To HATE the phrase "lived experience"?

I get what you are saying, linguistically

But I think the idea is to distinguish between someone who actually has the condition and someone who (for instance) just has experience of treating the condition.

I don’t think you know what an oxymoron is.

Yes!

No it isn’t?
Second hand and first hand experience exists OP. Why are you trying to force your opinion that they are the same thing?
You asked a question. You’ve been shown to be wrong. Maybe take this as ‘lived experience’ of being corrected.

But is that your lived experience or just your experience?

You can't see that having an oncologist who has had cancer themselves, can be even more beneficial than having one who has been taught about cancer and worked with many patients?

You really can't see the difference?

It's experience gained first hand as opposed to learning about it from a book. For example professionals advising drug users are often ex-addicts who know the pain they clients are experiencing rather than just knowing 'about' it. Ditto domestic violence, bereavement, child SA etc.

But there is when putting together a panel of people to review services, if you don't want to waffle on and make people tune out. It's a simple way of explaining what perspective a person is coming from.
It was still a fairly new phase when person centered planning and service users reviewing and help to plan how the service is delivered, came into being. It went back further when communities (often after riots etc) were involved in shaping their future.

It then extended to medical. Especially when arrogant male surgeons were telling women that their symptoms or pain was imaginary.
My DP's stoma nurse's professional experience is useful, but the lived experience of the people on the FB page is actually better.

I used the term quite recently here, apologies if it didn’t make sense. I didn’t realise it would be an irritant. However, in my defence, it was in response to a post suggesting that people of my age were likely to have only worked for 35 years before a long retirement. I’m late 70s, and whilst I can’t answer for every one of my age, my working life, from leaving school at 15 was nearer 50.

I’ve lived a heck of a lot longer than most people who post on here about old age, many who have quite strong opinions about what our lives were and are like. Younger people can’t have experienced old age, and older people’s experiences are very different. Hence my use of the term to describe mine.

Judging by some of the people here, yeah.

It’s is either linguistic laziness (shortening of a longer form) or just the changes that language has due to time, society etc;

As a trans woman she has not really experienced living as an actual woman.
As a trans woman she hasn’t the lived experience of a woman.

It is a general demonstration of the fall of the genitive in most languages. Interesting as a linguist.

If we are trying to plan a new service for the local authority I work for I can have knowledge as a worker for the domestic violence uni. I understand how the systems work but I haven't had experience of it or understood what it is like to go through the system and therefore it's important to speak people with experience.

You have knowledge. The people who have experienced it, have experience. You don't need the word 'lived' in there.

Actually, it's common for health practices in particular roles to have both professional and lived experience. In some roles lived experience is essential.

Its annoying but only because its over used and stretched beyond it's initial function, described up thread.

Many concepts jump from academia into mainstream media and this happens. ' Narrative' is another example, plus all the language from psychotherapy...

Nah

No it isn't. "I have experience of treating patients with schizophrenia" / "I have schizophrenia". Or do you not "live" your professional experience?

Isn't the phrase needed because of the range of meanings of "experienced". As in the direct (a) "I experience hip pain whenever I climb stairs" versus (b) "I am experienced in rheumatology, specialising in hips and knees"

So the admittedly slightly cringy modifier "lived" is added just to make crystal clear to arrogant (b)s that there is some essential expertise out there that they don't have

See my previous post.

If you're talking to someone it's very very easy indeed to say something is your personal or professional experience, without resorting to a phrase like lived experience.

The context will show if it's your personal life or that as a professional.

No one needs to say 'lived experience'. There are plenty of ways to say 'This is my personal experience' or 'This is my experience through professional training and working with clients ' Or both- whichever is appropriate to context.

There has historically been a huge issue with psychiatrists’ experiences being prejudiced over those of people with actual mental health conditions. Which is part of why the term lived experience developed.

Are you this rigid about everything OP?

Because using 'lived experience' in funding applications get you higher on the points list.

To me it implies an inescapability of the experience.
For example, I lived as a poor, hand to mouth student in my younger days.
This is different from the ‘lives experience’ of being truely poor and growing up in poverty.

Professionals may say "in my experience" when talking about their area of work and they mean in my experience of working in this area. If they were to say lived experience you would know they have also been in the situation.

Yes it did. It was used in mental health. As was expert by experience.

It's nonsense.

The context tells people all they need to know.

Words are not used out of context.

As an employee there is going to be a difference between what you experience in yur job and what you experience in your personal life.

Whether you are talking to someone or writing about it, they should know the context and if they don't, you need to explain - without using silly phrases like 'lived experience'.

A journalist for example, who talks about their 'experience' makes it very clear in context if it's about THEM or the people in the feature.