Jun 1, 2009
Shades of Gray
by Jerry Jaker
While conversing recently with a colleague about gun violence, she told me, “There are so many out there that refuse to acknowledge these shades of gray. Some make blanket statements without being informed, some make informed but narrow judgments without thought for how they impact others. The bottom line – the truth lies in the middle and if more people realized that, one outcome might be that politics would not have such a bad name.”
Our work in the promotion of public health and in the prevention of health-compromising behavior is driven by both science and civics. Science is one way of knowing. In a democratic society where all opinions may be heard, we need to understand that not all citizens base their decisions on scientific knowledge alone. The road to success fully protecting the public health involves the art and skill of compromise with integrity as well as the dissemination of scientific information.
Public policy concerning alcohol is a topic that triggers strong feelings among many people in the United States. A public health approach dictates that our policies and programs are driven by accurate and current data and that we consider how alcohol impacts multiple sectors of the community. Focusing on how people get hurt seems to me to make more sense than just dictating how we want other people to live their lives. Alcohol use is a personal choice that involves legal, physical, health and other social consequences. It’s not to be a shouting contest between pro-use advocates and advocates so “dry” they are a fire hazard. The truth is in the middle; life is not black and white but filled with shades of gray.
Some of the most contentious issues of our time have been more successfully addressed by a public health approach, not trumped by politics.
It shouldn’t be a second amendment-screaming contest between gun control activities and the NRA. Nor should it be a debate between pro-marijuana and anti-marijuana groups. It should be “what does public health science permit us to understand about this issue, and how does that play out in a free society?”.
I think about Abraham Lincoln, who knew a thing or two about leading discussion on contentious issues in an American society, counseling us that we should “always bear in mind that the resolution to succeed is more important than any one thing.”
I thought of Lincoln last week as President Obama commented about abortion, one of the more contentious health issues of our times. During his commencement address at the University of Notre Dame, “When we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think precisely like we do, that’s when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.”
Good point. Life, the more one lives it, is about shades of gray. Democracy is slow and oftentimes messy. But it beats whatever is in second place.
Our work in the promotion of public health and in the prevention of health-compromising behavior is driven by both science and civics. Science is one way of knowing. In a democratic society where all opinions may be heard, we need to understand that not all citizens base their decisions on scientific knowledge alone. The road to success fully protecting the public health involves the art and skill of compromise with integrity as well as the dissemination of scientific information.
Public policy concerning alcohol is a topic that triggers strong feelings among many people in the United States. A public health approach dictates that our policies and programs are driven by accurate and current data and that we consider how alcohol impacts multiple sectors of the community. Focusing on how people get hurt seems to me to make more sense than just dictating how we want other people to live their lives. Alcohol use is a personal choice that involves legal, physical, health and other social consequences. It’s not to be a shouting contest between pro-use advocates and advocates so “dry” they are a fire hazard. The truth is in the middle; life is not black and white but filled with shades of gray.
Some of the most contentious issues of our time have been more successfully addressed by a public health approach, not trumped by politics.
It shouldn’t be a second amendment-screaming contest between gun control activities and the NRA. Nor should it be a debate between pro-marijuana and anti-marijuana groups. It should be “what does public health science permit us to understand about this issue, and how does that play out in a free society?”.
I think about Abraham Lincoln, who knew a thing or two about leading discussion on contentious issues in an American society, counseling us that we should “always bear in mind that the resolution to succeed is more important than any one thing.”
I thought of Lincoln last week as President Obama commented about abortion, one of the more contentious health issues of our times. During his commencement address at the University of Notre Dame, “When we open our hearts and our minds to those who may not think precisely like we do, that’s when we discover at least the possibility of common ground.”
Good point. Life, the more one lives it, is about shades of gray. Democracy is slow and oftentimes messy. But it beats whatever is in second place.
Posted on June 1, 2009 - 8:38am by Jerry Jaker
Post new comment