to hate the term "special needs"

[witchandchips]

to find it at best patronising and at worst offensive. What does a wheelchair user have in common with some one on the austic spectrum? Apart from allocating funding across schools why do we need a catch all term, surely it plays into the hands of those who think anybody different is "stupid"

interesting. what would you suggest as an alternative?

yes. I hate it too. Have a sticker on my wheelchair that says 'don't you special me'

Prefer 'additional needs' but special is patronising and making out someone is different.

I don't know tbh. Considering that dd's school offered support for the children on the autistic spectrum and took 3 years (!) before they did anything for my physically disabled dd, I would have been delighted for her to have been lumped in the same group. I don't care about words- I just wanted her to be given the same chance to learn. (oh, and to go to the bathroom in a manner compatible with human dignity).

The thing children with special needs have in common is that they need more resources. That is what is meant by Special Needs. It's a message to the LEA/school that you need to get your finger out and organise some funding. It's a message that says you have to make an extra effort to provide a level playing field. What the extra effort actually entails is the next stage; this is just the flag saying 'attention'.

If people think that autistic children are stupid, then I'd say their opinion matters very little anyway.

Witch those people who assume someone with any kind of disability is ''stupid'' are probably less intelligent than those who have Special needs in the first place.

I must say I prefer special needs to 'Disabled' I think that categorises people more than SN. SN refers to extra needs of a person such as ramps for wheelchair users or maybe a bit more attention for someone who may have a mental disability, well thats not the proper meaning I know but thats how I think of it.

So yes YABU in a way.

I think my point is that we only need a catch all term in very few circumstances. Having a term like "special needs" is just another way of separating children out from the mainstream as we are not even taking the trouble to remember their precise condition just lumping them all together as different. What is wrong with xx is a wheelchair user ffs?

I have reached the point where

a)I mostly regard language as a mechanism to make people either help my son or leave us the fuck alone and

b) I realise that a percentage of the world are in fact fuck wits and it doesn't matter what appropriate term you come up with they will turn it into a sneering and small minded insult and

my sister was referred to as, 'retarded'...

I'd have a problem with terminology in any case, witch .

-Ah yes, X- well, she is a wheelchair user on some days, maybe between 8 and 10.30, then she walks, but she may not be able to do the stairs, and by 1.34 it will have changed again...and then things will all be different on Tuesday, because it will be some other part of her body that plays up.

(have just completed DLA form and it's murder; like you, they expect that all disabled people can be summed up in a simple phrase. Can I just have something big and convenient? Please?)

mary warnock hates what she has created too

the DLA form is the work of the devil.
I have filled several sections in with
How many time per day ?- between 1 and 80
For how long each time? between 30 seconds and 1 hour

I have to explain and interpret every life vent for DS2 and they think it is just about speech.
AND they made me complete 3 times in 5 years . Although last review that relised that they needed to give him nmore money rather than less which was quite funny

Well I would used 'Specific Educational Needs' instead of SEN as it is.

with Additional Needs for other areas.

So my DS (and DD to a lesser extent) would have both Specific Educational and Additional Needs

It's a minefield though. I always agonise before using any of these terms in case it's not the right one. I hate to offend. But if I did offend, it certainly wouldn't be on purpose.

DH is now working in a special school (which I can see might be a somewhat patronising term ) - how do you refer to the children in that school? They mainly have severe behavioural problems. I admit that special needs seems quite inappropriate but I think that is the usual term.

I do see your point I think. Each child is an individual so either don't mention the issue or refer to it specifically. Is that what you mean?

disabled rights movement prefers 'disabled people' or 'additional educational needs'

I use (maybe wrongly) additional needs

This term I use to mean a child needs a bit more help/support/thought sometimes - I use it for permanent or temporary conditions or situations - so a child moving house or going through a divorce - may need more support of cuddles, someone with mobility issues may need a bit more room to manoeuvre or a bit of kit to help out, education needs may need more time to complete something, post-op may need temporary support for playing, development delay more support while learning. They would all needs a bit more consideration in some area (but not all obviously)

I may be wrong but I feel this approach meets more children needs that the 'special' so we do things differently approach

Schools up here in Scotland use the term "Additional support needs" which I think is at least less patronising than "special". It covers both "disability" and also temporary things like short-term medical issues, bullying, family circumstances, basically anything which means they assistance in benefitting from their education.

additional needs is the more pc version.

airlines are very scientific about it and have a checklist for impairments (1 for mobility, 2 for sight, 3 for hearing, 4 for lds etc - not the exact ones but y' get the idea)

it makes me laugh but it's eminently sensible ('this is dd2 with additional need 1' etc)

very monty python 'we are all individuals'
'i'm not'

don't like 'special' but tend to the avoidance of euphemisms in any case.

'this is dd2 and she has cp - sometimes she uses a wheelchair'

SEN is a whole other kettle of fish - even the special schools can't differentiate between mld and sld from what i can work out!

I find it hard to get past the idea that the needs are 'special' or 'additional', as they're not - they're the same needs for education and support as any other person.

What is different or special is how we meet them. I think by categorising needs in this way, we are expected to see them as something abnormal and costly, rather than a normal part of the spectrum of need.

Not sure if this makes sense!

I think the 'additional' bit is for me to do (if that makes sense)

yabu I like it, It is better that having to say that my dd is disabled. It just keeps it lighter imo.

I am used to SN now and would prefer it not to change just for the sake of change. That said, I initially found 'special needs' hard because it is too non-specific, it could refer to foreign-born people or the mentally ill, it could mean anything. Same goes for 'additional' needs.

I would have prefered something like 'disabled', or even more specific 'visually impaired', 'wheel-chair dependent', etc. Pagwatch is right that small-minded people will always try to turn these labels bad, so rather than keep dithering about and changing the preferred wording, better to reclaim the existing words and put energy into pushing hard the message "Disabled" people/people with "SN"/etc. are still just people like any others.

I agree pagwatch sums it all up

yabu - sometimes it's easy to have a catch-all, I agree with cory that it's more of a red flag than anything else.

I agree with 2shoes - sometimes it's easier just to be non-specific, and say your child has SN rather than go into all the details.

I find it easier to say "He has special needs, he can't talk" re DS3 than "He is autistic".