July 24th, 2010

red panda eating bamboo

Kiva's Christian-associated lenders, tools for sorting Kiva loans

I just made some more loans via http://kiva.org. My "strategy" when lending has been to lend to people in a variety of different countries. But this time around I also decided that I'm not going to make any more loans that are associated with explicitly Christian charities. Personally, I would rather support lenders that don't encourage or require their loan recipients to adopt certain beliefs or behaviors (unrelated to paying back their loan).

I'm sure that not all of the Christian-associated lenders are pushy that way, but some of them, based on the lender descriptions on Kiva, sound like they are. E.g., "Esperanza International Dominican Republic, a partner of HOPE International" includes as part of their lender description:
We define poverty as the condition of the human being as a result of their broken relationships with God, other people, the creation and himself, as a consequence of sin. We expect, then, to assist them in their release from poverty through a transforming development process, which we define as the reconciliation process where the individual is restored to bless and be blessed, becoming an instrument for God’s Kingdom.
I defined "explicitly Christian" as a lender or charity that mentions Christianity in its mission statement.

I did a bunch of this research myself, and afterward I found the following list of Christian-associated lenders. My research agreed with their list. The post and comments also mention some tools that automatically sort Kiva loans in various ways, including exclusion (or inclusion) of religiously affiliated lenders:

http://atheist-monkey.blogspot.com/2009/08/kiva-mfi-checker.html#list

(I am not trying to bash Christianity or tell anyone what to do. This is about my own comfort and beliefs.)

This entry was originally posted at http://firecat.dreamwidth.org/683683.html, where there are comment count unavailable comments.
red panda eating bamboo

That Dr Rob article

A lot of people are commenting about this article, a doctor's letter to patients with chronic disease:

http://distractible.org/2010/07/14/a-letter-to-patients-with-chronic-disease/

I get that Dr Rob means well and I like that he admits doctors are scared by chronic conditions and by the fact that many patients with chronic conditions know more about their conditions than the doctor does. I do think respect goes a long way toward improving communications between people. However, I don't think it works when he tries to pretend the doctor and the patient are equal:

"just like you know your disease better than any doctor, I know what being a doctor feels like"

"we have worked very hard to earn our position; it was not bestowed by fiat or family tree. Just as you want to be listened to, so do we."

"The best care happens when a doctor understands the patient and the patient understands the doctor."

In a typical doctor-patient interaction, the doctor and the patient are not equal. The doctor has much more power. And although Dr. Rob addresses that the patient is suffering, he completely ignores the power imbalance in the post.

The post got a great many comments and he engaged a lot with the comments trying to explain where he's coming from. In the comments, he sees people saying stuff about the power relationship, but he doesn't get that the power relationship is systemic and what that means. He says stuff like "docs are insecure about their position of power," and he talks about how the good doctors wish the bad doctors would go away. But he doesn't understand that this power imbalance inevitably affects the doctor-patient relationship even in the case of good doctors who mean well.

At a NAAFA conference a few years ago I went to a talk that really hammered home the point that the medical system is a system, and in that system patients are roles and not individuals, and therefore it is very difficult to get your needs met if you have individual needs that the system doesn't have a systematized solution for. (Case in point: After the OH had an operation to install his cochlear implant, the hospital staff persisted in trying to communicate with him by talking, although he had a bandage on his head and was completely deaf.) I wish Dr Rob could have gone to that talk.

This entry was originally posted at http://firecat.dreamwidth.org/683867.html, where there are comment count unavailable comments.