Anyone else find terms used by mental health professionals offensive?

In this case no, because people have very different versions of normality and will insist that something different is abnormal, to an outsider quite randomly, there seems to be no rhyme or reason to it.

Yes that does give us some ‘clout’ to argue that not all people diagnosed with disorders are a liability.

On the other hand, the figures can give some a reason to say disordered people are a liability. Unfortunately, some equate worth as a human being to those who are employed. 

I just meant that as long as some are contributing you cant make the lazy statement that all are a liability. This means you have to get more specific, but it is not easy to narrow it down in a simple sound bite. It means having everyone together offers some protection for those less fortunate.

Fewer work than I thought. Seems 30%, with 15% full time, although many more want to work. Its below the average for all disabilities.

Might be 300,000 or more in work in the UK.

Sorry Stewart, I get what you have said now in the last paragraph. I was confused by the three paragraphs as I am goggled eyed at the moment - too much screen time. 

Stuart333 said:

This is where putting everyone together is helpful as it undermines the simple views

Will you please explain why putting everyone together undermines the simple views. Are you referring to my view and one or more other persons?

I feel a sadness and hurt when I hear the word ‘disordered’. It is an emotion, not something fixed in facts.

I am not suggesting anyone else should share my feelings and I don’t believe I claimed anything other than a feeling in my first response. 

ArchaeC said:

My dislike of ‘disorder’ being used to describe Autism does not mean I don’t believe it is an accurate term if used correctly.

What I have said can be repeated by saying “I believe it is accurate as a classification”. I don’t believe certain politicians are using it correctly and therefore the meaning has become changed in popular culture. As an example, the English language is a living language, and the word ‘gay’ meant ‘bright and lively’ when I was a child, yet now the word is used to mean ‘homosexual’. I don’t like the word being used in the context of autism because of the association.

I don’t think there is anything more I can say about that. It is how I feel, and I haven’t done anything other than state accurate facts.

Stuart333 said:

there are plenty who work and pay tax though, in tech and finance. They are not a drain.

Not that many:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_of_autistic_people

between 76% and 90% of autistic people being unemployed in Europe in 2014 and approximately 85% in the US in 2023

That leaves the rest as dependent on others or benefits in the vast majority of cases.

ArchaeC said:

of course the definition of disorder is correct. 

My dislike of ‘disorder’ being used to describe Autism does not mean I don’t believe it is an accurate term if used correctly.

Based on facts, can you explain why you think the medical definition is not being applied correctly please? I'm curious as to the thought processes behind this.

When it comes to labels used by fascists then if we change the label they will just come after the new one too - names change nothing of consequence here.

ArchaeC said:

That is the message coming from the US, that is what is being fed to people around the world and that is what I don’t want to be a part of. 

They are coming after us because we are a high dependancy group and have little ability as a group to defend outselves. It is a classic fascist approach to remove the needy from society and remove the "undesirables" from both sight and cost.

Seeing how many countries have  growing right wing and fascist movements I think this issue is going to become much more significant over time.

If anyone has an effective idea how to get us out of the crosshairs I would be interested to hear it.

But there are plenty who work and pay tax though, in tech and finance. They are not a drain.

They also have a disorder.

This is where putting everyone together is helpful as it undermines the simple views 

Yes, of course the definition of disorder is correct. 

My dislike of ‘disorder’ being used to describe Autism does not mean I don’t believe it is an accurate term if used correctly.

Unfortunately, the term has been used to describe autistic and neurodivergent people in a less than flattering way. Vance and Kennedy have spoken about autistic people as if they are to be discarded on the rubbish pile. Cures have been proposed to prevent autistic people ending up on the scrap heap, so they can no longer be a drain on society. In other words, what I am seeing is a big sign say I AM A DISORDERED PERSON AND NOT WORTHY OF BEING A HUMAN BEING. 

That is the message coming from the US, that is what is being fed to people around the world and that is what I don’t want to be a part of. 

TheCatWoman said:

I'm always a bit wary when someone defines normal, probably because I've so often been on the wrong side of that definition and it seem very moevable feast.

Do you think this could have caused bias in your reasoning here? 

I know I have bias in some things and have to carefully consider my discussions to take this into account.

I would ask how many differnces are there in the neurology of the human species? Then we can go on to causes etc.

I'm always a bit wary when someone defines normal, probably because I've so often been on the wrong side of that definition and it seem very moevable feast.

I'm all for asking questions but I thought it had been answered.

What would the core of the question be? What defines normal?

Maybe not, but we can ask the question though can't we? I think we should ask the question too, I don't think you can say on the one hand that people are too stupid or uneducated to understand things like causation and yet bow before the experts on asking questions?

ArchaeC said:

I’m starting to wonder if they have left anything out or is everybody with a mental illness/ condition/affliction/syndrome or whatever disordered.

The simple answer is - probably.

Look at the definition of the medical term:

https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/disorder 

- A derangement or abnormality of function; a morbid physical or mental state.
- A condition characterized by lack of normal functioning of physical or mental processes

This would fit the vast majority of the cases you talk about.

TheCatWoman said:

Did we really Iain?

I let the medical professionals decide that. Neither I nor you have the skills to do this.

Did we really Iain? Or are we just another variant in human development? Maybe its the expectations that are wrong not the people? The more thats found out the less we seem to be the same.

I’m starting to wonder if they have left anything out or is everybody with a mental illness/ condition/affliction/syndrome or whatever disordered.

Yes, I have seen quite a few posts referring to social anxiety disorder on this forum, but also elsewhere.

TheCatWoman said:

I can't see there ever being a neurotypical disorder

That is because they have developed "normally" or at least the way the vast majority have (hence it being defined as normal). As this is the accepted path of development then it became the standard to measure others against.

We didn't follow the expected route with our brains development so we do meet the medical definition of disordered.

TheCatWoman said:

NT's cause so many problems and prejudice.

This is true, but they create as many problems for other NTs too.