"Calling people trying to protect their kids selfish and irrational is tantamount to saying “I don’t care how you feel. Your feelings are wrong. You should feel the way I feel.” One need not be an expert in risk or health or science communication to see how that is likely to make things worse, not better. Views stiffen. Minds close. If parents are attacked for being a Whole-Foods-shopping, Prius-driving greenies or an anti-government, Don’t-Tread-On-Me-right-wingers, any ambivalence they might have about whether to vaccinate their kids is overwhelmed by the instinct to stick up for and promote the common views and values of their friends and neighbors and the groups with which they identify...
Respectful communication is more than just presenting the facts the communicator wants to present. It requires acknowledgment of the other parties’ feelings, and it sure doesn’t include calling people names."
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/2015/02/02/vilifying-parents-who-dont-vaccinate-their-kids-is-counterproductive/
I love love love love love these points.
And it's why I find most arguments/debates (about anything, really) so deeply, deeply counterproductive. Opinions and feelings don't change in those conversational format - unless it's maybe a really sickly feeling of capitulating, doing something against your will - and they just generally sour the air to respectful or caring interactions.
From my perspective, such that it is emotionally realistic for all parties, the solution is to clearly listen and learn from each other without an agenda of trying to change someone's mind. No one knows the full story. No one is absolutely correct just because they have more people with degrees on theri side.
No comments:
Post a Comment