Liz. That is terrific that you are doing this. I am not sure I know literature of the top of my head that offers added insight. I might refer to the literature on inclusion and crossing disciplinary/ideological divides to get at what I think you are trying to get to. Fundamentally this piece, as with a lot of my writing, aims to suggest that we need to keep our doors (and minds) open to radically different perspectives than ours, and engage them with civility. Sandro
Your post came at just the right morment to help inform ASPPH's Framing the Future: Education for Public Health 2030 initiative. One of the expert panels is proposing a competency for student learners on something we're calling, for lack of a better term for now, "boundary spanning." By this we mean, outreach to many different kinds of audiences and effective communication in a variety of venues, settings, and sectors for crossing divides and drawing in those who are most resistant to public health promotion and disease and injury prevention. Do you, Dr. Galea, or anyone following THG have insights or literature that may support or help shape what we're trying to do here?
Throughout this post you refer to Not "liking" or "disagreeing" with the poitions of states or countries. The issue is not so much about ones personal likes and dislikes. It is about taking a moral/ethical stand in public health. Benefits of this approach are not always immediately clear nor should they always be the primary goal. Just as public health is about the interests of the majority rather than individual rights taking precedent when thry conflict, so too should public health be bold enough to stand up for what is ethically and morally right.
Liz. That is terrific that you are doing this. I am not sure I know literature of the top of my head that offers added insight. I might refer to the literature on inclusion and crossing disciplinary/ideological divides to get at what I think you are trying to get to. Fundamentally this piece, as with a lot of my writing, aims to suggest that we need to keep our doors (and minds) open to radically different perspectives than ours, and engage them with civility. Sandro
Your post came at just the right morment to help inform ASPPH's Framing the Future: Education for Public Health 2030 initiative. One of the expert panels is proposing a competency for student learners on something we're calling, for lack of a better term for now, "boundary spanning." By this we mean, outreach to many different kinds of audiences and effective communication in a variety of venues, settings, and sectors for crossing divides and drawing in those who are most resistant to public health promotion and disease and injury prevention. Do you, Dr. Galea, or anyone following THG have insights or literature that may support or help shape what we're trying to do here?
Throughout this post you refer to Not "liking" or "disagreeing" with the poitions of states or countries. The issue is not so much about ones personal likes and dislikes. It is about taking a moral/ethical stand in public health. Benefits of this approach are not always immediately clear nor should they always be the primary goal. Just as public health is about the interests of the majority rather than individual rights taking precedent when thry conflict, so too should public health be bold enough to stand up for what is ethically and morally right.
Excellent arguments, thank you.