You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Awareness’ category.
Some people may have seen news reports yesterday about changes to access of blood glucose strips for people with diabetes in Australia. Some reports were a little light on detail (and by ‘light on detail’ I mean ‘incorrect’) and there has been a lot of discussion on SoMe with people trying to get the facts and work out what it means for them.
This information on the Department of Health’s website gives all the details to date.
Following the news piece, quite a few people have been in touch asking me if I can provide some clarification. I have no details other than what has already been announced publicly. When the announcement was made last year, I wrote this piece about it, so for some background of the issue – and my take on it – have a read.
But what does it mean TODAY for people with diabetes in Australia?
- These changes DO NOT affect people with type 1 diabetes or insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.
- No one should be denied access to BGL strips today, tomorrow, next week or next month. While the change in policy took effect from 1 July 2016, an initial six-month supply has been automatically granted to all NDSS registrants with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes. This means the earliest anyone may be affected by the changes is 1 January 2017.
- Further information will be coming, so keep an eye on the NDSS and Department of Health websites.
- Speak with your HCP about the changes if you are concerned about how this will affect you and your diabetes management.
I know that many of us are feeling a little confused about diabetes supplies at the moment with the recent changes in how we access our consumables, and this seems to just be another change we need to deal with.
And as with all change, there is often a lot of speculation and misinformation being shared around. The sensationalist nature of yesterday’s reports did nothing to allay any of these concerns and only fuelled the fire of uncertainty. And is yet another example of poor reporting of diabetes in the media.
I’m almost ready to take a deep sigh of relief, because National Diabetes Week is almost over. It’s been a busy week – it always is. I’ve been working for diabetes organisations for a very long time, and have seen quite a few national campaigns, including some of which I was very, very critical. (Just ask the Comms Manager I worked with for over 10 years who had to deal with me complaining a lot!)
But today, I am writing only of this year’s campaign, which has highlighted the need for a National Diabetes Amputation Prevention Strategy. The campaign has not pissed me off which is a pleasant surprise for everyone who has to work with me. I don’t think it is a scare campaign. I don’t think it is graphic and gory. And I don’t think it is laying the blame for developing diabetes-related complications on people with diabetes.
On Sunday, within hours of the launch, the criticism started. I posted this on my FB page, and my frustration is pretty apparent.
Throughout the week, in between doing interviews trying to raise awareness of diabetes and why it is really crap that each year 3,740 have diabetes-related amputations that could have been prevented, I have read many comments about the campaign. A lot of them – in fact the vast majority – are really positive. Many people understand the complexity of communicating a really difficult message to a very diverse audience. But not all of them.
I have never subscribed to the idea that everyone needs to have the same opinion. And I have never ever shied away from people criticising me or the work I do. I like robust discussions, especially if they are respectful and that everyone is open to considering – not necessarily agree though – with all sides to the debate. (Unless we’re talking vaccination. Then there is only one side.)
But I what I absolutely despise is that any time diabetes is in the media and someone doesn’t like the angle, because what is being discussed is not relevant to them, or they don’t like the message, they respond with immediate outrage and negativity and refuse to consider other positions. This is not just a diabetes thing – social media outrage is the default position for many – hell, I’m guilty of it too. But often with the outrage comes assumptions and the perpetuation of misconceptions about diabetes.
In my capacity as an employee of a diabetes organisation, I have read the comments and not replied. That includes to the direct messages I have received on Twitter and Facebook and email that have been personally attacking and have called me some pretty choice names. (There is no denying the power of deleting and blocking!)
But today, I thought that here, I would put down my responses to some of the comments I’ve seen online. (Please remember that this is my blog and all opinions are mine. Nothing I have written here necessarily reflects the thoughts of the organisation I work for.)
- The campaign is not relevant to people with type 1 diabetes.
Of course it is! You have diabetes – any type – and you are at risk of complications. That’s the reality. It’s unpleasant; I hate thinking about it; it terrifies me.
Here is what denying this reality does: it adds shame and stigma to those who do live with complications. Had a limb amputated? Well, obviously it’s because you didn’t look after yourself and are not a diabetes superhero like me.
- Type 1 and type 2 diabetes are not the same thing.
Yeah, I know. I get it – they are two different conditions. Sometimes though it’s not relevant to differentiate. 4,400 people have diabetes-related amputations each year. Some are type 1 and some are type 2; some are men and some are women; some are older and some are younger. They are all people and they all have diabetes.
- People already diagnosed with diabetes know what happens if their condition is not well managed.
Absolutely not true and a dangerous idea to perpetuate. And this sort of comment is a brilliant example of not being able to look outside your privilege bubble.
If you are in a position to know a lot about your health condition, have access to specialist care, have wonderful support around you, (or know where and how to access support), can afford the latest treatment and technology and are managing really well – that is fantastic. I am one of those people and I know how lucky I am. But many people do not. If you are sitting on the end of a computer, complaining on Facebook and/or blogging about your experiences, you are privileged.
If you are one of those people and think everyone else is just like you, you are wrong and I would really urge you to maybe look beyond the Facebook page where you do your bitching and moaning.
Also – what is it saying to the people who have done everything ‘right’ and still have developed complications?
- People with type 1 are well aware – it’s people with type 2 that have no idea what they are for if they keep mismanaging their health.
Really? Just wow! Let’s break this into two sections:
- It’s a mighty big assumption to make that all people with type 1 are aware, capable and well-informed of their condition. It’s also incorrect. And it says that we don’t need to be focusing on people with type 1 because we are all clever clogs and know everything!
- The idea that it is only people with type 2 diabetes who have no idea is wrong and also really stigmatising. And it shows a complete and utter lack of understanding about type 2 diabetes and those living with it. Maybe that campaign about the different sorts of diabetes needs to start from within the diabetes community first. How can we expect people completely unaffected by diabetes to know the facts of those of us in it are so ill-informed at times?
- What would you know? You don’t live with diabetes.
Hi. I’m Renza (or Brenda, Peta, Wenzer). Here is my blog about living with diabetes.
One of the things I have come to learn is that there is no way that a single diabetes campaign will appeal to everyone or be relevant to everyone living with the condition. And that there is no making all people happy all of the time. In the spirit of this piece of advice, I am calling the week over and putting it in the vault. Have a great weekend everyone!
The new Prime Minister of Britain has type 1 diabetes. I am sure that you have heard this about her, possibly mixed up in the commentary about her hair and shoes. (Which is, of course, THE most important thing about a woman who has become one of the most powerful leaders in the world and absolutely what we should all be talking about. Ugh!)
Pretty much everyone I have ever met has informed me that the new PM has type 1 diabetes. I have had calls, emails, Facebook posts and texts from people excitedly telling me that Theresa May is just as pancreatically-challenged as me! Many have asked if I am excited that we have a new pin-up gal for ‘our cause’.
I’m not commenting on May’s politics – that is actually totally irrelevant to how I feel about having a world leader with type 1 diabetes.
Here is what I would love to see about Theresa May’s own diabetes. Very little. Because I don’t want her type 1 diabetes to become a focus. I don’t want type 1 diabetes to be ‘blamed’ for questionable decisions, political gaffs, or the fact that she fell asleep in parliament last week.
Because people without type 1 diabetes make bad decisions all the time. And people without type 1 diabetes make political gaffs. (Barnaby? David? I’m looking at you two…) And people without type 1 diabetes fall asleep in parliament because often there is a man in a suit speaking in a monotone about something possibly rather uninspiring. For a very, very, very long time.
In the same way that every move AFL player Paddy McCartin makes is scrutinised from the position of his defective beta cells, I fear that may be the case for Theresa May.
A world leader with type 1 diabetes is brilliant because it can show people that diabetes need not be a barrier to being at the top of your game. We all love a story like that!
But being the excuse for any negativity – or becoming the focus of her time as PM? That can do ‘our cause’ more harm than good.
Related – but not really
Discussions about Theresa May have included me saying: ‘Well if Jed Bartlet can be President of the United States of America with MS, Theresa May can be PM with type 1.’ I had to be reminded that Jed Bartlet is not real – and no matter how hard I hope and wish for it to be true, it never will be. Damn.
The contradictions in diabetes are complex and confuse my little mind sometimes. Today is one of those days.
Getting the message that diabetes is serious – and needs to be taken seriously – is sometimes messed up in our determination to show that diabetes won’t stop us from being superheroes. In our proverbial capes*, we do amazing things; we are brilliant; we advocate; we inform. All while pretending to be a pancreas.
We use language that empowers us and makes others see us as forces with which to be reckoned. I say I live with diabetes (often saying I live well with diabetes, never struggle with it. I refuse to even suggest for a minute that I am suffering with or from diabetes and will correct anyone who suggests otherwise.
But is that undermining the seriousness of it? And is it ignoring the days where it does seem like a battle – and an uphill one at that.
I refer to diabetes as a condition, never a disease. Is that the right terminology? And why do I do that?
According to this piece at Health Writer Hub a disease is an …’ abnormality in systemic function…that causes both physical and emotional signs and symptoms’. A condition is …’an abnormal state of health that interferes with the usual activities or feeling of wellbeing’. Both are actually correct when talking about diabetes, and yet I (and many others) object to using the term disease.
Perhaps we don’t want to be thought of as ‘diseased’ or as if there is something wrong with us and ‘disease’ does suggest that.
We want people to think we are superheroes who manage to not only thrive and excel with the condition (disease?) we have been dealt, but also demand that they don’t think of us as any different to everyone else and are given the same opportunities and choices.
Are we doing ourselves a disservice by appearing so ‘in control’ and, dare I say it, ‘normal’, when there is truly nothing normal about having to pretend to be an internal organ, day in day out?
I don’t for a minute want to stop being the empowered, confident, secure and capable person I am. But sometimes I do feel that in all my cheerleading efforts, I sometimes forget – or rather refuse to admit – that it can be tough.
And mostly, I wonder, and fear, that if we all are making diabetes look so easy to manage and impact us in such insignificant ways, do others not see and understand the urgency that we feel every single day in our desire to make things better? Who needs a cure if we look so bloody happy and competent with our little condition?
Today I attended the Victorian Kellion Victory Medal Award Ceremony. There before me, sixty-six people were awarded medals for having lived with diabetes for 50, 60, 70 and 75 years.
I write about this event every year, and each year, I write about how much hope and inspiration I feel while sitting in the room.
Because it’s true. I walk away from the Kellion awards full to the brim and amazed at what these people have achieved. I’m never sure if it is despite or because of their lives with diabetes that I feel this way. But, undeniably, it is a special day.
Frequently the stories are the same – a shock diagnosis, sometimes a misdiagnosis. Many are unable to pursue their chosen career, especially in days where teaching or nursing were not possible vocations for people with type 1 diabetes. Many spent a lot of time in hospital as they adapted to their post-diabetes-diagnosis life. And many reminisce about injecting into an orange, which apparently was the done thing for a newly diagnosed person 75 years just as it was 18 years ago when I was diagnosed – and still today!
And they share tales of brutal management instruments and tools that in equal measure terrify me and make me glad of the time I was diagnosed.
The hope exists for me because when I look around the room, and I listen to the stories and I speak directly to the recipients and their families as they proudly hold on to their well- earned medals I don’t see diabetes. I see people.
They don’t all claim that diabetes has been fun or that it has been a breeze. In fact, some of them are really open about just how tough it has made their life. But even those who say they have really struggled, still do not believe diabetes has been the single most defining aspect of their life.
I’ve always said that I wish all newly diagnosed people could meet a Kellion medal so they can see that everything will be okay. But I think that was a little naïve of me and actually undermines just what it has taken for these people to be standing there in front of us, accepting their medal. And it also suggests that diabetes hasn’t actually had some sort of impact on their lives.
These are ordinary lives made extraordinary by diabetes. And while their achievements are not there for my benefit, I am so glad that I get to hear their stories.
Source – @DiabetesVic
This morning, I sat in a restaurant in New Orleans with three of my favourite people and diabetes advocates. If anyone could bottle the tenacity, passion, determination, guts and cheekiness of these three women, they would make a fortune and be able to solve all the problems of the world.
I listened to Anna, Christel and Melissa – who I am lucky enough to call friends – talk about their work and we discussed the US health system which made me shake my head in disbelief and confusion. I don’t understand it; I doubt I ever will. But these three not only navigate the system themselves, they are doing it for others as well as they trying to improve things.
All week I have been around people who are involved in important and life-changing work in diabetes care. From those who are developing smarter devices, using data better, improving access and doing reseach, the dedication and commitment to improving the lives of people with diabetes has been very visibly on show at this conference.
And I have been reminded that at a conference where there are ground breaking announcements made and new and exciting tools launched, it is not the flashy conference centre and the lights of the Exhibit Hall that tell any of the story. It is years and years and years of work, of people plugging away and just doing what needs to be done, until the excitement of telling the world.
This morning, I walked around New Orleans with a delicious, embargoed secret in my head that I was bursting to shout from the rooftops. Some of the exciting work I have been involved in over the last few years has started seeing results and today’s announcement from ALP health spokesperson, Catherine King (no longer under embargo, hence me writing about it….and shouting it from the rooftops) is an example of what happens when people do the hard yards.
Australians now have bipartisan support for CGM funding. The ALP pledge goes further than the Coalition’s, with access under its scheme being based on clinical need – not just age. This mirrors the submission made by Diabetes Australia, JDRF, ADS, ADEA and APEG in our joint proposal. (Disclosure: I worked on the this submission as an employee of (initally Diabetes Victoria and) Diabetes Australia and am acting as spokesperson for Diabetes Australia in any media.)
Today, there will be press and a media launch and lights and excitement as there should be. This is worth celebrating! And as I sit in my hotel room 33 levels above Canal Street in New Orleans, speaking with Australian news radio staff about the announcmenet and I am incredibly proud of what we have managed to achieve in Australia. This is a slow burn. It takes time, it takes commitment and it takes dedication. I love being surrounded by people who have it in spades.
More?
The other night, I drove through the pouring rain to Geelong to speak at an information session for healthcare professionals about CGM technology. The event was run by AMSL, the distributors of Dexcom here in Australia (the disclosure song and dance can be found at the end of this post).
I sat on the panel with Dr Natalie Harrison, a terrific local endocrinologist (oh – how’s THIS for a bit of disclosure – we went to kindergarten together!!) and paediatrician and diabetes technology champion, Dr Peter Goss. I was there to bring the overall IQ of the panel down, share the ‘living with CGM’ story and be the point of difference between the glossy information presented by the CGM company.
On the left – the numbers of all readings in the glossy propaganda (it’s about 6.2 in our language). On the right – real life.
Both presentations by the doctors on the panel were enlightening. They clearly showed how CGM could be used in a number of different scenarios. The thing I particularly enjoyed was how both speakers are using this tech as tools of empowerment for the adult or child with diabetes – not for any other reason. Both repeatedly said that although in most of the cases they presented, there was a reduction in HbA1c, the biggest benefits to the PWD was improved quality of life. (I may have done a little fist pump each time they mentioned that!)
Examples included shift workers, tradies working on construction sights, exercise nuts, kids, adults, teens – demonstrating a terrific cross section of the diabetes community who may – and indeed have – benefitted from the technology. There was also a discussion about how CGM is useful in specific target groups and situations, with a considerable time of the discussion being about low carb diets and CGM. (And can I say just how refreshing it was to have this discussed with little judgement from the speakers. Too often LCHF or just LC is dismissed by healthcare professionals without any willingness to accept that there are many people who are using this as part of their diabetes management and achieving excellent results.)
Dr Goss also mentioned how useful CGM tech can be for families where ‘dead in bed’ is a real concern because it can show families just how stable glucose levels usually are overnight, and therefore may help reduce a lot of the anxiety parents feel. (There was also a discussion about the significant emotion around DIB and how it is frequently overplayed. This is really important because while one person dying from DIB is one person too many, it is thankfully a very, very rare occurrence (as shown in all local and international literature). The fear and the risks need to be in perspective and unfortunately, that is not the case at all times, and the anxiety it is causing is unnecessary.)
After the official, smart speakers finished, I stood up. At this stage, the AV equipment had called it a night, so I put aside the few slides I had developed, and shared a few things.
I spoke about why I love this technology and why I choose to use it pretty much all the time. But I also spoke about its limitations – specifically the emotional and psychological barriers that are of concern. I raised the point that reluctance to use CGM by PWD could be for myriad reasons and to never assume what that reason is (this was in direct response to the suggestion from one of the speakers that often PWD refusing to wear CGM have something to hide). I suggested that for some, it is a huge step to agree to wear something attached to one’s body all the time – something that provides a lot of confronting information, beeps, alarms and can be downright annoying. This is not a small consideration – it is big!
I also spoke about the necessity to customise just how PWD use the technology. I explained how I turn alerts on and off, depending on how engaged I am with my care. I could see that didn’t sit well with everyone so I tried to explain that being able to deal with – and respond to – a couple of alerts, is better than having the all on and doing nothing because it is too overwhelming. Or simply not wearing the technology at all.
And I also spoke about how what I do to make CGM work for me, even if it is against the direct advice of the company – and HCPs. Case in point, my sensor and transmitter are on my arm at the moment. I have found that recently, I get better readings and the sensors last longer if that’s where I site them. I also leave the sensors in for a lot longer than the suggested 7 days. (Peter Goss concurred with both those statements saying that most of the children and adolescents he sees prefer to wear sensors on the upper arm. And there was a bit of a ‘who leaves their sensor in the longest’ discussion, with Dr Goss sharing that the record in his clinic is 26 days. I did disclose that while I have a mental block about going beyond 21 days, I know people who have doubled that!)
This is why it is important to hear directly from people who use the technology. While both doctors shared case studies, the focus was really on how CGM helped smooth out glucose lines. And of course that’s important. But equally important is the way we manage the technology in our life, because if we can’t find a way to get it to work for us, we won’t wear it. After the presentations, a couple of HCPs thanked me for being there and said that I had raised a number of things that they just had not considered before – all things that are usually missed when a PWD is not part of the discussion.
And it served as a reminder again that even though it is terrific to have people with diabetes represented in some ways in presentations at these sorts of events (or conferences, meetings etc.), the only way to hear the real story is to hear it from someone living it.
Thanks to AMSL for inviting me to speak, but more so, for putting a person with diabetes up there on the panel. We belong there.
Disclosure
I was invited to speak at this event by AMSL Diabetes, Australian importers and distributors of Animas and Dexcom. I was provided with product to speak at this event…. The team from AMSL did not hear or see my presetantio prior to the evening and the only direction I was given was to share my experience of using Dexcom. Which I did – the good, the bad and the ugly.
(For the record, although not really relevant, but I’m disclosing the crap out of everything here, I also use an Animas pump. That was wholly paid for by my private insurance company whose premiums I pay each fortnight through clenched fists of frustration as their premiums continue to rise. I also pay for the ongoing consumables needed to drive said pump.)
It’s day 1 of Diabetes Blog Week which means that this is a week where I will be getting little, if any sleep, as I trawl my way through hundreds of diabetes blogs from bloggers all over the world. Big thanks, as always, to the lovely Karen Graffeo (who I love today, but by the end of the week, in my sleep-deprived state, will be cursing for this initiative!) for coordinating the week and giving diabetes bloggers a chance to share their ideas and thoughts on such terrific topics.
Today’s prompt: Lets kick off the week by talking about why we are here, in the diabetes blog space. What is the most important diabetes awareness message to you? Why is that message important for you, and what are you trying to accomplish by sharing it on your blog?
I have now been writing a blog for over five years now. This is my 602nd post (apparently). That’s a lot of waffle about diabetes!
What’s important about diabetes awareness is not only different for each of us, but it also changes throughout time. I have had particular areas of interest at particular times, but there are certainly some issues and messages that have remained pretty consistent.
So here are a list (and links) of some of the most common messages that appear on Diabetogenic.
Use your words. Wisely. Language and diabetes is important. (And I am so excited that this is a topic for Diabetes Blog Week this year!) I have written A LOT about diabetes and language and most of those posts can be found here.
#Access4All. And that does mean for all.
Coffee and Nutella are food groups.
My DOC friends – the ones who keep me company at 3am while low, make me laugh at any time with a random tweet or message, or reach out when concerned – are the only reason that I am mostly balanced about diabetes. Without them – and their support – I don’t know where I would be. And the same goes for the IRL friends.
Put us in the room. People with diabetes have a place at all levels, at all diabetes conferences and at discussions with all stakeholders. Our seat is at the head of the table. Make sure we get the invitation!
Diabetes experitse is shared – but different. Except when it comes to MY diabetes. Then the expertise lies squarely with me.
Diabetes is not only about numbers. It is mostly about what is going on in my head.
These are the issues that are most important to me. It was once suggested by my boss that the only time I get off my high horse is to climb on my soap box – an accusation that was made in good faith and one that I wear fondly. We all have axes to grind, issues about which we are passionate. And we need that in this as we navigate the world of diabetes.
High horse to soapbox…
I have been closely watching how our US DOC friends are responding to the situation with United Healthcare insurance limiting the choice of insulin pumps to Medtronic devices only. They have effectively removed the ability for the person with diabetes to select the pump that best works for their diabetes management (at least without a flight through – what I imagine would be – a terribly arduous appeals process).
My knowledge of the US health system is rudimentary, but I do frequently read about how treatment choices are dictated by health insurers. This is absolutely shocking to me – the idea that my health insurer gets a say in what insulin I pump into my body, which strips I use to check my BGL or the device I use to administer insulin is terrifying.
While I am appalled at the insurer for their complete and utter lack of concern for the person living with diabetes, I am not really surprised. I have never felt that an insurer is on the side of the insured.
But I am very concerned at how Medtronic has behaved here, because despite any rhetoric, this is not the best outcome for, or in the best interest of, the person living with diabetes. For a company that has often shown they are genuinely interested in listening to the consumer, this flies in the face of any consumer-centric attitude and reeks of nothing more than greed.
The commentary from US DOC folks has been swift, consistent and damning, and I continue to read and learn with much interest as they eloquently and passionately plead the case for choice. I am, as I often am, inspired and motivated by the way the community comes together to fight the good fight.
But I am dismayed that there is a need for so much fighting. Living with diabetes is hard enough without having to battle red tape, bureaucracy and corporate hacks who are so out of touch with what living with a chronic condition is about.
And I also watch with fear, because I know that as much as we have freedom of choice in Australia (for now), we shouldn’t take it for granted. We know our insurers are always looking for ways to cut costs, increase profits and raise premiums.
We have already seen some insurers here take measures to make it harder to claim for a pump. There are stories of insurers insisting a higher level of cover for insulin pump rebates, instead of the basic hospital cover that was once the norm; longer qualifying periods have been introduced before a claim for a pump can be made; the number of years between upgrades are sneakily being increased in policies.
Whatever the change, it is clear the outcome for people with diabetes is that we are being screwed. We shouldn’t be too smug here in Australia as we watch from afar, because I fear it is just a matter of time before these sorts of measures are introduced here.
Here are some responses from the US DOC:
Kerri from Six Until Me (also. happy 11th blogaversary!)
Bennet from Your Diabetes May Vary
Kelly from Diabetesaliciousness
Round up from Diabetes Mine and this Storey
Marina from The Betes Organization
And finally, keep an eye on DPAC for update.
#AccessMatters
#MyPumpMyChoice
#PatientsOverProfits
Growing up, when I infrequently visited our family GP, he was always referred to by his first name. I do remember when we were really young putting a ‘Doctor’ before his first name, but we never referred to him by his surname. He was always ‘Dr Sam’ until he became just ‘Sam’.
Since being diagnosed with diabetes and becoming a frequent flyer of healthcare services, I have only ever addressed HCPs by their first name. (Except my endo who frequently gets referred to by her first and middle name together, but that is because my kid has the same middle name (named for my endo) so when speaking to and of each other, we use both names..)
When meeting a new HCP, I will walk into a first appointment, hand extended as we do our introductions. I always say, ‘Please call me Renza,’ although I don’t know that I have ever had a doctor not call me by my first name in the first instance. In fact, usually, when called in from the waiting room, they do so by using my first name.
So it’s probably not surprising that I found myself prickling a little as I read this article from a couple of months ago, written my an oncologist from the US. James Salwitz MD tells the story of a new patient – an elderly man who attended with his adult son. The son insisted on calling Dr Salwitz* by his first name which, apparently, was a little unnerving for the doctor. He referred to it as a cultural faux pas, suggesting that it was being done to… ‘diminsh the power and value of my experience, control and guidance.’
Now, I know it is possible that there are some cultural differences here. In Australia, we seem to have a far more relaxed attitude about being formal. And we also don’t necessarily consider that using someone’s first name shows a lack of respect as suggested by Dr Salwitz and some of the commenters at the end of the piece.
I asked a few people – also regular users of healthcare – and most said they used only first names. A few said they would always refer doctors by their titles, but nurses by their first names. This raises another point about the hierarchy of healthcare professionals. I’m not sure why one would be more inclined to use Dr Diabetes for the endo, but not Ms/Mr Diabetes for the nurse.
I treat and regard my healthcare team with nothing other than respect. I speak to them with respect, I respect their time and how busy they are, and I recognise their professional expertise. How I address them does not diminish this respect, nor undermine their qualification.
What was not clear in the article I read was how Dr Salwitz addressed the person he was treating (or his son). If there was an expectation from doctors that they are addressed by their professional title, then surely they should demonstrate the same courtesy (if that is what it is) and address their patients by their title and surname.
Any discomfort can be solved at the first greeting. This is one of the reasons the #HelloMyNameIs campaign is so important. Clear introductions from the beginning establish how people would prefer to be addressed. If unsure, the question ‘Is it okay for me to call you by your first name’ can be asked by both physician and consumer.
Feeling comfortable in our medical appointments is necessary if we are to get the most from the limited time we have before our HCPs. And for that to occur, there needs to be mutual respect and no imbalance of power. I feel very fortunate to have that with my team.
*Thought is best to refer to Dr Salwitz by his title throughout this post.
Diabetogenic 