Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4

Original poster

Is this wrong or am I being too pc...

81 replies

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:02

Dd1 (6-Y2) did an assembly yesterday for 'jeans for genes day' all lovely, school raised money for a good cause, brilliant.
The assembly was about genes and what they are/how they affect us.
They explained genes as being like a recipe, then said 'sometimes someone has the wrong ingredients and the recipe goes wrong, if a person has the wrong ingredients they might have to use a wheelchair or a hearing aid or take lots of medicine'
I thought that was the wrong way to teach 6/7 year olds about disability, I'd be mortified of dd told someone in a wheelchair they were made with the 'wrong ingredients' it's just not true!
I feel as though I should say something about it, but am I overreacting?

OP posts:

pianodoodle · 21/09/2013 09:08

When I first read it I also thought the use of the word "wrong" wasn't the best so you're not the only one who picked up on it!

DontPanicMrMannering · 21/09/2013 09:10

Nice thought BADLY executed yanbu

PeggyCarter · 21/09/2013 09:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

lljkk · 21/09/2013 09:13

Untangling...
Not all people with wonky genes are disabled.
Lots of disabled people don't have any genetic oddities.
Explaining genes is tricky at best of time, I usually describe it to DC as an instruction manual written with mistakes. So recipe analogy seems reasonable to me.
You're touching on the whole social model of disability. Which personally I take issues with. I don't think it's adequate to say that genetic variations are merely variations. They are real problems a lot of the time.
But if you truly believe in the SM then I am entirely wrong. Minefield.

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:13

That was my thought-different should have been the word used. I can't imagine a member of the deaf community taking very kindly to being told they had the wrong ingredients for example.

OP posts:

BackforGood · 21/09/2013 09:13

Same as Joyful. Good that the school supported 'Jeans for Genes' Day, but someone could do with rewording it.

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:17

What's the social model of disability?
I try to be as aware as possible, and have had disability awareness training at work, but no in depth knowledge or personal experience.

OP posts:

froken · 21/09/2013 09:23

Yanbu.

It also makes it sound like everyone else is made from tge same recipe.

They could have said we all have our own unique recipe which gives us blue/brown/green eyes and strait or curly hair and makes us tall or short but.

ReindeerBollocks · 21/09/2013 09:25

I don't like that analogy at all, even if it is more age appropriate. It implies that those with genetic disorders are not normal, and it would have upset both my DS (whose has a genetic disorder) and DD who, at four years old would have understood that this was insulting towards her brother.

I was upset at the way our school handled it too though - they asked DS to get up and talk to the school about his medical problems. Whilst we've always been open about it, DS is getting to a stage where he'd prefer not to discuss it and I'm not sure how factually correct it would have been. I think jeans for genes is a great idea, just needs more forethought into explaining it to schools.

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:25

They did do a bit on hair/eye/skin colour being caused by genes, and genes coming from our parents, that was separate.

OP posts:

OxfordBags · 21/09/2013 09:26

I have three relatives who are disabled. Not a single one of them is disabled due to any genetic factor. Many disabilties are down to chromosomal factors, not genes (and none of my rellies are disabled due to chromosomal factors either!). I'm sure it was well-meant, but all that talk of 'wrong' genes would perturb me too. It seems to infer that disabled people are somehow inferior or abnormal, neither of which are true, it goes without saying.

namechangesforthehardstuff · 21/09/2013 09:26

YANBU. Except maybe for writing 'too Pc' in your title.

PC has got bad press (mostly from the Daily Fail) but it's just a way of thinking about what we say to try to ensure we don't offend each other too much; politeness, if you like. What could possibly be wrong with that?

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:29

They did then go on to talk about the Paralympics and Ellie simmonds and how having short arms and legs didn't stop her from winning lots of medals, it was all well meant, just worded badly I think, which makes me feel even more that I should say something.
So is suggesting another time that the word different is substituted for wrong enough?

OP posts:

namechangesforthehardstuff · 21/09/2013 09:29

Sorry that sounded a bit , it was meant,with a

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:30

Totally agree namechanges, I just thought using that phrase would meant I got a full spectrum of views...

OP posts:

lunar1 · 21/09/2013 09:31

I don't like it either, I think describing someone as wrong could lead to lots if playground nastiness.

OnaPromise · 21/09/2013 09:36

social model of disability; basically the idea that any 'disability' is only a problem because of barriers put in place by the rest of society, whether they are in the physical environment or social attitudes. As opposed to the medical model which would see people as having something wrong with them which need to be fixed.

tallwivglasses · 21/09/2013 09:40

I fucking hate Jeans for Genes day for this very reason. Years ago I went to a conference about disability issues and someone pointed out that if the geneticists and eugenics people had their way the room would be practically empty.

While I understand genetic screening can prevent some very debilitating conditions, which is wonderful, I also think there's a real danger of us moving into 'designer baby' territory. Autism testing particularly scares me and they can bang on about early intervention as much as they like, we all know it's to get rid.

I'm horrified at both explanations - the one by the headteacher and the one that used a pupil to demonstrate 'imperfection'.

To the poster who asked about the social model of disability I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned during disability awareness training - or was it one of those "here, put on this eye mask - isn't it dreadful to be blind" type sessions?

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:47

I see, I work in theatre, the main, and loudest group we come across are people from the deaf community, my disability awareness training was run by a deaf person, who was very much a believer in the social model of disability, as I believe most deaf people are (I'm aware I may be offending people by not capitalising deaf in some places for example, but I'm on my phone and lazy!)

OP posts:

CailinDana · 21/09/2013 09:48

The social model of disability sees disability as just being different and it suggests that the concept of disability only exists because our society is set up for only one type of person i.e the able bodied able minded person. A person isn't disabled by their own physiology they are disabled by a society that won't accommodate their differences. It makes a lot of sense when you think that only as recently as the start of the 20th century being a paraplegic was considered akin to being in a coma - you were a non-person who could do nothing. Then a doctor started the paralympics and now a being a paraplegic is considered hard but no barrier to having a pretty much normal life.
Similarly babies with disorders like down syndrome and spina bifida were left to die or sent to asylu. Although attitudes still have a long way to go people with disabilities are less disabled these days simply because society is more willing to

CailinDana · 21/09/2013 09:49

accept and accommodate them.

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:54

I think when trying to keep things relatively simple for a Y1 assembly the social model would be better than the medical model? It is such a difficult and nuanced thing to explain, this was an assembly performed by the children so they were taught to say 'wrong ingredients' by heart, which makes it very likely to be repeated elsewhere IMO.

OP posts:

namechangesforthehardstuff · 21/09/2013 09:55

Yeah I guessed you knew that OP. More for the people with the 'full range of views'

WhereDoAllTheCalculatorsGo · 21/09/2013 09:56

lljkk, you have proper given me the rage. You have issues with the social model of disability?
Care to explain before I get all sweary?

Original poster

sillyoldfool · 21/09/2013 09:57

Sorry Y2, not Y1, haven't got used to her being in a new year yet!

OP posts:

Flip

1 2 3 4