[NIFL-HEALTH:2244] Re: It's a plain language issue

From: Sandra Smith (sandras@u.washington.edu)
Date: Mon Feb 28 2000 - 20:32:28 EST


Return-Path: <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov>
Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.9.3/8.9.0.Beta5/980425bjb) with SMTP id UAA08131; Mon, 28 Feb 2000 20:32:28 -0500 (EST)
Date: Mon, 28 Feb 2000 20:32:28 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <01BF8215.3D2DD080.sandras@u.washington.edu>
Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov
Reply-To: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Originator: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Sender: nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov
Precedence: bulk
From: Sandra Smith <sandras@u.washington.edu>
To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-health@literacy.nifl.gov>
Subject: [NIFL-HEALTH:2244] Re: It's a plain language issue
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
Status: OR

Well said Audrey. SS

-----Original Message-----
From:	Plnenglish@aol.com [SMTP:Plnenglish@aol.com]
Sent:	Monday, February 28, 2000 5:23 PM
To:	Multiple recipients of list
Subject:	[NIFL-HEALTH:2243] Re: It's a plain language issue

Dear NIFL-Health listers:

I'm responding to a theme in 3 recent messages from which I've 
excerpted
below:
1) <<The stories we tell are a great hook to get people interested in 
this
issue and then we go on to talk about clear verbal communications and 
the use
of plain language materials as back up. Beth Poore-Bowman, RN, FNP>>
2) << We must also look at ourselves and our communications. The 
sender is
responsible for the message. Sandra Smith (I think.)>>
3) <<What an interesting idea. Thanks for reminding us all that this 
is
indeed a two way process. How often we cite the impact of a 
patient/client's
problem without taking the responsibility for what professionals 
contribute
to the situation. Debbie Yoho>>

I think all three of you have touched on a critical piece of patient
education and materials development. Many of us already think about 
both
"sides of the coin" in achieving true communication with print 
materials --
the reader and the writer. Indeed this is a two-way process. But so 
often the
gap is framed in a way that refers mainly to the people who have not 
had the
opportunity to learn to read well.

Two things come to mind here. First, the gap between the literacy 
demands of
print materials in health care and the literacy abilities of the 
public
affects millions more US adults than just those with limited literacy 
skills.
Study after study shows that the majority of health care materials 
are
written at high school or college level. The 1990 Census reported 
that only
20% of the population reads at college level. Take into account the 
mental,
physical and emotional state people are often in when they encounter 
our
health care system and that 20% will be even smaller. So our field of 
"health
literacy" is really about much more than getting health information 
to those
folks who struggle with the printed word. It's about the challenge in 
reaching 70-80% of the public with effective information when we use 
print.

Second, I think it's critical for us to see our work in health 
literacy in a
broader framework--as part of the plain language movement. There is 
an
international movement to bring all kinds of consumer information to 
the
public in clear, easy-to-understand printed materials. There are 
probably
50-100 people around the world  who consider themselves plain 
language
specialists. We spend our professional lives educating people, 
organizations,
and governments about the fact that plain language documents are the 
"way to
go" (not only because it's ethical and humane but because it can save 
millions of dollars). In my mind, my health literacy work is also 
plain
language work so I've crossed over into both fields.

I encourage you all to begin thinking about the broader context of 
this
movement toward clarity in all documents intended for public 
consumption.
Some of us are working to bring plain language to the forefront and 
receive
more public attention in the US as it has in several other countries. 
In the
meantime, it's helpful to think of ourselves as plain language 
advocates and
workers, too. I think it can help us understand why our printed 
health care
materials don't seem to be effective with many patients. It helps us 
take
responsibility for our piece of the process and to do everything we 
can to
meet patients at their level.

With highest regards for you, my colleagues, in this challenging 
work,
Audrey Riffenburgh
Plain Language and Readability Specialist
Albuquerque, New Mexico, USA
plnenglish@aol.com



This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:42:58 EST