Find some of the recommended hidden restaurants in the metro here. Plan your next food trip now!read more
Looking for a driving school? Here are some recommended schools you may want to check!read more
"As the screen darkens and the credits start to roll, you are left with a sense of having witnessed something extraordinary."read more
Check out this thread to know how to win exclusive movie merch from Fist Fight!read more
magkaiba naman kasi ng scenario ang binigay mo situation like person with diabetes is a diabetic tas icocompare mo sa child with autism.
case to case basis ang term na paggamit ng autistic. kasi iba ang approach nito sa medical field unlike sa iba nabanggit mo (Same as a person with diabetes is a diabetic. Same as a person who's anal retentive is a tight a$s etcetera etc.).
ganyan rin sinabi ng family doctor namin, na avoid using the term "autistic child" when referring to person with autism.
Last edited by physio; Aug 29, 2009 at 04:00 AM.
Referring Children with Autism as Autistic Kid is a different scenario from person with diabetes calling as diabetic.
[spoiler start] If I may ask, are you even a doctor or a therapist by any chance? Cause I think you should read first your PT/OT Code of Ethics book, might as well check out the Medical Code of Ethics.
Well, just in case you don't know what I am talking about. [/spoiler end]
nagtataka lang ako, bat todo depensa kayo kay josh, pero nung panahon ni L.A. Lopez eh ang daming nanglalait sa kanyang pexer? wait, may sakit ba si LA Lopez?
(which includes PDD-not otherwise specified, autism spectrum disorder, asperger, rett syndrome and child disintegrative disorder).
Dev'l pediatricians usually diagnosed a child based on his/her delays in different developmental areas (cognitive, social skills, gross motor, fine motor, language and communication , self-care skills)..
rumors circulating before said that Josh was actually diagnosed with autism by most well-known dev pediatricians in the country, but kris could not accept the label 'autism' to her son that's why she asked for another dev ped's professional opinion, that dev ped diagnosed josh with ADHD, thus everytime she talks about him on tv, she always say my son has ADHD, and not autism...
gifted autistics in a certain area (like playing instruments, or certain crafts) tawag dun ay 'splinter skills'; if ang batang may autism ay nakakitaan ng ganitong galing sa isang larangan, mas magandang i-encourage or i-train ang bata, he/she can be autistic pero pwede pa rin silang magkaron ng sari-sarili nilang career sa future.
bakit ba kasi maraming OA, I don't see anything wrong calling Josh "autistic"...e totoo naman eh..what's the big fuzz anyway?
Whether we use medical or derogatory terms associated with these psychological disorders, a discriminating person will always discriminate even if he does use correct medical terms, and a compassionate person will still care even if he is unaware of the correct term to use to these children.
Teachers at SpEd changed the term MENTALLY RETARDED to MENTALLY CHALLENGED and the DISABLED to DIFFERENTLY-ABLE. But this won't change the treatment one gives to these special children.
My point is, call Josh an autistic for as long as you are not speaking in degradation, and you're talking to people whom you're not offending.
I have a brother who is a special child and it breaks my heart if one calls him abnormal or retarded. Maybe, after all, it will be an issue of sensitivity not only towards the special children, but even to the family members as well.
Here's my take on OTT political correctness...
If the term connotes a negative aspect, people don't want to be associated to it. People don't want to be labeled because of their defects like "kirat" or "ngongo". Several years ago, it became offensive to call somebody lame, so you should use "handicapped". Now, "handicapped" is offensive and you should use "physically challenged".
That's why blacks don't like being called blacks...they're "Afro Americans". But decades ago, 'black" was a more politically correct term to use instead of "neegrow". Who knows, "Afro-American" will be offensive a few years from now.
Unfortunately, once they change their labels, their defects get associated with their new labels and in time they find the labels offensive and have to rename themselves all over again.
even using abnormal for me is not derogatory, it's a word to describe things that are "not normal". while "*****" is just a slang for abnormal.
well, it is not socially accepted to use these terms. but in reality there is nothing wrong really, I mean it's just we over analyzed things sometimes.
what's the tagalog for "autistic" then?
For some reason, if you use the vernacular (tagalog), it becomes doubly offensive.
i never knew that "autistic" is derogatory, & i don't think it is...
it's a direct adjective for a person with autism...
well, it depends on how one uses it to pertain to anther person, i guess...
& how one accepts the condition of their loved one...
it seems to me that people who get too sensitive & anal about this political correctness are, in some way, still in denial stage.
calling someone autistic seems ok for me.
but how about calling out somene as retarded or retardate or a "retard" for that matter?
parang di ba.
offensive to whom? To the retard? He is born with mental retardation right?
All these changing labels I mentioned in my previous post I didn't realize, is a previously discussed phenomenon called "euphemism treadmill" or "pejoration" (Semantic change).
Connotations easily change over time. "Idiot", "imbecile", and "moron" were once neutral terms for a developmentally delayed adult of toddler, preschool, and primary school mental ages, respectively. As with Gresham's law, negative connotations tend to crowd out neutral ones, so the phrase mentally retarded was pressed into service to replace them. Now that, too, is considered rude, used commonly as an insult of a person, thing, or idea. As a result, new terms like "mentally challenged", "with an intellectual disability", "learning difficulties" and "special needs" have replaced "retarded". A similar progression occurred with:
lame → crippled → handicapped → disabled → physically challenged → differently abled
although in the case of "crippled" the meaning has also broadened (and hence has been narrowed with adjectives, which themselves have been euphemised); a dyslexic or colorblind person, for example, would not be termed "crippled". Even more recent is the use of person-centric phrases, such as "person(s) with disability, dyslexia, colorblindness, etc.", which ascribe a particular condition to those previously qualified with the aforementioned adjectives.