To HATE the phrase "lived experience"?

I think in these examples you have given, the person would have used the phrase incorrectly. A bit like if a person said "I literally did that". Pointless.
However, in a Healthcare setting, considering and including people with 'lived experience ' is important when setting up a service for people who have a particular condition. As they have lived experience of that condition.

I am a lived experience ambassador for oliver mcgowan; all that I do/have done in life is through a neurodiverse lens, so I am able to share a depth of experience that those who support people with autism would not have.

But you are not able to do this. You are able to share your personal experience, you have no idea that it is the same as other autistic people without relying on what they say - in which case you are passing on secondhand evidence too.

i presume as you mention autism, you have autism, so why presume there is a common ‘neurodiverse lens’ that gives you the same view as someone with learning disabilities, dyslexia, cerebral palsy, epilepsy, very high IQ….?

Interesting debate as I'm interested in language and it's allegedly one if my strengths.

I think the term "lived experience" is useful as it offers a shorthand insight into the potential impact of any experience, and most often it seems to be applied to traumatic experiences. The devil is indeed in the detail as every individuals experience is unique, however there will be commonalities that, for example, support services can identify, then build on and adapt to individuals.

I personally find it useful to know that someone I'm talking to has been identified as having "lived experience " of x, y or z because it means I can hopefully avoid sticking my foot in my mouth by waxing lyrical about things that I don't have experience of but can perhaps theorise about, and be miles off the mark. I think it helps inform sensitivity.

The arguments regarding the professional approach based on say, diagnosis and research are interesting, as I have "lived experience" of being dismissed and belittled by doctors and other professionals because my direct experience of events and situations doesn't fit their academic model and leads to conflict. We see it all the time on threads about trauma and extreme situations, the rush to tell people how they "should" think, feel or behave, rather than accepting that people react differently depending on a whole host of factors and need to work through and process things in a way that works for them to hopefully achieve a beneficial outcome.

There is a tendency to want life with all it's experiences to be formulaic, a tick box mentality if you will, but we're not robots or computers, there is constant adaptation and evolution, it's an almost fractal process in my mind.

Getting fixated on this phrase is a bit pointless, as it does serve a purpose. If you don't like it, fair enough, but the snippy comments about playing "top trumps" and "bending over backwards to avoid othering" in services are pretty petty and suggest some sort of ego wound.

Live (your experience) and let live (their experience) I say.

For me the problem is when 'lived experience' becomes part of the discourse of opression olympics, used in everyday speech ('my lived experience trumps your (presumably unlived) experience'). As a phrease that indicates a category of knowledge, in for example a research project, differentiating between professional experience, academic experience and lived experience can be useful. As in I am studying poverty but also have lived experience of poverty. The adoption of the phrase as a means to symbolise 'therefore your experiences of X are lessser', is dumb. It is not what the phrase was designed to indicate, and is a reflection of the mad culture wars idiots have created by having a little bit of critical language, but no critical mind.

I have lived experience of working with copy editors who think their opinions trump everything and make corrections that change the meaning because they don’t understand the subject matter 😉

IME buzzwords/terms come in and out of fashion. People don’t tend to say ‘lean in’ quite so much these days, but it was all the rage a few years back, due to Sheryl Sandberg.

IMHO, language matters and doesn’t always evolve in a good way. For example, it’s now common for a mixed gender group, or indeed a group of all women, to be referred to as ‘guys’. So the male term is now commonly used to address women. If you looked at it the other way around, would men be happy being referred to as ‘gals’ as a collective term?

There's no difference hence no need for the term "lived".

I think the term is more to do with changes in thinking about how problems are addressed, centering the sufferers rather than the experts. It is not necessary from a language point of view

Your comments about ‘getting frothy on Twitter’ betrays your dismissal of ‘lived experiences’ that don’t accord with your view - reflecting your activist led sector.

Well obviously, experience of being homeless Vs experience of working with homeless people.

@FancyBiscuitsLevel · Today 09:25

^ - what term would you have used previously for someone who was homeless, isn’t now and is working in the sector, so has both professional and lived experience of homelessness.^
“experience of homelessness” could just imply that they’ve worked with people who are homeless, wouldn’t specify their different circumstances of having lived through it too.'

-I am homeless
-I work with/I support homeless people.

That's all you need..

It's to do with redressing the balance between expertise gained through study/job and expertise gained through 'lived experience'. So as an oncologist one might be experienced in cancer treatment, and in fact and expert in the field; as a patient one might have 'lived experience' that adds nuance, perspective and new understanding that can't be gained through experience as a doctor. Similarly, you can be an expert in marxism/economic inequality, 'experienced in the field' without 'lived experience' of poverty.

I do agree with the op, that If someone says they have experienced something, the inference is that it has happened to them, but I think there may be a more nuanced difference?

I’ve experienced racism - I’ve been on the receiving end a few times.

I have a lived experience of racism - Racism permeates my life every single day.

Hey, little songbird - lovely to hear its having some impact. I am a late diagnosed female (40) who has significant need; according to my report, but yet I've bumbled through life - I really want to help other girls/women be diagnosed/detected earlier.

But you have lived experience of being a teacher of autistic children.

Like experience of being an immigrant Vs experience of working with immigrants.

In most cases lived experience just adds an emphasis, it shouldn't be necessary for meaning, but I think it's come about through taking views of people who use the services, experience the disabilities etc rather than just the paternalistic expert views of doctors, policy makers etc. in that sense it's a definite good thing as long as people realise that a single anecdote isn't necessarily representative of the wider population. There is sometimes a danger of that too. A single voice of someone with "lived experience" shouldn't be used to shut down debate

Can I just feed back to you that I did my Oliver McGowan training with lived experience ambassadors recently and I found it incredibly useful and helpful in reframing some of my thinking. Thank you for your time and input in doing this.

@Cattreesea - what term would you have used previously for someone who was homeless, isn’t now and is working in the sector, so has both professional and lived experience of homelessness.

“experience of homelessness” could just imply that they’ve worked with people who are homeless, wouldn’t specify their different circumstances of having lived through it too.

I agree. It is a relatively new term and I don't think it means anything.
Either you have experienced something, you have supported someone while they have experienced something, you have witnessed someone experiencing something or you haven't experienced something.
They are all lived!

It could be argued you have lived experience of working with people going through homelessness, or lived experience of providing homelessness services, but not direct experience of homelessness.

I've only really come across it in the NHS in the context of patients / service users being described as having "lived experience" of their condition. To me it makes sense.

But, if my children started telling me they had "lived experience" of being a school child I'd tell them to stop talking nonsense. So I think it depends on context.

But don't get me started on "reaching out" as a term.

I am a lived experience ambassador for oliver mcgowan; all that I do/have done in life is through a neurodiverse lens, so I am able to share a depth of experience that those who support people with autism would not have.

I actually think the OP is the flip side of “it’s PC gone mad, can’t say anything these days” types - in that adding words/terms is unsettling as removing offensive ones. Some people really really struggle with language and social norms evolving to fit new situations.

Much easier to claim it’s other people being wrong and stupid.

Language evolves and changes, concepts and ideas and social norms change.