1. Framework from Sieck outlines how digital literacy and access play a vital role in overall health and wellbeing. I believe the two most important elements that stood out to me were, food and community and social context. Food because it is the base level of human needs and research shows from outcomes of children receiving school breakfast and test scores, to senior hunger initiatives food impacts across the lifespan. The ability to access support for food insecurity heavily relies on digital access, and education on healthy diet and managing chronic conditions with diet are more likely to reach persons on digital platforms. Community and social context because our support system and community play such a vital role in mental and physical wellbeing. 

2. Sieck framework is a strong design for explaining the impact of digital divide and how access to and literacy around technology and the internet are necessities at this point in time. As healthcare shifts to digital platforms and going paperless, having the internet is imperative. Also understanding how to navigate not just the internet but the devices can be a barrier to services, and ultimately determine long-term health outcomes and quality of life. It makes me think of telehealth but also my mind goes to assistive technology. Many AT devices are simple technology and you must have the skill set, or social support, to be able to set up and reap benefits. 

3. Sanders and Scanlon discussion of the digital divide as a social justice issue was the most impactful in regards to who is most impacted, low-income, aging and minority persons. Public libraries are still acting as the backbone of community and now access. The argument was persuasive and defined well in the article. I believe this argument or issue is known to social services communities and Sanders and Scanlon laid out the impacts of the digital divide in clean digestible pieces for the reader. 

4. Sanders and Scanlon’s strategy to advocate for bridging the gap of the digital divide was promising. For myself the strategy that most stood out was identifying the target audience because advocacy can not make a great impact if it falls on the wrong ears. This speaks further to the need of social workers to understand power structure and policy effort and context. Although good points were made, I found the suggestions or rather talk around government funding and large waves of improving access to the internet were unrealistic when considering current times economically and getting a large scale buy-in on the ideas. 

5. Criag article on adopting CBT with LGBTQ+ Youth via telehealth was most effective to me in regards to setting the stage for the therapy. I believe a certain level of rapport and an inviting environment are key to creating the space for a person to feel safe and support to open up in therapy. Meeting youth where they are and utilizing what they are most familiar with like emojis. Creating the space with cameras and audio on to prevent miscommunications in text form. In regards to the connection to previous two articles from Sieck and Sanders and Scanlon we have to understand that the adoption of CBT for LGBTQ+ youth will be determined by digital literacy and access. A Hispanic LGBTQ+ youth from a low income, rural area who relies on the local library for computer access will not be granted privilege of this therapy. Even though they may benefit greatly from the experience, which further widens the digital divide.