Imagine your elders camped by a fire telling stories.
Indian Country holds stories dear. Stories keep cultures alive and warm.
Today medical practitioners welcome a new form of story-telling called narrative medicine.
Point is to enable patients to have their stories heard.
I was excited when I first learned about narrative medicine and I thought, here’s a break-through: doctors will actually listen to their patients.
My framework translates narrative medicine as an opportunity to learn about health through many means, not simply through the lens of a physician.
This week I received a notice about a workshop on narrative medicine.
I was excited to scan through the notice but then stopped cold. I couldn’t understand any of it.
The notice announces a workshop on “narrative advocacy” where folks will:
Read exemplar works which showcase both varied advocacy focus areas (patient care/ practice improvement, research dissemination, medical education, health policy) and diverse platforms (medical journals, the lay press, blogs, and health policy journals).
I have no idea what that means.
Here I sit, an active audience member, and I cannot discern what the hell the statement means.
A further enticement reads:
Next they will draft the beginnings of a narrative advocacy piece and, in a works-in-progress style workshop, receive peer and faculty feedback on their topic, approach, and possible publication sites for their pieces.
Seems dumb that I can’t understand the narrative about teaching about narrative.
Image from http://www.economist.com/node/14119801
Lol, academics. I know the feeling and I’m part of that crowd too.
Good to hear your response! Join the crowd.