group of departments would show much better indices of productivity and organizational functioning, as well.

There is, in fact, very substantial literature in the business com- munity about the relationship between organizational spirit and parameters of organizational functioning and success. One of the very early books in this area was “The Soul of a Business” by Tom Chappell, a narrative of the history and evolution of Tom’s of Maine, the organic personal care products company that Chappell founded with his wife, Kate.2 Starting from their home in Kennebunk, Maine, the Chappells built a business that was profitable but, by the late 1970s, had reached a plateau. Tom believed that something was missing, and he negotiated with his board to drop back to half time and to devote the remainder of his time to studying theology at Harvard Divinity School.

He had a blast, studying Martin Buber, Jonathan Edwards and other spiritual writers, and bringing back to Maine a new energy for integration of spiritual wisdom and consciousness in business practice. With his board, he then revisited the kind of organization they wished to lead, in terms of empowerment of employees, stew- ardship of the environment, and substantial engagement with the local community. The results of this undertaking, from a purely business standpoint, were striking.

So, too, in health care. There are good data in this arena, as well, as we will review. The short summary is that health care or-

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

10

ganizations that pay attention to organizational soul… a shared sense of mission, respect and empowerment of employees, a spirit of community and caring among workers… do better than or- ganizations that do not with respect to employee retention and satisfaction, patient satisfaction, performance improvement and process measures, and health care outcomes.

Three interlocking pieces I believe that all three arenas are vital parts of the larger picture of spirituality in health and wellness care. Spiritual care is incomplete without attention to personal spirituality, as well as clinical ap- proaches, as well as organizational soul. Take one in isolation… a common example being good clinical skills in dis-spirited prac- titioners or disempowering organizations… and the challenges of providing good spiritual care over time become formidable and prohibitive.

Stated positively, the possibilities of providing good spiritual care can be exciting in the setting of centered and grounded prac- titioners, with solid and practical clinical approaches, in organi- zations that empower staff and patients alike to bring out the best that is within them.

I tell participants in my workshops that 92 percent of the lit- erature on spirituality and health care addresses the clinical arena, 7.5 percent of the literature addresses the personal arena, with a scattering of publications addressing the organizational arena. I confess that I am making these numbers up, but I suspect that they would come close to the actual emphasis in each of these three arenas.

In the main body of this book, we will consider each of these arenas in detail, exploring what they are, why they matter, how they interrelate, and how they may be nurtured.

 

 

Introduction

11

POSITIVE SPIRITUALITY What is “positive spirituality?” Is some spirituality “negative?” What does “Positive Spirituality in Health Care” mean?

Good questions. Thanks for asking. Consider; a parent anguishes over why a loving God would visit

a three year old child with cancer. A man dying of AIDS struggles to reconcile his homosexuality with his lifelong devotion to the Catholic Church. A middle-aged woman is drawn into a sexual re- lationship with her pastor… which she ends… and faces challenges of forgiveness and trust.

These are serious spiritual issues; challenges that call into question people’s core spiritual values about themselves, the world and, indeed, the nature of the Divine. I think that clinicians in health and wellness care can work with people around issues like these to a lesser or greater extent depending on a number of factors, such as our skills and experience, our comfort level, and the kinds of ongoing relationships we have had. Often, however, people struggling with issues such as these can be best served by spiritual care professionals such as chaplains, spiritual directors and clergy.

“Positive spirituality” complements the journey of identifying and healing spiritual issues. Positive spirituality comes at spirituality from the other direction. The question is not “What is wrong?” The question is “What is right?” The question is not primarily how spiritual suffering and spiritual wounds can be healed; the question is more one of identifying and encouraging people’s spiritual values and resources, and bringing those values and resources to bear in people’s journeys toward health, coping, dignity and wellness.

The positive spirituality conversation takes shape along lines I have described above, and will explore in considerable detail.

• What is your life about? • What matters to you? • What do you care about? • What is sacred for you; what do you cherish?

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

12

• What sustains you and keeps you going in adversity? • What are the qualities of character that you most take pride in and

try to express in your life?

As I write this, I saw a patient this week for the first time, who described a lifelong history of abuse and mental health issues. She began the conversation with a recitation of the various psychiatric diagnoses she had accumulated… PTSD, depression, bipolar disorder, and borderline personality disorder… and then proceeded to describe the terrible physical and sexual abuse that had been visited upon her by her father over a number of years. She had had multiple suicide attempts, the most recent three years ago upon the death of a cherished grandfather. One could feel and see the weight of this suffering in her telling the story.

It occurred to me to confirm with her that she had indeed not attempted suicide in the last three years… this was the case… and to ask why. For much of this time, she said, she had been engaged in caring for her widowed grandmother, spending time with her and helping her with her own health problems, until the grand- mother passed away, as well. Did my patient think that her caring for the grandmother had anything to do with her refraining from suicide attempts during this time? Yes, she believed that it did. How would she put into words what it was about caring for the grandmother that helped her to remain on this side of suicide? She paused,

I think it gave me a purpose in my life, a purpose for being on this planet.

We spoke more about the idea of “purpose” and how that had made a difference in her life; one could see and feel the weight of the suffering diminishing. This is “positive spirituality.”

Of course, she has some significant spiritual issues to address. How do you deal with years of sexual abuse at the hands of someone who should be a champion and protector? What does “forgiveness” mean and how might this at some point be a part of the journey?

 

 

Introduction

13

Important questions; genuine spiritual issues. But it is clear that she is more than the person who has been terribly victimized. She is also a person who has a heart of tenderness for aging grand- parents, and who has made the profoundly important connection that “purpose for being on this planet” can be a vital part of her own healing journey.

Positive spirituality, in other words, affirms that people may have substantial spiritual issues and suffering, but directs energy particularly toward the spiritual values and resources that sustain and empower people as they live their lives.

As a practical matter, what I am calling spiritual “issues” and spiritual “resources” often intersect. You see both in the brief story I have told about my abused patient. We will touch on the subject of spiritual issues and suffering and consider some approaches for providers of health and wellness care, while the over-arching theme of the following chapters will be the understanding and nour- ishment of spiritual values and resources, in personal, clinical and organizational venues.

A LOOK FORWARD The first three chapters of this book provide background material for a clinically-oriented perspective on spirituality and spiritual care. Chapter 1 presents some definitions and perspectives about spirituality, including an introduction to my CAMPS framework for exploring five dimensions of spiritual experience. Chapter 2 describes four reasons why spirituality is important in health and wellness care. Chapter 3 considers the nature of spiritual care, and how health and wellness care clinicians can provide great spiritual care, in partnership with spiritual care specialists. Chapter 4 ex- amines the three arenas of spiritual care… personal, clinical and organizational… in greater detail.

The main body of the book presents nine chapters that explore the “Nine Practical Approaches to Pursuing Wholeness for Cli- nicians, Patients and Health Care Organizations.” Chapters 5

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

14

through 7 consider the personal arena of spiritual care, exploring personal purpose, positive qualities of character, and healing in- tention and presence. Chapters 8 through 10 consider the clinical arena of spiritual care, exploring spiritual inquiry, partnering with patients in pursuing what they care about, and recurring themes of transcendence and valued directions. Chapters 11 through 13 consider the organizational dimension of spiritual care, exploring organizational mission and values, organizations as “community,” and empowering leadership.

Sprinkled throughout are twenty-four practical strategies for building on the ideas and case examples we will be considering. You may also think of these strategies as “exercises,” or suggestions for “active learning.”

Finally, two appendices present a dozen or so helpful websites about spirituality and health, and A Fiddler’s Dozen of Fred’s Fa- vorite Books on Spirituality and Health Care.

May this book affirm the heart and the skill that you already bring to your work, and may we explore together some additional approaches to supporting people on their journeys toward healing and wholeness.

REFERENCES 1. Myss C. Invisible acts of power. In: Church D, ed. Healing the

Heart of the World. Santa Rosa, CA: Elite; 2005:17-21. 2. Chappell T. The Soul of a Business. New York: Bantam; 1993.

 

 

The Context

 

 

17

Chapter One

Perspectives on Spirituality

The spiritual is inclusive. It is the deepest sense of belonging and participation.

We all participate in the spiritual at all times, whether we know it or not. There’s no place to go and be separated from the spiritual… The most

important thing in defining spirit is the recognition that the spirit is an essential need of human nature. There is something in all of us

that seeks the spiritual. This yearning varies in strength from person to person but it is always there in everyone.

And so, healing becomes possible.1

Rachel Naomi Remen, MD

Some time during the second half of the first century of the Common Era, a fisherman and missionary in Asia Minor contrasted spiritual and material pursuits. According to John the Apostle, as he is known in the Christian tradition, “It is the spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and are life” (NIV).

The modern literature on spirituality and human experience offers countless perspectives on spirituality. At its core, however, I am drawn to the idea that spirit gives life. Spirit… however

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

18

you think of this and from whatever tradition you come… gives meaning, dignity, direction and passion to life.

As I speak with people about spirituality, I often hear a con- nection between being spiritually engaged and being fully and meaningfully alive:

T.S. was a 34 year old female who complained of a complete loss of libido. At the time of presentation the insufferable complaint had been going on for greater than 3 years without any improvement. Over the course of two years her complaint was not found to be secondary to a hormonal imbalance, an anatomical condition, any metabolic or organic problem, or a primary depression. Psychotherapy, couples counseling, and sensate focus were also tried unsuccessfully. Some time later, I had the opportunity to follow-up with her and she had finally experienced a reso- lution of her symptoms after 5-6 years of suffering. She explained that she had come to realize that several life events had occurred simultaneously that had left her feeling “spiritually dead” and completely detached from her spiritual self and the “experience of God” that she had always known. Apparently, she was not able to realize this previously and no amount of talking or suggestions had led to her reconnecting with her spiritual self. She began her journey of healing after listening to an audio-tape on intuition and love. A suggestion was made to experience getting in touch with all of her senses through self-guided imagery. She began to re- awaken and also began nurturing herself through nature and rest while creating experiences to connect with her senses. Eventually this explo- ration allowed her to redefine a sense of spiritual connection and “being present” in her life. This allowed her to feel whole again and spiritually alive. Her libido followed.

In the framework of this patient, there is a clear distinction drawn between being spiritually “dead” and spiritually “alive,” and this distinction has profound implications for her health and for the ways that she lives her life.

The last eighteen or twenty years have witnessed a substantial increase in the interest in spirituality and health care. When I

 

 

Perspectives on Spirituality

19

presented a seminar about spirituality at a Society of Teachers of Family Medicine national conference in 1986,2 and when I pub- lished (with the late David Larson) what I believe was the first article about spirituality in the Family Medicine literature in 1988,3 there was clearly a feeling that people interested in this subject were part of a small, ragtag band outside of the mainstream of organized medicine.

How much has changed in the intervening years. One can go to STFM conferences these days and find that seminars and interest group conversations about spirituality consistently spill out into the halls. Thanks to the efforts of Dr. Larson, Dr. Christina Pu- chalski (Founder and Director of the George Washington Institute for Spirituality and Health), the Templeton Foundation, and many others, there are now educational curricula about spirituality at a majority of American medical schools, a number of postgraduate programs, and at least one program (several fellowships in Inte- grative Medicine at the Arizona Center for Integrative Medicine) addressed to mid-career physicians. Dr. Herbert Benson’s Harvard conference on Spirituality and Healing in Medicine has been packing them in for many years. The number and quality of re- search projects about the incorporation of spirituality in health care has increased substantially, as we shall see later, and there have been significant research initiatives (sponsored by the Fetzer In- stitute, among others) in a number of ancillary subject areas such as forgiveness, gratitude, hope, and love. And at a personal level, I talk about this subject with medical students who are applying to our residency program and find lively and engaged interest, in contrast to the quizzical and worried expressions of years past.

Still, there is much more work to be done, and many questions remaining to be explored. What is the larger picture… what does it mean to incorporate spirituality in health care? Where are the points in patients’ lives and in the process of health care where con- versation about spirituality may be helpful? How do we best enter this arena with patients? How can we best approach spirituality in an

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

20

inclusive and respectful way with our patients? As we encounter or elicit spiritual issues in our relationships with patients, what do we as providers of health and wellness care do? What is our unique role… as physicians, nurses, acupuncturists, naturopaths, psychologists, physical therapists, medical assistants and others in the health care world… in strengthening patients’ spiritual resources and amelio- rating spiritual suffering? How can we best collaborate with pastoral care professionals, drawing on their skills and expertise and also being legitimate players in this arena ourselves? How is our own spirituality related to what we do as health care professionals?

PERSPECTIVES ON SPIRITUALITY What do we mean by “spirituality?” Why do we speak of “spiri- tuality,” rather than “religion?” What is the relationship of spiri- tuality and religion? Does reference to “spirituality” imply a par- ticular world view?

Good questions, all. It would certainly be sensible to lay out a clear definition of spirituality, as we embark on an exploration of spirituality and health care.

This is, however, not so easy. My observation is that the word “spirituality” rolls frequently and smoothly off the tongue, but takes on a broad variety of meanings to different people. If you tell me that spirituality is an important part of your life, I may make some assumptions about your having some cherished values or beliefs, or perhaps assume that you engage in some centering or grounding practices. But I would be guessing… and I would certainly need to have a conversation with you about this before I began to have some real appreciation of what this meant to you.

For me, the most succinct statement of the overarching picture of spirituality comes from former Surgeon General Dr. C. Everett Koop. Speaking in 1994 at the annual Maine symposium on spiri- tuality and health that I coordinate, he defined spirituality as

The vital center of a person; that which is held sacred.4

 

 

Perspectives on Spirituality

21

Along with the observation from John the Apostle, I think that this points to themes that can be profoundly helpful as we care for patients. What is “the vital center” for a middle aged man who has had a serious heart attack? What sustains a grade school teacher who feels overwhelmed and depressed? What is sacred enough for a young mother to energize her efforts to stop smoking? When are the times when a retired person feels really alive? What keeps a high school student who has had suicidal ideas from carrying them out? When, indeed, do we experience something sacred in our professional lives? What sustains and re-orients us when we become overextended and demoralized?

As we understand… for our patients and for ourselves… what “gives life” and what is “vital and sacred,” we glimpse the foundation that underlies the personal meaning of health and wholeness. We understand better the personal nature of suffering. We understand better the personal motivation for change. And we are given the opportunity and the honor of engaging the personally-understood life force that sustains all of us as people on our life journeys.

DEFINING SPIRITUALITY Before we consider further the “content” of spirituality… the aspects of human experience that this broad word embraces… I would like to suggest several ideas about the process of approaching a definition.

Spirituality is personal Spirituality is uniquely experienced and understood by individual people.

There may be common beliefs and practices among groups of people, but ultimately the understanding of what is vital and sacred is uniquely our own. Mennonites may share beliefs about adult baptism. Southern Baptists may share beliefs about the literal in- terpretation of biblical texts. Hasidic Jews may express their faith in common ways in terms of ritual and celebration. Participants

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

22

in Alcoholics Anonymous may embrace together the convention of referring to a “Higher Power.” Activists with the Nature Con- servancy may orient much of their personal and professional lives around sustaining the natural environment. But in each of these cases, an articulation of what is vital and sacred… what gives life… will be in the unique language, drawing on the unique personal experiences, of individual people.

Indeed, any definition of spirituality is itself a personal matter. I am suggesting some core ideas about spirituality that make sense to me, and I will shortly be suggesting several common aspects of spiritual experience. I do this not so much because I think there is a right way to think about spirituality, but because a) I think I owe it to readers to let you know where I am coming from, and b) because much of what I will be describing about how I work with spirituality with patients and health professionals follows from my understanding of spirituality.

In practice, I find that most people who would care to define spirituality have their own definition, and have some emotional attachment to this definition. I would rather honor the framework and language of people’s personal definitions, rather than impose my own. Honoring the unique definition of “spirituality” held by individual people is respectful of them, and empowering as they cultivate and pursue what is vital and sacred for them.

Spirituality as experience Spirituality is, first, experienced. It is secondarily put into words.

I love models and frameworks and paradigms. It warms my heart to draw boxes and arrows that depict directions of influence among aspects of human experience. But the clearest pathway to understanding the spiritual dimension of someone’s life is not found in seeking the words, but in seeking the experiences. As we will consider when we examine spiritual inquiry, a question such as, “When has there been a time when you have experienced something really sacred and powerful in your life?” typically yields

 

 

Perspectives on Spirituality

23

a much more rich and substantial response than asking people about their theology or belief systems.

I have had two good friends and colleagues, ages 46 and 55, die of cancer in the last couple of years. Both of them, until the very end, were among the most “vital” and “alive” people I have known… caring about other people, learning and growing, cher- ishing their days. One spoke comfortably in spiritual language; one did not. Neither one needed to speak formally about their spirituality. You could see it. You could feel it.

Spirituality as narrative More specifically, the richness of spirituality often resides in stories.

A few years ago, I did a qualitative research project that involved interviewing family physicians about what “spirituality” meant to them and how they incorporated it into their professional and personal lives.5 The subjects were 12 physicians from three regions of the country. Six were male and six female. They were all either in full-time clinical practice, or had had substantial clinical practice experience. All were referred to me because intervening contacts thought that they would have an interest in talking about spiri- tuality and medicine. They were involved, to a greater or lesser extent, with a broad variety of spiritual communities, reflecting both Western and Eastern traditions.

I spoke with all of them about their experiences and perspectives about spirituality and medicine, then processed the interview tran- scripts according to a typical content analysis methodology. The results were striking both for what these physicians did not talk about and what they did talk about.

These physicians did not much speak about religion, spiritual history-taking, chaplains, or spiritually-related techniques such as prayer and meditation. Rather, they told rich and touching stories of patients’ struggles, courage, determination and really coming to grips with issues of what it means to live, and to die. They told stories, as well, about their own lives and, often, what it meant to

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

24

them to be doctors and healers. I had a fellow who started seeing me for some sinus problems and

back problems. As I began to get to know him, he kind of opened up a little and said that his son had been killed in an auto accident about a year or two before. We talked a little bit about it and he kind of closed off the discussion and I wrapped up the medical things and gave him a prescription and he went on.

He came back again about a month later. He was having more back problems and some stress situation reactions. We talked again and I asked him how he was feeling. Was he depressed at all? And how he was dealing with the fact of losing his son? So that gave us the opportunity again to talk a little bit more about that. And he broke down. He said he thought he had begun to turn a corner, but it was still really hard.

He just cried and said, “It was the worst thing I ever had to deal with. I was depressed and I really wanted to kill myself.” I said, “Well, what has started to make a difference?”

And he said, “The last time you talked to me, you know, you were so concerned about how I was doing… I felt like you really understood what it was like to go through what I’d been going through. I remember you asked what I was doing for myself… was I exercising, was I seeing friends, had I been going to church, and things like that. After that, my wife and I sat down and talked. I turned on the TV to one of the religious programs and we listened and we started doing those things again. It’s really made a difference in my life.”

Over the next few months, he got a job at Ignatius house, which is the AIDS program here in town. He put his heart into that and really started talking with those fellows about how they were doing, too. He said it’s made a difference. We got him into counseling. He’s gone back to church. Stopped alcohol, stopped the meds he’d been taking. I really have seen a big change in his life. It’s not like I deserve the credit for all of this, but I think I may have had a role in caring about him and encouraging him about the things that might help him to bring his life back together.

Most healing traditions are deeply rooted in narrative and story- telling. Even in Western medicine, we typically begin our conver-

 

 

Perspectives on Spirituality

25

sation about people with stories: “I have a 47 year old bank manager who was working in his garden Thursday when he experienced a sharp pain…”. As we hear (and participate in) patients’ stories, spir- ituality “comes alive” and engages the listener. Something happens to us personally and spiritually as we hear people’s stories of pain, suffering, courage, determination and commitment.

Spirituality as “embodiment,” rather than “specialty” Spirituality in health care subsumes, but is not defined by, specific techniques and approaches.

We will consider in the next chapter a substantial research lit- erature on the relationships between spiritual and religious beliefs and practices and health. Much of this research looks at the ben- eficial effects of a variety of observable behaviors and spiritual tech- niques… religious institution attendance, prayer and meditation, spiritual assessment, chaplain consultation, and so forth. As we work with patients, we try to understand and support the spiritual practices that have been helpful to patients, and to find concrete spiritual resources that have been helpful to us.

While we embrace such techniques and approaches in working with patients, however, I believe that the definition of spirituality in health care is broader than techniques and approaches. An inte- grative approach to thinking about spirituality has its roots in the ways in which spirituality informs who we are as people and prac- titioners, and how spirituality informs the mission and culture and spirit of the organizations of which we are a part. It has its roots in the larger picture of how “the spiritual” is embodied, and given life, in the experience of patients and in ourselves. For a patient with metastatic cancer, coming to an understanding of what life will be about and what is “vital and sacred” during their remaining time is the larger picture. The techniques we use, such as prayer, medi- tation or religious participation can be viewed as methodologies in service to this larger picture.

The “landscape” of spirituality, in other words, is large. Specific techniques and approaches dot the landscape, but do not define

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

26

the whole picture. The specialty model. I have proposed two contrasting per-

spectives on the larger picture of spirituality in health care; the “specialty” model and the “embodiment” model.6 What I call the “specialty model” views spirituality as a specific content area, or area of technical expertise, in parallel with countless other content areas (such as cardiology and ENT) that health care practitioners need to make a part of their repertoire. Primary care physicians, for instance, operate from a variety of specialty areas as the clinical situation warrants. Sometimes they may “do” cardiology in working with a patient with heart disease. Sometimes they may “do” neurology, or gastroenterology, or orthopedics. At other times, they do not engage these specialty areas. There is not much need for a textbook of In- ternal Medicine when doing a well-child exam, for instance.

In the “specialty model,” spirituality is incorporated in the process of health care in the same way as any other specialty content area; sometimes you “do it” and sometimes you don’t. In this model, certain clinical situations (such as death and dying or profound disability) lead health care practitioners to shift into a “spirituality mode” and engage this particular content area with specific techniques and approaches. Practitioners may conduct an organized spiritual assessment, recommend prayer, teach medi- tation, and so forth. Apart from clinical situations that trigger the spirituality mode, spirituality content is put away, just as one keeps the Medicine textbook on the shelf during the pediatric exam.

The embodiment model. We may contrast the “specialty” way of thinking about spirituality with what I call the “embodiment model.” In the embodiment model, spirituality lies at the core of what it means to be a provider of health care, acting as an agent of healing in people’s lives.

Spirituality is embodied in everything we do. The work that we do as health care practitioners is informed and guided by how we see ourselves and how we come to understand and give life to our sense

 

 

Perspectives on Spirituality

27

of vocation, calling and mission. No matter what the content area, there is a spirit in the room as

we work with patients… which we can feel and experience, even if it can’t be adequately put into words. We may try, perhaps with some success, to capture this spirit with a variety of words… calm, compassionate, time-urgent, businesslike, welcoming, honoring, ana- lytical, detached, and so forth.

We will consider later some of the literature on “presence” and “intention” in health care. The thrust of this literature is that our spirits, or the ways in which spirit is visible or experienced in us as health care givers… matters. How spirit is embodied in the work we do, in other words, has a bearing on the healing process.

I have an elderly patient who has struggled for many months with the impending death of her sister from end stage CA. She always included a description (usually tearful) of how her sister was doing at her visits with me, as well as what it was like for her to experience her sister’s decline. She was especially feeling helpless and guilty as the oldest sibling who’d been the one others would always look to for help in the past. At first I was uncomfortable as I felt something more was expected of me besides listening. However at subsequent visits I realized she just needed to tell her story. Even though the telling was not easy she always seemed lifted after and I could sense a deepening spiritual connection between us.

The term, “spiritual connection” signifies to me that a spirit of healing has been embodied in the person and presence of this prac- titioner. I would not be surprised if the patient were to describe this relationship with words like “respect” or “safety” or “compassion” or “caring” or even “love.” It can perhaps be argued that what the practitioner is doing in this relationship is reducible to definable techniques such as active listening, or perhaps qualities of non- verbal behavior like optimal eye contact and physical distance. I don’t doubt that behaviors and techniques at this level could be reliably identified on a videotape of office encounters with this patient, but my belief is that what is happening is not fully re-

 

 

Positive Spirituality In Health Care

28

Health Care Delivery

Healthcare
: Undergraduate
: Essay
: English (U.S.)
: 3 pages/825 words
:APA

Health Care Delivery

NAME

HEALTHCARE DELIVERY

 

 

 

 

 

 

A Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan is affordable in my region since one pays low monthly premiums. This plan does have deductibles, and it uses a network which is optimized for our region. It is an all-in-one coverage plan which may also include built-in coverage of prescription drugs. One pays less if he/she uses doctors and hospitals which are in the network of the plan.

A low annual deductible is paid when one uses the Preferred Provider Organization (PPO) plan. The deductible amount is $10. The coinsurance of a PPO plan is also very affordable as it requires the patient to pay 10 % of the total amount (Gold et al, 2015). Participants of a PPO plan are allowed to see doctor facilities in their networks without the referral. They can also choose specialists without necessarily having to consult the primary care physicians.

A Part D (Prescription Drug) is most suitable for healthcare coverage of the hypothetical obesity patient. This plan ensures that the patient gets bonus drugs in addition to the total formulary drugs. The patient can order drugs through mail if he/she uses this plan. The initial coverage limit for this plan is designed such that the plan covers for more costs than the patient. Brand-name drugs also have a discount of 75 % (Heiss et al, 2012).

The Part D policy also suits the obesity patient since he/she will be charged a low monthly premium of $100. Blue Cross Blue Shield does not cancel a prescription drug plan. Enrolling in a part D prescription drug plan will ensure that the obesity patient gets additional benefits to his/her initial Medicare coverage (Heiss et al, 2012). The part D plan offered by Blue Cross Blue Shield allows users to switch to low-cost medications.

The obesity patient can use over-the-counter drugs since he/she has already been diagnosed with the condition. These over-the-counter drugs are more affordable and a part D plan will allow for the patient to switch to the medication (Miller et al, 2014). The plan also charges small amounts of money to patients taking drugs for a longer period. An obesity patient is very likely to take drugs for a longer period such as a 30-day supply. This plan will allow him/her to save his/her money.

Prescriptions can be filled at various pharmacies which are to be used by the obesity patient. These ensure that the plan fully covers him/her through the pharmacies at which prescriptions were filled. The part D plan by Blue Cross Blue Shield charges lower costs for those who use the preferred pharmacies for that network (Safran et al, 2015). Identifying the preferred pharmacies for this network also helps to save a lot of money.

Higher discount rates are given when one uses a membership card in the part D plan. These are given on the prescription drugs bought. There are additional programs which collaborate with Blue Cross Blue Shield in order to help customers pay for the expenses of prescription drugs (Safran et al, 2015). Several programs are available in my region, and they help those with a part D plan very often. One can also apply for the extra help program.

A part D plan also offers all the prescription drugs needed by a patient. This guarantees the obesity patient adequate drug supply all the time. A patient can also get prescription drugs and pay at a later date. In addition to this, there is no interest charged for such credit payments.

 

 

 

 

 

REFERENCES

Gold et al (2015). A national survey of the arrangements managed-care plans makes with physicians. New England Journal of Medicine333(25), 1678-1683.

Heiss et al (2012). Mind the gap! Consumer perceptions and choices of Medicare Part D prescription drug plans. In Research findings in the economics of aging (pp. 413-481). University of Chicago Press.

Miller et al (2014). Managed care plan performance since 1980: a literature analysis. Jama271(19), 1512-1519.

Safran et al (2015). Prescription Drug Coverage and seniors: Findings from A 2003 National Survey: Where do things stand on the eve of implementing the new Medicare Part D benefit? Health Affairs24(Suppl1), W5-152.

: For a hypothetical patient who has Obesity disease you selected, create a socioeconomic profile of your choice. What is the level of this patient�s income, education, work experience, and cultural influences? How might these socioeconomic factors influence his or her ability to access the necessary healthcare? How can the patient engage in self-care practices, such as modifying diet and exercise, and understand the nature of the illness, treatment, and prognosis? What healthcare services for this disease does the patient has access to?