Who co-opted my interventions???

This will be a brief entry to serve as placemarker for a larger discussion, if it ends up being warranted.  I have blogged before about my basic understanding of the Sapir–Whorf hypothesis. This hypothesis states that there is a power to words and that words frame our perspectives and understandings.  Language is a medium for expression of a culture – and a culture is a shared set of beliefs and practices. In the simplest form, language transmits the beliefs and practices of people. As Bruner has pointed out, words reflect our beliefs that frame our narratives and support our culture.

Today I was being interviewed by a media person and they were confused about my use of the word 'intervention'  when I was talking about 'occupational therapy interventions.'  This was surprising to me.  My message to them was focused on the friendly context of my clinic and the services we offer, and their understanding of the word 'intervention' was related to a reality television show entitled Intervention.  That was not so good.  The interviewer mentioned that when they think of interventions that they don't think of a friendly process that helps children.  It was one of these moments:

So now I am kind of wondering about my words.  Maybe I need to go back to treatment planning and forget this intervention business.  Has anyone else run into this problem?


Popular posts from this blog

Deconstructing the myth of clothing sensitivity as a 'sensory processing disorder'

When writing gives you the willies: Reconsidering 'tactile defensiveness'

On retained primitive reflexes