A few years back, I spoke about a case that involved the death of a child. My child.
Before I began, I paused and said:

💡 ONE IDEA WELL

Do warnings prepare… or do they prime?

I've given content warnings before.
Sometimes it feels like the right thing - the kind thing - to do.
Especially when a talk might touch on grief, trauma, or scenes from frontline medicine that some might find confronting.

But you can’t give a warning for everything.

A recent meta-analysis in Clinical Psychological Science (Bridgland et al., 2024) reviewed 17 studies on trigger warnings and found:

In other words: warnings don’t consistently help, and in some cases, they may hurt.

This invites a distinction:

• A trigger warning assumes a specific response: This might be harmful to you.
• A content warning simply informs: This is what’s coming.

The first is about protection. The second is about permission.

For me, content warnings are about respect - offering people a moment to prepare, pause, or step out.
But as a speaker, your job isn’t to wrap your audience in cotton wool. It’s to be clear, intentional, and human.

Because not everything needs a warning.
But everything needs care.

🧰 LESS MESS, MORE MESSAGE

If you’re going to give a content warning, make it clear, brief, and timely.
​
⚠️ “The next section includes discussion of child loss.”
Not: “This might be upsetting.” (Everything in medicine might be upsetting.)

And remember: you’re not fragile - and neither is your audience.
You’re both human.

🧭 ASK YOURSELF THIS

​
​
Speak soon,

Andy
​
​📎 PS

Here’s the meta-analysis from Bridgland et al. (2024) that sparked this conversation. Worth a read — or at least a skim.