Keränen Response

In addition to the questions you posed at the end of your section response, what are a couple of discussion questions you might draft for the chapters in your section? (Think advanced undergraduates or early graduate students)

  • Spend a moment reflecting on the conceptual, methodological, and practical affordances of the concept of health citizenship. What does the term offer rhetoricians of health and medicine and how do its affinities with the rhetorical tradition both help and hinder its conceptual work?
  • In what ways do you and your loved ones enact health citizenship?
  • What are some ethical principles that might underlie health citizenship in a global society? Why did you identify these principles and how do they work for the common good?
  • Keränen distinguishes between several senses of health citizenship. What are they and how are they different? Can you identify additional ways of conceptualizing the concept?
  • What is the value in turning from the concept of being a patient vs. becoming a health advocate?

What is the most important idea in your (response, intro, afterword) that you would want to make sure folks know?

  • These questions: What are the preconditions for productive dialogues about health-related matters in multicultural global societies? What roles can rhetoricians play in fostering and studying such debates? encounters among cultural, local, national discourses around the globe.
  • Following Condit’s (2013) call for more international work in the rhetoric of science, technology, and medicine, what does global health citizenship look like and how does it interrelate to nationally and locally focused forms of health citizenship? Do different forms of health citizenship attach to different regimes of governance? That is, is health citizenship configured differently in authoritarian, socialist, and democratic nation states? And how does the notion of universal health citizenship that permeates United Nations and World Health Organization discourses function and how is this notion deployed across contexts, rhetorics, and cultures?
  • How can rhetoricians of health and medicine center race in their work and produce scholarship that counters the tacit whiteness of our field? Relatedly, what are the underlying assumptions of citizenship in prevailing notions of health citizenship and whose voices do they exclude? How can rhetoricians of health and medicine work towards globally inclusive concepts, practices, and research concerning health citizenship? What are the ethical requirements of and equitable models for such engagement?
  • Finally,  . . . What are and should be the goals of rhetorical analysis of health citizenship and advocacy? Must such scholarship be a form of praxis, as some of the authors in this section suggest? Or, is it enough to “raise awareness”?

What makes RHM an interesting area of scholarly inquiry in both theory and/or practice? (In other words, what makes us so cool?

  • Social salience.
  • Is there anything that you want those new to the field to know about RHM?
  • We are fortunate to have people like Lisa Melancon and Blake Scott and others creating paths for others’ success!