What are your thoughts on contractions when it comes to grammar?

[The Valkyrie]

WT'F.

You heard that right:  If a doctor says "can't" or "won't" we have to type them as "cannot" or "will not."  If we get alphabet soup such as "ITP" we have to expand at least the first instance to "idiopathic thrombocytopenic purpura."

You need to have a remote shock device keyed to each doctor. Whenever they write an acronym in documentation you have to fill out, you should shock them.  Just a little.

It might take a while, even after it's explained to them, but they will eventually get it.

Even doctors can be taught.

[Joods]

Yes. Because there is a difference between BPD and BPD. One needs to know which one a doc is referring to when transcribing their dictation.

And that, I'm sure, isn't the only instance where the same acronym has more than one meaning.

[TheRealJoeFish]

I use contractions in informal writing but can "turn them off" quite easily while at work (for instance, anything that's [that is] going to a client can't [cannot] have contractions in it).

I see a lot of doctor writing, and a lot of dictated notes, so I am eternally grateful to those who expend the time/effort to actually figure out what the eff doctors mean when they say shit. Or write shit. Lawyers constantly have to ask doctors at depositions "this note here on page 43... dafuq that say?"

There's a big push in the medical field, I understand, to write everything out and to say everything and to highlight frequently confused things. I know that the names of a lot of medications are always written with certain parts capitalized, to distinguish from other similar-sounding drugs. And there are lots of rule about abbreviations and numbers and being sure to distinguish between 5.0 and 50 and "fifty" and "fifteen" and all that. Blah. Stupid dumb language.