Follow Up: “Choosing Nursing: A Feminist Odyssey”, “Finding the Face in Public Health Policy…” and “Acting on a Grander Scale…”

All of these articles look at health care and feminism’s role in the health care. In Turner’s article she makes the point that “one should never compromise when trying to make a difference” (108). I think this statement is very interesting. In one way it makes the point that when changing something for the better you should not settle, but on the other hand I think that compromise is often the best way to actually accomplish something. I guess it would depend on the situation. The question that I have is: it better to compromise and have something change a little, or not to compromise and not change at all? I think there can be different arguments for both. The health care system in America is suppose to be changing, but as Turner points out the poor are not represented in the health care system now, so will anything change for them?
Mendez and Kaminsky write about their personal experiences as members of the medical side in the health care debate. Both are medical personnel, but make different points. Mendez writes about the need for bilingual doctors, and her personal experiences with it. Kaminsky writes about how nursing is considered a feminine job, but explains how that should not down play how important of a job it is. I think this relates to the debate on being a housewife. A woman should not be seen as less depending on her job, but in today’s society she is. Housewife and nurse are both feminine jobs, and both are looked down on. The connection between the two is that a typical woman’s job is worth less than a typical man’s job. Mendez’s point is that it is not only men who look down on nurses, but feminists as well and this should change.