Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Personal' started by nizebaby, Sep 10, 2020.
Says it all really.
Wouldn't you just know it! Please make it possible for us to edit our rhread titles!!!
The point remains true, whether you yourself are autistic or not.
plural noun: autistics
a person affected by autism.
There is a section in the link to report any words if you feel they are wrongly included in the dictionary.
I agree with Nizebaby. It's shorthand but diminishing. It reduces the whole human to one condition. Just as The Blind, spastic and dwarf do.
Did you report me, jamric? Please tell me if you did.
We can still be meet friends if you did!
Out of curiosity, why did you ask @nizebaby ?
Good. Someone else has started a thread on autism. All mine seem to get deleted ...
I spoke about Alex on one of the deleted threads.
He is going to ask his doctor for a second opinion. The convincer for me is the way he ties his shoelaces. The experts charge thousands for their diagnosis. Will the surgery cough up?
The local magistrates court will be giving their own verdict on his behaviour in a fortnight.
I agree, I don't like people being referred to as disabled, autistic etc. I prefer to state, 'a child who has a disability', or 'a child affected by autism.'' More wordy but more humane.
If I am on a website where I see a parent stating, 'I have an autistic son,' I am always PMing her to tell her to always state, 'My son is affected by autism.' And autism is a very, very broad spectrum and being told someone has autism, doesn't help me in the slightest in understanding important things like:
a. what they are like
b. what they are capable of doing
c. how to interact with them etc.
In fact, I learn more about an individual when I am told, 'She loves Disney princesses,' or, 'He is a Barcelona fan.'
Now that is something, as an educator, I can work with.
As someone who is autistic, I find the "affected by autism" language patronising and silly. It's akin to describing me as "affected by maleness" as if it's some terrible affliction that I want to escape. I don't "have a disability", I'm disabled by the behaviour of others. As for nouns, I don't use it but I have no particular issue with "autist" which I have seen used elsewhere.
That's fine for you, but I think that there are too many generalist terms used for individuals, such as black, blonde, gay, disabled etc and perhaps there is a neater and more generally acceptable way of stating these things, if these things ever need to be stated. I am affected by a disability, but I do not like being referred to as being disabled. That I find patronising and silly.
But each to their own.
I might reply "Thank you for your opinion. I however will not be changing (or censoring) what I see as perfectly good vocabulary merely in order to placate certain other people".
Except you said that you were in the habit of correcting the parents of autistic children about their language choices, so you clearly don't believe "each to their own", you want to impose your language choices on us and on our families.
I wouldn't put it as bluntly as I have stated above. I would state to the parent who is describing her son like that, that in order to perhaps find tutoring support or a nanny etc., is not doing service to her son's needs. Rather than stating, as some parents do,
'I need a tutor. My son is autistic,' there are much better ways of getting the support the child needs, by describing the child, what they are like and mentioning they have this condition. As I mentioned above, autism is a very broad spectrum. Some children affected by autism can not speak, or attend to their toileting needs and then their are others who have the potential to gain PhDs.
Yes, it is useful to know that a child is affected by a condition, and that this may affect his teaching and learning, but I really do not like people being described in such ways as it tells us very little about them and their abilities.
And yes, we all have different opinions on this, however it is always very important that the opinion of the individual being referred to be taken into consideration. I have never offended or upset a parent by stating this, on the contrary, a lot of them agree with me that it is best to refer to their child as a child first and not a condition.
My son is autistic, could be written as, my son's teaching and learning, especially in English is affected by autism.
If someone who is has a disability, does not like being referred to as disabled, that needs to be noted, as does someone who is affected by autism, wanting to be called autistic.
And those categories can overlap - non-verbal isn't the same as non-thinking.
Not impose, that way too strong an assumption to make. But rather to give others my perception and an understanding as to why I believe in that way of referring to a child. And also, giving more of a description of the child and not just a label, is more helpful to gaining a fuller understanding of the uniqueness of an individual child.
I repeat, stating a child is autistic tells me nothing at all.