dear mn hq why are so many disablist threads being left up

[Samcro]

one today for instance and mn hq post
"We don't think that this thread is disablist, it is a valid discussion that we don't think should be shut down. "

yet it has obviously been reported.
cause hurt and upset
how is that making life easier(or better) for the sn community`?

or this message from mn hq
That CBeebies is just far too PC
Thread deleted
Message from MNHQ: Thanks so much for all the reports about this.

Although there has been some interesting debate and discussion, we do agree that the OP and some of what ensues is disablist, so we have decided to delete.

how can these be interesting debates??
\not long ago mn hq said that they were going to be quicker dealing with this stuff
what happened??

Perhaps if MNHQ came on to actually clarify what was meant rather than deleting the thread and letting us all take our own meaning from it then it wouldn't be so bad. As it is, they've posted something that at best was an ill thought out reply that didn't have much to do with the discussion or at worst, confirmed they subscribe to the same mentality as other ignorant posters.

'in a post above there was a comment that a borough was simplifying their definitions so that everyone on the spectrum is labelled as autistic'

Everyone on the spectrum is autistic.
The most recent diagnostic criteria (DSMV) has removed aspergers syndrome as a diagnosis. A person who might previously have been diagnosed with aspergers would now be diagnosed with ASD.

Because I want to know the difference between autism being up for debate and my (other, as I am also autistic) disability being up for debate. As you were defending it, I thought you seemed to agree with mnhq's post, so I wondered what you thought.

I took it to mean that MNHQ share the commonly held view that sometimes ASD is a label that doesn't really mean anything, so is fair game to being discussed in terms of children just being horrible etc.

We'd already had 'some children with a Dx are just horrible children' and assorted other BS on the thread by then, so it did rather lend itself to that interpretation didn't it?

Everyone on the spectrum is autistic.

I think we just need to chant these basics until everyone gets it;

Everyone on the spectrum is autistic.

Autism is a disability.

Autism is not bad behaviour, poor parenting or a mental illness.

High functioning doesn't mean less autistic.

Comorbid diagnoses don't mean less autistic.

'Everyone is on the spectrum' is errant bollocks.

And repeat.

Ooh, about a six and a half...

Perhaps we need to set up a "have you had that baby yet" type of website relating to a scale. So someone asks, we give a "number" on the scale, they google it and it leads to a site that just says "you are a twat"

Beyond

beyond you mean something like this?

bfy.tw/7H5U

Because I want to know the difference between autism being up for debate and my (other, as I am also autistic) disability being up for debate. As you were defending it, I thought you seemed to agree with mnhq's post, so I wondered what you thought.

I have never said that autism as a disability is up for debate and neither has MNHQ. Nothing to defend, it didn't happen.

😂

Not deleting the debate-y thread shows that it is up for debate?

I'm thinking a link to let me google that for you could be the new approach to questions about autism - labelling , the autistic scale, is it easy to get a diagnosis, etc etc.

The thread was asking if a diagnosis was always helpful, although unfortunately the op used the word "label" which people took exception to and caused a massive thread diversion.

But it wasn't as simple as that Silver, if it was exception wouldn't have been taken.

The tone of the op was very goady and minimising, and unfortunately MNHQ's comments backed up that tone. That, and many other threads left standing with the same debate and minimisation around ASD are what this thread is about.

Jacob :o

In a bid to be constructive, could we ask for another Myth to be added to the list? This is the current list:

MYTH 1: Behaviour disorders are a fashionable excuse for bad behaviour and poor parenting

MYTH 2: If your child has a disability, you're given lots of easily accessible support

MYTH 3: People who get disability-related payments for their children are scroungers

MYTH 4: Language about special needs doesn't matter

MYTH 5: People with autism are unaffectionate geniuses

MYTH 6: you can always tell when someone has a disability

Is it detrimental to label someone with DS?

Is it detrimental to label someone with CF?

Is it detrimental to label someone with paralysis?

Is it detrimental to label someone with deafness?

Is it detrimental to label someone with blindness?

Would any of those ^ questions be up for debate?

It's not just the word label though. People who have diagnoses don't get them for shits and giggles, or for some sort of collection, they get them because they need them.

Even without the 'label' word, why is it okay to ask if an autism diagnosis is actually needed? The question in itself is offensive, suggesting that it is some sort of "diagnosis du jour" (a phrase that has been allowed to stand on another thread btw)

Even without the 'label' word, why is it okay to ask if an autism diagnosis is actually needed? The question in itself is offensive, suggesting that it is some sort of "diagnosis du jour" (a phrase that has been allowed to stand on another thread btw)

Indeed.

And that left without the 'restriction' of a 'label' they'd somehow get over it and emerge non-autistic

Agreed re the word label. Replace it with diagnosis and it's still offensive.

I have a bit of a cough, is labelling it as asthma benefical? I think nowerdays I would meet criteria for diagnosis, after all, everyone is a little bit asthmatic.