• Replies 42 replies
  • Subscribers 88 subscribers
  • Views 1422 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Anyone else find terms used by mental health professionals offensive?

DazeAndConfused

I was thinking about the labels given to those with mental health struggles. Previously I have been told I had an Obsessive Compulsive Personality Disorder, and am currently considered by the secondary mental health team to be on the spectrum with an Autism Spectrum Disorder, I have issues with the term Disorder. To me it implies that we are broken or wrong to think in the way we do. Given the diabolical state of the world at the moment, what is so great about being and thinking like a neurotypical person. 

More recently I have been reading up about the diagnostic assessment process, and the need for Informants. To me this language invokes overtones of criminality or worse of an oligarchic state and its secret police. I mentioned this to my wife and a couple of friends, and they too were horrified by the term Informant! 

Surely the Neurodivergent community deserves more respect. Derogatory language (disorder, informant) is in my opinion offensive and shows a lack of respect from those working in the mental health arena. The language used in any dialogue is, in my opinion, so important in establishing the tone and nature of any interaction.

I am interested in your views on the subject.

Parents

  • If you look at the technicalities of it, autism is accurately defined as a disorder:

    https://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/disorder
    Disorder:
    A disturbance of function, structure, or both, resulting from a genetic or embryonic failure in development or from exogenous factors such as poison, trauma, or disease.

    With autism the brain does not develop normally - we are unable to develop the sensory filters that neurotypicals do.

    I think what is happening is you are creating an interpritation of the words that is negative. If you can try to see them as medical facts then they are simply accurate descriptions.

    With the word informant, the correct interpritation is:

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/informant

    1- one that imparts knowledge or news

    the other interpritations are secondary so it helps to realise that the main definition is what is being used here.

  • in reply to Iain

    I don't think the problem is the literal definition of the word disorder. It is the connotations that come with that. Yes there are things we find difficult as autistic people but do we want to be seen as something that is disordered or just a different way of being that hopefully with time will come to be accepted? Personally I think autism spectrum condition just sounds better.

    This is one of those things that is always going to split opinion. Some people dislike autism being called a disability and some really fight for it to be seen as one. Some people dislike the word disability altogether and want it to be changed, others dislike the fact that people are trying to take that identity away from them by trying to change the name. It's complicated because it also involves opinion.

    Unfortunately, what ever words are used always seem to end up having negative connotations attached to them. Special needs is a great example of this. It was a term introduced, particularly in schools, to try and move away from the negative words that were used to describe people with support needs and to try and make it sound more positive. All that has actually happened is that special has become an insult and now people dislike the term. Sometimes, I'm not sure we can actually win.

  • in reply to Expecto_Patronum

    Exactly, it's the negative connotations of the language used in today's world that I find so annoying. How would people react today if when they applied for a job, the company insisted on you supplying a number of informants instead of referees? And who is to say that a "disturbance of function" won't turn out to be an evolutionary breakthrough?

  • in reply to Stuart333

    Referee has two definitions, the second of which is "a person willing to testify in writing about the character or ability of someone, especially an applicant for a job."

  • in reply to DazeAndConfused

    But they aren't referees, they are not adjudicating on any rules. They are independent historical observed behavioural data providers which is too long to say. Informant seems easier and is technically correct.

    If the medical field were to remove all reference to deficits, disorder, impairment, etc. which are not terribly flattering terms, then what are they diagnosing?

    Why would you diagnose a difference that has no negative impact? You don't don't get diagnosed for being taller than average or having longer toes. 

    The criteria require there to be some impact on your life, it can be emotional, relational, psychological, sensory, etc. Else you are just a quirky individual with some autistic traits, but not autistic.

Reply
  • in reply to DazeAndConfused

    But they aren't referees, they are not adjudicating on any rules. They are independent historical observed behavioural data providers which is too long to say. Informant seems easier and is technically correct.

    If the medical field were to remove all reference to deficits, disorder, impairment, etc. which are not terribly flattering terms, then what are they diagnosing?

    Why would you diagnose a difference that has no negative impact? You don't don't get diagnosed for being taller than average or having longer toes. 

    The criteria require there to be some impact on your life, it can be emotional, relational, psychological, sensory, etc. Else you are just a quirky individual with some autistic traits, but not autistic.

Children