The three most important takeaways from the video on effective healthcare communication are: 1) Patients should feel comfortable and empowered to ask questions; 2) Active listening is important in order to ensure that both parties understand each other’s needs and concerns; 3) Health professionals should use appropriate language to make sure patients comprehend the information being discussed. (“Health Communication: Tips For Effective Communication With Your Patients,” 2020).
In order to ensure these points are met, I believe it starts with me by making sure I am equipped with all of the necessary knowledge and skills needed when communicating with my patients. This includes staying up-to-date on evidence based medicine practices so that I have a full understanding of how best to treat any medical condition as well as being aware of relevant cultural & linguistic backgrounds which may influence treatment decisions. Additionally, it’s vital for me to be familiarized with terminology used in healthcare settings which requires knowing more than just medical words but also using patient friendly language when discussing diagnoses or treatments since this can ultimately lead them feeling more relaxed and less intimidated.
Furthermore, I must be prepared for any difficult conversations that might arise by remaining calm & professional while allowing time for questions if needed plus validating their feelings no matter how uncomfortable the subject may be. Lastly, active listening is key so showing empathy towards my patient as well as providing feedback will help create a relationship built on trust where they know their voice will always be heard no matter what type of issue arises.
By doing my part in meeting these three important points listed above it will go a long way in making sure effective health care communication is accomplished successfully each time thus ensuring positive outcomes every time.
llenges that may have contributed to the lack of a generally accepted definition. Regarding the BM, the authors highlighted the difficulties in distinguishing terrorism from other forms of political violence, such as insurgencies, guerrilla warfare, and civil wars. Terrorism also encounters literal and analytical STs. While literal STs are a product of the author’s geographical or psychological distance from the terrorist act, which ultimately determines what event is tagged a terrorist act, or an uprising; analytical STPs occur as a result of over generalisation of the concept. Collier and Mahon described it as follows:
When scholars take a category developed for one set of cases and extend it to additional cases, the new cases may be sufficiently different that the category is no longer appropriate in its original form. If this problem arises, they may adapt the category by climbing the ladder of generality, thereby obeying the law of inverse variation. As they increase the extension, they reduce the intension to the degree necessary to fit the new contexts (Collier & Mahon, 1993, p. 846).
Thus, on the one hand, terrorism could stretch to the point of abstraction or require the invention of a new word that would represent a broader set of actions (Weinberg, Pedahzur and Hirsch-Hoefler (2004, p. 779).
Irrespective of these challenges and in recognition of the vast range of benefits which a consensual definition of terrorism would yield, scholars have continued to explore different approaches towards combating the definition menace. Although, no consensus has been reached, the efforts by the authors have yielded some degree of success. On the one hand are authors who emphasise the psychological element of terrorism, on the other are those, who recognise the empirical deficiency of such a route and have adopted, safer, observable components in crafting their definitions. An examination of two separate studies will serve to elucidate these differences, as well as highlight the merits and demerits of each stance. The researcher’s expression of terrorism as a politically motivated tactic involving the use or threat of violence, with the primary purpose of generating a psychological impact beyond the immediate victims or object of attack in which the pursuit of publicity plays a significant role, is a product of the merits of the definitions proposed by the authors in these studies.
Towards resolving the 30-year terrorism definition conflict, Weinberg, Pedahzur and Hirsch-Hoefler (2004) compared Schmid’s definition, (see excerpt below), a product of a survey in which 22 definitional elements were identified in the 109 definitions of terrorism retrieved from 200 participants; to the application of the concept in three terrorism-based academic journals: Terrorism, Studies in Conflict and Terroris
