It's time for a little "wokeness" in health literacy

 

This week, there's a very triggering conversation I'm following on a popular health literacy discussion list. 

People are talking about how best to refer to "people with low health literacy." 

Take your pick - there are posts from all sides

"Low" is too judgmental.

How about "restricted"?

Why not "needs help reading"?

"Inadequate" ...

One of my problems with calling anyone or any group "limited" or "low" or "inadequate' or even "adequate"  is that they all assume a few things I don't hold dear.  

Are you sure....

1.  that the "standards" used for judging who is and who is not "limited" are standards based on the best known science and theory - can we really say this about the TOFHLA and New Vital Signs?

2.  that the standards are not set from an elitist, privileged perspective - dare I say that everyone judging limited or low health literacy fits into this category, including me. 

3.  that the "labelling" of someone does not in some way stygmatize them  - would you like to be labeled that way

4.  that we, good people one and all, are not perpetuating a dominant culture model that needs us to broaden the lens through which we look at one's understanding of health / science and requires of us a dose of mutual respect and  humility.   

For myself, I've answered these questions, and I come up lacking. 

So says a woman living in the time huge social change, still learning.