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??

Ah I see

Maybe mnhq can fish it back up for us now they are reading/responding to the thread?

I genuinely want them to put my mind at rest.

fanjo, don't tell me what I can post. You aren't MNHQ.

If someone is rude and aggressive towards me I don't have to take it. If someone is behaving childishly I will say so.

ballmum, I'm not a lawyer but in retirement work as a volunteer with a group where dealing with hate speech has become an issue. Hence my opinion that it wasn't hate speech.

I've never said it wasn't unpleasant and untrue and said as much on the thread.

I said please don't. But on your head be it..

Can some of you wonderful mumsnetter do the following please:

Can i get it confirmed that the post was left standing after others were deleted?

And that there are other hate speech posts still publicly on threads?

I said please don't. But on your head be it..

Not sure what you mean by that, it sounds a bit like a theat.

Well it wasn't.

A close friend has informed us that after lots of tests, her son has Cystic Fibrosis and it got me reading about it online. As I've been reading up on it, I've come across adult signs of Cystic Fibrosis and it appears I have some of the milder traits. A lot of us probably do!

It made me think, that if I had been born now, instead of nearly 50 years ago, I would almost surely have had the label of Cystic Fibrosis given to me, which I would then have had to live with and carry for the rest of my life.

if I do have it, according to the list it's very mild and hardly noticeable and I think a label would have been more of a hindrance than a help throughout my life
Obviously in the majority of cases, a diagnosis can bring lots of much needed help and I think that's great.
But what if somebody has a really mild version? Is it right to label them and put them in a 'category'?

Wouldn't that be a burden? Especially if they didn't ask or want to be labelled.

This applies to all labels given to children.

You see Rowan the tone of that thread was problematic from the start, even if the intent wasn't malign.

Do my substitutions make it any clearer?

(And yes "milder" Cystic Fibrosis not picked up until adulthood is a thing.)

And the "Most of us do!" thing really needs stamping on.

I think we are all just SICK of the endless background DRIP of trivialisation of Autism.

And the implied criticism of parents who do the responsible (the ONLY possible) thing and get their DCs a diagnostic assessment.

Thanks for that Dacre, I keep thinking I was imagining what the OP came across like. But it is as laden and skewed as I remembered. I cannot see how anyone can think it wasn't goady

I just don't think the 'meant well' excuse covers it polter

Polter after re-reading the OP's posts I can see that, in the context of continually and unfairly having to defend the validity of a proper diagnosis, it is galling. Equally, galling is the judgment of another parent's actions, just for seeking help and getting their child's disability diagnosed.

Coming from my perspective, as I described in my earlier posts, I also understood the worry concerning 'labelling' and although I completely understood a diagnosis is valid and not a label and made this explicit, having had a DC who has been on the receiving end of stereotyping and being labelled I empathised with the OP. Even the moment when she acknowledged she saw herself as possessing some traits which can be identified as autistic traits, I had no reason to doubt her. Her fear that she could have been (mis)diagnosed which could have altered people's perceptions of her, I saw as perhaps understandable, again, primarily, as my child was at the receiving end of some unfair perceptions as a result of prejudice against additional needs. Although, she certainly needed to be reassured concerning the rigorous nature of diagnosis, I did not read her post as goady or malicious.

This perhaps shows my pre-conceptions and biases which relate to my own personal experiences, I wanted to be able to find common ground since I have not been able to find many people who can relate to the experiences I have had with SEN and my DC's treatment within the education system.

I am not trying to down play the wrongness of minimising disablism, my child has been on the receiving end of a certain amount of discrimination for their additional needs and it is horrible. However just to say I didn't pick up on it because I thought I saw something in the OP's post I could relate to my own and my DC's experiences.

A close friend has informed us that after lots of tests, her son Is blind and it got me reading about it online. As I've been reading up on it, I've come across adult signs of being blind and it appears I have some of the milder traits. A lot of us probably do!

It made me think, that if I had been born now, instead of nearly 50 years ago, I would almost surely have had the label of blind given to me, which I would then have had to live with and carry for the rest of my life.

if I do have it, according to the list it's very mild and hardly noticeable and I think a label would have been more of a hindrance than a help throughout my life
Obviously in the majority of cases, a classification can bring lots of much needed help and I think that's great.
But what if somebody has a really mild version? Is it right to label them and put them in a 'category'?

Wouldn't that be a burden? Especially if they didn't ask or want to be labelled.

This applies to all labels given to children.

Jason I'm pretty sure the comment was left standing longer because of a comment you made quite late on in the thread. Obviously I have no evidence though.

Polter after re-reading the OP's posts I can see that, in the context of continually and unfairly having to defend the validity of a proper diagnosis, it is galling. Equally, galling is the judgment of another parent's actions, just for seeking help and getting their child's disability diagnosed.

EXACTLY that.

after re-reading the OP's posts I can see that, in the context of continually and unfairly having to defend the validity of a proper diagnosis, it is galling.

Don't be silly it's fine because it's about ASD!

I wish someone could find the HQ Down's post.

You have more chance of hell freezing over.

The quote will be shortened / changed in the hope that no one will notice.

And thank PIG, i need witnesses to confirm the post stood longer.

A close friend has informed us that after lots of tests, her son Is hearing impaired and it got me reading about it online. As I've been reading up on it, I've come across adult signs of being hearing impaired and it appears I have some of the milder traits. A lot of us probably do!

It made me think, that if I had been born now, instead of nearly 50 years ago, I would almost surely have had the label of hearing impaired given to me, which I would then have had to live with and carry for the rest of my life.

if I do have it, according to the list it's very mild and hardly noticeable and I think a label would have been more of a hindrance than a help throughout my life
Obviously in the majority of cases, a classification can bring lots of much needed help and I think that's great.
But what if somebody has a really mild version? Is it right to label them and put them in a 'category'?

Wouldn't that be a burden? Especially if they didn't ask or want to be labelled.

This applies to all labels given to children.