Advocacy and Lobbying Are Both

Advocacy and lobbying are both processes that an individual can use to influence a specific or general group of people for a cause or belief that is considered important. These processes work to gain support and effect change for the specific position in question. In Occupational Therapy, both processes can be used in combination to effect the desired changes. Because Occupational Therapists are health professionals, a great concern is the legislation surrounding health issues.

Occupational Therapists are required to work within legislative boundaries in their attempt to ensure optimal health for the specific group they are working with. Rather than opting for a general and community-focused process like advocacy, a more specific focus on legislation by means of lobbying is therefore perhaps the most effective way to advance the profession and the scope of help it can provide to clients. Lobbying can occur on two levels: direct lobbying and grassroots lobbying.

The direct lobbying process is directed towards a government official such as a legislator or staffer, and aims to influence a specific piece of legislation (eBasedTreatment.org, 2010). In the Occupational Therapy profession, lobbying would therefore be concerned with any piece of health legislation that is considered inadequate or detrimental to the aims of the profession to help clients effectively. Grassroots lobbying, on the other hand, while still attempting to influence legislation, has a more general and indirect focus.

It seeks to influence legislators by means of communication with their constituents (eBasedTreatment.org, 2010). As such, grassroots lobbying would be aimed at specific legislation, reflect views on this legislation, and encourage action with respect to the legislation. In Occupational Therapy, the lobbyist may then for example distribute pamphlets aimed at changing a certain piece of health legislation by means of the vote. In terms of effectiveness, I believe that the direct communication with legislators, by means of direct lobbying is most effective.

However, if direct lobbying is combined with grassroots lobbying, this could also serve the purpose of strengthening the position of the lobbyist. The lobbyist Maureen Mulhall for example has an Internet presence by means of which she conducts her grassroots lobbying efforts, while also directly communicating with legislators in order to make necessary and effective changes to the legislation (IlOTA, 2010). Advocacy in turn is a much more broad spectrum of activities, with a much broader focus than lobbying.

Lobbying may form a part of the advocacy effort, but this is not necessarily the case. The IlOTA (2010) Website for example includes links to legislative issues that might respond well to advocacy efforts. Advocacy is also most effective when done on an ongoing basis, and over a period of time (Nursing-Informatics.com, 2010).

For Occupational Therapy, advocacy could include such actions as placing regular articles in local newspapers that focus on health issues, feature stories regarding the assistance that Occupational Therapists provide to certain interest groups, and provide publications regarding the profession and its importance to the community. While this would raise the community consciousness regarding Occupational Therapy and its importance to society, I do not really believe it would be effective in terms of concrete changes needed in the profession and how.