Are you familiar with the term or concept of the "caregiver's dilemma?" It sounds like you're articulating it. It's a constant threat to those in caregiving professions, especially because people outside those professions--per the dilemma--ignore how the demands of the cared-for can hollow-out the care-giver. Too often, people utt…
Are you familiar with the term or concept of the "caregiver's dilemma?" It sounds like you're articulating it. It's a constant threat to those in caregiving professions, especially because people outside those professions--per the dilemma--ignore how the demands of the cared-for can hollow-out the care-giver. Too often, people utterly ignore the giver and expect infinite giving. Hence, the caregiver's dilemma.
Yes! There's also a power dynamic at play, especially in the health care system where patients aren't empowered to take responsibility for their own health. This is a topic I could talk about for DAYS! But having language and vocabulary to articulate aspects of the experience is helpful.
I'm an ethicist, and this issue is a textbook one in ethics going back decades.
However, like so much of life, it seems that the institutions ignore this.
I have an almost fear of the medical system just because of how many times I've been actively disempowered in it as providers "just want to get one with it" and yet they're making obviously bad choices. I struggle with blaming them because I know--in all probability--they're horrendously overworked.
So, speaking more generally, the systems tend to overwork providers and encourage an assembly-line like approach to care, but the latter almost universally disempowers patients. Even knowledgeable, active ones like me. So, the vocabulary I'm providing is "systemic disempowerment." The way the institution operates, despite intentions, creates repeated, pervasive outcomes (systemic) that disempower both providers and the cared-for. It also forces providers to protect themselves against the demands of the cared-for, despite both the mission and protocols of the institution. In this way, administrators can make claims about what their policies are--they're awesome right?-- while ignoring the fact that the implementation forces outcomes adverse to those policies. Blame is then placed on the provider. This is all a "strategic deferral of responsibility." It's strategic in that the most deft administrators are aware of all this, and make it someone else's problem.
I learned this, btw, in academia. It does this. A lot.
I hope this gives you more ideas and vocabulary for articulation. I specialize in institutional effects, and such.
Mariah,
Are you familiar with the term or concept of the "caregiver's dilemma?" It sounds like you're articulating it. It's a constant threat to those in caregiving professions, especially because people outside those professions--per the dilemma--ignore how the demands of the cared-for can hollow-out the care-giver. Too often, people utterly ignore the giver and expect infinite giving. Hence, the caregiver's dilemma.
Yes! There's also a power dynamic at play, especially in the health care system where patients aren't empowered to take responsibility for their own health. This is a topic I could talk about for DAYS! But having language and vocabulary to articulate aspects of the experience is helpful.
Oh...
I'm an ethicist, and this issue is a textbook one in ethics going back decades.
However, like so much of life, it seems that the institutions ignore this.
I have an almost fear of the medical system just because of how many times I've been actively disempowered in it as providers "just want to get one with it" and yet they're making obviously bad choices. I struggle with blaming them because I know--in all probability--they're horrendously overworked.
So, speaking more generally, the systems tend to overwork providers and encourage an assembly-line like approach to care, but the latter almost universally disempowers patients. Even knowledgeable, active ones like me. So, the vocabulary I'm providing is "systemic disempowerment." The way the institution operates, despite intentions, creates repeated, pervasive outcomes (systemic) that disempower both providers and the cared-for. It also forces providers to protect themselves against the demands of the cared-for, despite both the mission and protocols of the institution. In this way, administrators can make claims about what their policies are--they're awesome right?-- while ignoring the fact that the implementation forces outcomes adverse to those policies. Blame is then placed on the provider. This is all a "strategic deferral of responsibility." It's strategic in that the most deft administrators are aware of all this, and make it someone else's problem.
I learned this, btw, in academia. It does this. A lot.
I hope this gives you more ideas and vocabulary for articulation. I specialize in institutional effects, and such.