Hi

James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 27-Jan-06 6:08:33 PM >>>
At 9:44 AM -0600 1/27/06, Blackman, Duncan DCRE wrote:
>Hello Jean-Marc and other Tipsters,
>
>The primary issue that people with this classification have is that 
>the terminology has excluded them from opportunities available to 
>all other people who are not labelled.  Their challenge is to 
>convince the societies and communities around them to include them, 
>to allow them to belong and participate to the best of their 
>abilities and interests.  They want to be known as people first and 
>included in discussions and policy-making concerning their lives 
>without discrimination, marginalization and social exclusion.

The problem is still that it's not the terminology that's excluded 
them -- it's the actions of people.
It is not at all clear that the terminology has any causal 
relationship to these actions.
If not, fighting a terminology fight is counterproductive.
-- 

JC:

I think another problem could be advocates' tendency to try to minimize the 
very real negative consequences of various disabilities.  In Jean-Marc's 
original post, he noted:
*---------------------------------------------
So, I'm curious to hear about your opinions on the matter. Is it still ok to 
talk about Mental Retardation? Or should I move towards what her mentors 
suggested: Mentally challenged, or even "gifted" (she said they were moving in 
that direction to replace mental retardation).
*---------------------------------------------

To label "mental retardation" (or equivalent phrase) as "gifted" is extremely 
dangerous, if only because it reduces preventive measures.  I understand that a 
(the?) primary cause of retardation now is Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (or 
whatever its current label is).  Imagine labels on alcohol that read: "Please 
do not drink during pregnancy.  It produces gifted children."  Or legislators 
being asked to provide more funding for facilities and services for "gifted" 
children and adults.

The trick appears to be to find labels that communicate accurately and 
effectively the debilitating nature of the disability, without exacerbating the 
all-too-prevalent stigma present in society.  And to do this in a way that 
maximizes development of people with the condition without giving false hope 
(and resulting disappointment) that maximizing development means complete 
elimination of any actual consequences of the disability (as opposed to 
elimination of barriers to maximal achievement).

Take care
Jim





---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [email protected]
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to