[Dysphagia] Sharing Information with Colleagues

[sem at new-vis.com (Suzanne Morris)]

One of the things I've learned, over time, in my teaching and exchanges 
with other therapists is that a given group consists of people with 
many different backgrounds.  On a listserv people join a group, gain 
what they need and leave.  And new people join.  A workshop consists of 
therapists who have very little feeding/dysphagia experience, 
therapists who have had extensive experience with approaches that I 
question, and therapists who are experienced and on the same wave 
length I am.  I know that simply by participating on a list or in a 
workshop, each participant is open to learning and growing in their own 
way.

  Until there is a consistency in teaching at universities and in 
continuing education, all of the research-based information that would 
influence our therapy isn't going to be reflected in the therapy and 
questions of every therapist.   After years of frustration, I've 
arrived at a wonderful sense of peace that this is just reality.  It 
isn't just the situation in our field, but in every field of human 
endeavor.   Being at peace with the "IS" doesn't mean that I am not a 
strong advocate for what I would like for people to know.  It doesn't 
mean that I don't become frustrated at times.  I just recognize that 
questions that I've heard before are either from new participants on a 
list or in a course, or are from people who are now ready to process 
the information that they may have heard at a time when they weren't 
ready to process it.   If information is important, it bears repeating. 
  I also, however, feel that it is really important for lists or 
specific members of lists to write information or position papers that 
can be posted on a website.  I've done this in the "Feed Your Mind" 
section of my New Visions website (www.new-vis.com)  for many of the 
issues in pediatric dysphagia that I feel are important.

Irene, it would be so wonderful if you would consider adding this type 
of a section to your own website.  You are such a marvelous resource 
person who challenges each of us to understand our assessment and 
treatment choices in light of research evidence.  You will know what 
papers to write and add from the specific questions you encounter on 
this list.   Although this takes some time initially, it is a great 
time and energy saver because you can simply refer people to the URL 
that addresses the topic area or question that they are asking.   For 
me this also defuses my own frustration at feeling I need to repeat and 
repeat the same informational content.  I can then approach the 
questions as opportunities to share a different perspective with others 
who are ready to learn more.

Suzanne


Suzanne Evans Morris, Ph.D.
New Visions
1124 Roberts Mountain Rd.
Faber, VA 22938
(434) 361-2285 ext. 5
www.new-vis.com


On May 18, 2005, at 4:00 PM, Irene Campbell-Taylor wrote:

>
> Genefer Behamdouni <BEHAMG@stjoe.on.ca> wrote:
> You know if you won't stand for people being rude to you, I'm not sure
> why you feel the need to be so rude to others. The information is
> interesting, but you won't solve anything by putting people down first.
>
> Grow up.
>
> *** One of the reasons that I frequently stay away from this list - 
> over the ten years in which I have been a contributor - is responses 
> like this. My comment was a repeat of what Barbara Sonies said in her 
> talk at ASHA in Chicago - outdated, incorrect information etc.  Should 
> she "Grow up" as well? And Michael Crary? Do the published facts mean 
> nothing? And what, exactly, was rude? I am on record as indicating 
> that every insulting message I receive on this list - and over the 
> years there have been hundreds- will be posted to the membership. If 
> one doesn't have the courage to say something publicly, please keep 
> quiet and know that these communications have no effect on me 
> whatsoever.
>
>>>> Irene Campbell-Taylor 05/18 9:44 AM >>>
> Okay, I can't stand it any longer. The wealth of outdated, inaccurate
> and misperceived information that still seems to be prevalent is
> frightening. For those of you who feel that you don't have time to read
> the relevant material and, by implication, feel that you don't need the
> information, stop here.
> Tongue retraction. This is still one of my "Where did you ever get that
> idea? mysteries. Many years ago, David Curtis proved that the "open
> swallow" is far more common than contact with the PPW. See below.
> The Masako: If you don't believe me, maybe you'll believe Michael Crary
> - also below.And, in the original article find the following:
>
> However, the use of the maneuver per se, which inhibits posterior
> retraction of the base of tongue (BOT), resulted in increasing the
> pharyngeal (specifically vallecular) residue after the swallow.