When my elderly parents entered the medical
system in the final years and months of their lives I learned something I had
not known before. I learned how family members of those in care must become
advocates for their loved ones, as once they have lost the ability to advocate
for themselves they are reliant on others to advocate for them, to be their
voices and ensure their needs are met. After my father’s lingering death in
palliative care from lung cancer and my mother’s rapid demise in an ICU after a
cerebral aneurysm I became aware not only of the fragility of the human
condition but of how a massive system like medical care can forget that what is
being dealt with are people, not just patients, and individuals, not just beds.
The front line staff were, almost without exception, very good at remembering
this and provided exceptional personal care, but it was in my brushes with
hospital administration that I sensed this was on occasion forgotten,
particularly as related to the language used to describe the patients – the
people – in their care.
I recognize that every industry has its
language – its jargon and lingo, and when one is dealing with automotive parts
that is quite reasonable. When one is dealing with people, though, language
that serves to see them as less than people – as objects – is dehumanizing and
distancing, framing every discussion in a way that makes it sound as if you are
dealing with parts, not people. One of those terms, and one that bothers me
immensely, is “bed blocker”.
In hospital terms this is a person who has
been treated and is ready to be released into care – perhaps a continuing care
facility or rehabilitation – but due to a lack of those spaces remains in their
hospital bed, taking up a spot that may be urgently needed for another incoming
person requiring care. It is sadly not uncommon and truly creates difficult
situations in our hospitals as they try to deal with people who should be
released into other levels of care so they can admit new people, but who are
unable to do so as space does not exist in other levels of care. I am
empathetic to the problem and I agree it needs to be resolved – but as both a
person who has been there with elderly parents and a communications
professional I soundly reject the term “bed blocker” as a dehumanizing,
distancing and demeaning term used to describe what are, fundamentally, people
in need.
This would be why I was incensed to learn
our new Minister of Health, Stephen Mandel, used the term in a recent interview when discussing the issue. I have not given a great deal of thought to Mandel’s
new role, as I had always thought he served Edmonton well as their former
mayor, and while I had some degree of misgivings about appointing an unelected
member of the public to provincial cabinet I was quite willing to see how he
performed – but when he chose to use a term that dehumanizes the very Albertans
he wishes to represent I saw a bit red and went into a bit of a rage, because
this is a bad start on the path to new leadership in Alberta health care.
As a person and someone who had two elderly
parents in care I can tell you how I would have responded had anyone referred
to my parents as “bed blockers”. The people in our hospitals in Alberta,
particularly the elderly waiting to go into care facilities, helped to build
this province. They are our history and we owe them a debt of gratitude, honour
and respect. Not only do we owe them excellent care in their waning years,
we owe them language that treats them with respect and as people, not objects.
They are not “bed blockers” – they are the very grassroots of our province, and
it is reprehensible to refer to them in terms that demean them in any regard.
Now, as a communications professional I can
guarantee I would never advise a politician to refer to people who likely voted
to support their party at one time in a way that dehumanizes them. I would
suggest that no matter the terms used in “the industry” the tone set by a
politician should always reflect dignity and respect when you are speaking of
your constituents, the Albertans who built this province. I would advise that
you have a responsibility to show empathy, understanding and honour to
everyone, but especially to the most vulnerable because you will be judged on
how you treat – and speak about – those groups the most. I would ban
dehumanizing terms from the dialogue, and reframe it.
When Mandel said that the new Premier had
given him the “instructions to deal with the bed blockers” he could have easily
reframed it. I would have suggested something like: “the Premier has given me instructions on ways to manage the many Albertans in need of care who remain in
hospital after they are able to be released and finding ways to ensure they
receive the care they deserve while also allowing the admission of new
Albertans requiring care”. Much longer to say than “bed blockers”, to be
certain, but reflective of the respect these citizens have earned.
Perhaps there are those who think the issue
of the terms used is a trifling one, but I disagree. How we frame a discussion
– the terms we use – are our starting point and often reflect how we really
think about the issue. I am gravely concerned to see a new Minister of Health
using a term that objectifies the very people he now has the mandate to
represent, and would suggest that he consider his words carefully as what he
does – and what he says – will now be carefully watched and scrutinized,
particularly when it comes to those in our province who are most vulnerable and
most in need of respect.
Albertans are not objects. They are not
“bed blockers”, and they deserve more than to be called terms that distance and
dehumanize them. Just as I was once my parents’ advocate it is the role of
every Albertan to advocate for those who can no longer advocate for themselves,
and today I advocate banning the use of the word “bed blocker” and other
dehumanizing terms when discussing health care in Alberta. I believe this
change needs to come from the top, and so it resides squarely with our new
Minister of Health and how he chooses to frame the dialogue. It is a new day in
Alberta politics, and a new start with a new Premier and cabinet. Perhaps it is
also time for a new and more respectful dialogue on health care, starting with
how we refer to the patients – the people – relying on us for their very lives.
Wow. I have to say I've never heard that term used before but definitely inappropriate to be used by the Minister.
ReplyDeleteThank you for your wise words. Our seniors deserve the respect and level of care that they deserve and it is time the PC's stopped closing continuing care beds and started building them with the level of care they need and deserve - not the cheapest. Privatization of continuing care benefits only the shareholders, not the patients/clients/residents. I will share your blog widely.
ReplyDelete