Advocacy can be defined as the targeted support or push for a cause to get legal approval. The advocacy can be to push for a policy to be adopted or amended in some way for the public cause (Chapman, 2007). In the case study paper, the advocacy is based on the improvement of uninsured people in the state of New York. The advocacy, in this case, is lobbying by advocacy groups and legal advocates for the public health legislation. The advocates together with Long Island Coalition for National Health Plan pushed for the availing of grants and health care program for the uninsured.
My agency has been working on HIV prevention and awareness projects. In our service delivery area, we have initiated several programs and activities towards informing policy makers. At the local level, we have engaged in collaborative networking with activists, NGOs and individuals involved in HIV/AIDS programs. The collaboration has formed a coalition body, which has directly approached local authorities and public representatives for talks. The talks and negotiations engaged have seen the inclusion of our agency’s concept note for grants and programs support approved as legal proposals.
The civil proposals have then been adopted by the policy makers at the council for enactment and adoption. At the State level, we have engaged in petitioning of the senator and other legal representatives to sponsor an HIV care bill. The bill allows among other things for a recurrent annual grant to our coalition, establishment of a dedicated state HIV Program department and statewide campaign launches. To that end, half a million signatures have been targeted for the support of the various petition proposals being pushed.
The advocacy work at the agency has several ways in which to inform policy makers of the concerns and issues at hand. At the local and state level, petitions are used to collect and present signatures of the members of public in support of HIV/AIDS programs. The other way is by initiating direct representative talks to the authorities’ offices. The talks and proposals can be submitted to the government or political offices for official notification. Another very effective way is by initiating briefings in the state legislative buildings for informative sessions. Telephone calls, e-mails, letters and video messages can be used as alternatives.
Public forums, hearings and discussions can also be used by the agency to attract the attention and participation of the policy makers. When covered by local and major news agencies, the discussions have the potential of galvanizing the policy makers to health development programs support. The discussion would also have the residual effect of having more public support and incidental communication imitation by other concerned quarters. Direct media and third party communication can also be used. Media interviews, talks, and discussion panels can be organized to have the policies discussed. In that medium, the policy proposals would attract the local and government representatives. Possible legal structuring and implementation can then be made possible.
In special/urgent cases, protests and demonstrations can be employed involving other health development bodies (Keefe & Jurkowski, 2013). The authorized picketing would be sure to notify the local and state authorities of the need to have special programs for the HIV/AIDS victims. Awareness programs would then be supported by the same entities via legalizing the proposals notes. An example of an action that the HIV agency might take to inform better the policy makers is the internet mobilization. The social media avenues such as Facebook, Twitter, and Whatsapp platforms can be used for public mobilization. By sharing the message via social media, policy makers are bound to be informed.
References
Chapman, S. (2007). Public health advocacy and tobacco control. Oxford: Blackwell Pub.
Keefe, R. & Jurkowski, E. (2013). Handbook for public health social work. New York: Springer Pub.
