Spiritual_Wellness_Holistic_Health_and_the_Practic

72 Philosophical Foundations of Health Education
health educators face the real world and the job market without marketable administrative
skills demanded by employers. Marketing of health education has been viewed
as being akin to unethical practice in the field. If health education is to be effective in
changing values and behaviors, it must embrace vigorously any field that will further
the cause. The interfacing of marketing with health education is long overdue. If as
much money and effort were put into health promotion through recognized marketing
methods as has been put into promoting the use of tobacco and other disease promoting
products, the picture of the health status of the country possibly would be different.
The lack of use of the media and marketing is obvious by its absence in health
education (except on a rare occasion or unique disease outbreak such as AIDS).
Television can and should have a major impact on the quality of life of all persons and
should be utilized to advantage. There is hardly a person of any age or educational
level who does not know something about AIDS or hunger in Africa, primarily because
of television news reporting, clearly demonstrating once again the impact that television
can have in health education and health promotion activities.
Management ’ s research on motivation has much to contribute to the field of health
education and promotion, yet rarely is discussed. Health education is faced with motivating
persons to activate a healthy lifestyle, to motivate people to change behavior,
and motivate people to maintain positive health behavior already in practice. Motivation
is an area from which health education could further develop and create a theoretical
foundation (Timmreck, 1977; Timmreck & Randal, 1983).
Rarely considered in the jungle of health education and promotion theory and
practice is management ’ s expectation of outcome. That is, does the health educator/
promoter have a positive or negative productivity level in comparison with other professionals
or workers? Are health educators and their programs a cost center (costing
the organization) or a profit center (financially effective)? These are concerns of
administration and management and are essential for future survival of all health education
programs outside school health instruction (Parlette et al., 1981).
FIELDS RELATED TO HEALTH EDUCATION
Health education has had only limited success in the field of patient education. Nursing
has been successful in laying solid claim to the area. Nursing has the clinical training,
and physicians who order patient education put much more trust in the nurse than the
health educator, as the latter usually has little or no clinical training and thus limited
credibility with most physicians.
Another infringement felt by health education has been the advent of several new
related fields. Psychology has developed the field of health psychology. Behavioral health,
a field less clearly attached to psychology, but clearly founded in the behavioral science
aspects of health and medicine, is gaining prominence. The medical field has developed
the area of behavioral medicine, combining education, counseling, and medicine. Further,
how does the Association of Teachers of Preventive Medicine fit into the scheme of health
education, or does health education fit into it? How do medical sociology and medical