Navigating the biomedical, emotional, and logistical complexity of end-of-life (EOL) care requires seamless interprofessional teamwork. Unfortunately, EOL care, interprofessional collaboration, and the role of support services such as hospice are not adequately emphasized in nursing and medical curricula. This article describes a student-run program, entitled the "HeArt of Medicine", which was designed to foster a reflective and collaborative approach to EOL care. The program consists of three workshops with a novel blend of art, science, and practical information, highlighting the need for interprofessional teamwork. Participants were surveyed before and after the workshops on their attitudes toward EOL care. Composite participant scores after workshops demonstrated increased comfort with and knowledge of EOL care topics (p = 0.001). The results show that this program has had a positive impact on participants' knowledge, comfort, and collaboration in EOL settings.
This paper critically examines the constructed narrative that there is an epistemic intergenerational divide on the topic of climate change, climate science, and the political actions necessary to address the most urgent threats. Analysing publicly available social media data, this paper traces the amplification of youth voice during 2019 and the emergence of this narrative. It compares the dominant messages against 2019 Afrobarometer and Eurobarometer reports which explore voter perspectives on climate change and climate action. Through a process of critical analysis it argues that the constructed narrative of an intergenerational epistemic divide is misleading. It argues that youth voices are subject to structural forms of epistemic injustice and exclusion in climate action deliberations and policy making. However, it finds that voters and older generations are also subject to similar forms of exclusion. Rather than framing this as an epistemic problem, this analysis points to the political-economy climate justice factors influencing the debate. It argues that the real points of contention now rest at the science-policy interface and with what happens when scientific evidence is refracted through dominant political ideologies and translated into policy.
Background: Community-based inclusive development (CBID) acknowledges society’s critical role in supporting the active participation of persons with disabilities. However, research on how this approach relates to the context-sensitive socially situated barriers of disability stigma is underexplored.Objectives: This study aimed to understand the drivers and experiences of disability stigma in Ethiopia, from the perspective of persons with disabilities engaged in CBID programmes, and to establish how disability stigma acts as a barrier to participation.Methods: An inductive methodological approach guided the research design. Mixed methods were used including a narrative review of disabilities studies literature, 16 semi-structured interviews with persons with disabilities, and a quantitative survey of 970 persons with disabilities across three communities in Ethiopia.Results: Informed by theories of epistemic justice, this study identified specific indicators of meaningful participation and examined how these relate to experiences of disability stigma. The study found that the participation of adults with disabilities in society is restricted across different areas of life. Misconceptions about the causes of disability and social perceptions regarding the capacities of persons with disabilities are found to exacerbate stigma and act as a barrier to participation.Conclusion: Targeted efforts to challenge internalised norms and harmful beliefs within CBID approaches are required to address disadvantages arising from embedded disability stigma.Contribution: This study makes conceptual, empirical and practical contributions that advance insights into the relationship between disability stigma and participation in Ethiopia and the dimensions of epistemic justice relevant to understanding the nature and drivers of disability stigma.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.