On Thu, 5 Sep 1996, Nancy E Ward - Hawthorn Center wrote:
 
> I don't believe in any kind of censorship of medical materials from
> patrons.  However, I believe we must be very careful in realizing that
> patrons might not understand everything they read.
 
Of course.... but then, neither do we always understand it <grin>....
 
> A couple of people at my church had medical problems.  In one case I
> photocopied a chapter from a medical book.  The wife was very glad I gave
> the chapter to her, but said she had to sit with a medical dictionary and
> look up every other word as she read.  In another case I gave some
> "medical" information to a woman in choir (she was just curious about a
> condition).  She skimmed it saying "all those big words".  I was
> surprised because she's a retired school teacher.  Just because people
> are educated doesn't mean they can understand  medicine.
 
Well -- with all due respect, I would never simply hand a friend from
church a chapter from a medical textbook saying "here, this is what you
asked for about this condition" unless I was pretty sure (based on my
previous *excellent* reference interview! <grin>) their motivation to
learn about the condition was *very* high.  If they are "just curious"
then there's a need on my part to try to find simpler information. On the
other hand, if the medical textbook contains the only information that's
readily available, I have in fact seen patrons in my library, literally,
sitting with a reference book on one side and a medical dictionary on the
other. Nothing wrong with that, IMHO.  It all depends on how important
having the information is _to_the_patron_.  It's the *patron's* motivation
that determines his or her ability to assimilate new information, not our
assessment of their capability.  And -- again, with different emphasis
--it's the patron's *motivation*, not their education level or
professional background, that determines their ability to assimilate
medical information.
 
Believe me, when a mom came into my library to find out about
Cruetzfeldt-Jakob disease, because the blood products her sons receive had
been contaminated with this, and the only information I had came from the
ID textbook I had on my shelf -- she learned.  With the textbook on one
side, and Dorland's on the other.
 
> It's a delicate balance.  You can't deny them medical materials, you have
> to be very careful what they can understand, yet you can't be patronizing
> or paternalistic when giving them "only simple stuff".
 
You are absolutely right -- it *is* a delicate balance.  Reference
interviewing is probably the most valuable skill a consumer health
librarian can have.  I can't emphasize this enough.  But -- we don't have
to be careful "what they can understand".  We DO have to make sure that we
understand what the *patron* believes his or her need to be, and that we
provide as many tools for understanding as we need to provide, to help
meet that need.
 
Val
 
*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*
Valerie Schultheiss                             <[log in to unmask]>
Planetree Health Library
Highline Community Hospital
16251 Sylvester Road SW                            Voice 206/244-4052
Burien, WA   98166-3052                            Fax   206/244-4674
 
Truth is found in the lives we live, not in the words we speak.
                                               William Jennings Bryan
 
If you don't like my .sig then don't read it.
                                                  Valerie Schultheiss
*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*=*