This entry was posted on January 28, 2010 at 2:07 am and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.
You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
Intereting and topically vital WHCC/11 and clearly the right time for the issues. I would ask however, in a system where about 70% of the people who work in health care are women you could only manage to find about 20% of your keynoters from the ranks of women. And an even greater mystery is how you could possibly have failed to find any keynoters who are nurses (60% of all care providers), the single largest group of PhD prepared health scholars in the country. One might be compelled to think that either some level of cronyism was at work here or some active process of high level gender or role discrimination is under way in your program planning. At any rate, it would be a positive reflection on the credibility of the WHCC if this obvious and gross imbalance were corrected in your future programming. Thank-you.
February 21, 2011 at 5:31 am |
Intereting and topically vital WHCC/11 and clearly the right time for the issues. I would ask however, in a system where about 70% of the people who work in health care are women you could only manage to find about 20% of your keynoters from the ranks of women. And an even greater mystery is how you could possibly have failed to find any keynoters who are nurses (60% of all care providers), the single largest group of PhD prepared health scholars in the country. One might be compelled to think that either some level of cronyism was at work here or some active process of high level gender or role discrimination is under way in your program planning. At any rate, it would be a positive reflection on the credibility of the WHCC if this obvious and gross imbalance were corrected in your future programming. Thank-you.