Spiritual_Wellness_Holistic_Health_and_the_Practic

Politics in Public Health Education 303
APPLICATION
Rationale and Objectives
Testifying before a congressional or state legislative committee can be an intimidating
experience. Public health professionals who present a factual and compelling case
have high credibility with legislators and government staff members. There are, however,
communication and procedural land mines awaiting inexperienced public health
spokespersons. Objectives of this part of the program include (1) teaching the students
communication in context; the mode, tone and rhetorical style of speaking must fit the
genre of the audience; and (2) allowing panelists to illustrate the types of arguments,
questions, and biases exhibited by legislators and to demonstrate the reasons behind
the legislative perspective.
Legislative versus Public Health Professional Perspectives
Professionals from an academic or medical background tend to expect professionals in
other areas to respond to the types of reasoned arguments and factual appeals that elicit a
positive response from their colleagues. While the legislative process may appear to deal in
reason and facts, actually legislators may pay more attention to parochial interests than
carefully constructed logic. Communication, then, must be at the level of those “back
home ” regional interests. Additionally, legislators must deal with hundreds of different
areas of legislation and have neither the time nor tolerance to become familiar with all of
the issues. Therefore, the information being presented to legislators should be technical
enough to explain the issue, but not so detailed that the audience loses interest.
Process and Outcomes
The students ’ training in the political nature of public health culminated in their presentations
to a mock legislative panel. The panel was made up of former legislators
and individuals who had prior experience in giving legislative testimony. Although the
students had been advised on the content of their presentations and coached in their
stylistic approach, the actual presentations to the panel were their own. It was evident
that they had invested considerable time and effort in the content and delivery of their
presentations. However, they did not make a sufficient audience adjustment from giving
a paper in a graduate class to addressing a legislative panel.
The students were repeatedly interrupted by the panelists ’ seemingly irrelevant
questions and rude remarks, such as, “ This sounds like another liberal give - away program
to me. ” The students were unprepared for the panelist s’ seemingly unprofessional
and inconsiderate behavior.
The students did have a chance to express their concerns and vent their feelings at
an extensive debriefing session following the hearing. Public health faculty members
were present to reassure the students but also to underscore the realistic nature of the
process that they had just experienced.