Down Syndrome man looking for girlfriend

[MannyMoeAndJack]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1162401/Will-sleep-Downs-syndrome-son-asks-mother-helping-21-year-o ld-lose-virginity.html

I tried to think of a case where a DS man or woman has had child/ren, but couldn't - surely this must have happened; does anybody know if it has?

Yes, one would say red haired woman. That's the whole point, which it seems you have missed.

no dd's disability disables her, how ever many ramps ect you put up she will still be disabled.

Yes Riven, World Health Organisation makes an interesting distinction between an impairment, handicap and disability that really gets one thinking.

but she would still needone to one care, so I still think it is the disability that disables. of course it is better if the enviroment is disabled freindly.

I do see what you mean, but even if all thw owrld was dd freindly, she would still be dd unable to walk....

I get that

God, I hope this guy gets his girl.

And moondog, I haven't missed any point. If you want to make 'DS man' gramatically correct, you would write, 'Down syndromic man', which is rarely, if ever used. Rather, 'DS man' is commonly written. Now that I have thought some more about the way that nouns and adjectives are used, it is clear now that, 'DS man' is incorrect and I have said already that I would not use this syntax in future. However, I disagree with you that there is a hidden slight against disabled people when the incorrect syntax is used; rather I think people just use 'Down syndrome' as an adjective by mistake.

Out of interest, do those affected prefer, 'blind/deaf man' or 'man with visual/hearing impairment'? I would say, after reading this thread, that it is the latter but I guess the former syntax is still used.

MannyMoeAndJack I once aske on here about the ad where they talk about a deaf/blind child.
so your not the only confused one.

2shoes, it's the flexibility of the English language that causes the confusion. Riven has stated above that it's acceptable to say, 'disabled person' and in my book it's also acceptable to say, 'autistic person'. These two examples give the impression that it's OK to use this syntax with other words, which can lead to, 'DS man'.

It's also usual to say, 'a blue-eyed baby' or a 'brown-haired child' or 'a black person' rather than using the longer syntax: 'baby with blue eyes' and 'person with black skin' (although I have heard that it is not uncommon (perhaps in US?) for the following to be used, 'person of colour').

It's easy to get confused and to make mistakes but language is a blunt tool.

I would be interested in hearing what are the WHO definitions of, 'disability', 'impairment' and 'handicap', preferably with some examples of correct and incorrect usage?

In case anyone is interested, I just did a brief search on the WHO Website and found the definitions of, 'disability', 'impairment' and 'handicap' contained within the following article (on the first page):

www.who.int/bulletin/archives/79(11)1047.pdf

From these definitions, my ds is sensory impaired, which makes him both disabled and handicapped. I didn't realise that the word, 'handicapped' was still in use.

However, another page on the WHO Website talks about, 'The Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities' - which seems to be at odds with what Riven said above, 'You would say 'disabled person' not person with a disability'

Now I am confused!

Not as confused as I am. I just can't cope with the brain-generated visual imagery of 'disabled person'. Doesn't work for me

It is a good idea to think about language and how it is used but I think you can go round in circles with the arguments sometimes - We talk about 'Disabled Parking Spaces' but not ' NT Parking Spaces' . Parking Spaces for the Disabled/Or Those with Disabilities would make more sense but English allows us to mix up descriptions this way - switch to Latin ?

What would the Latin be for 'disabled parking space!" Did they have them for the chariots??

Well there is a lift in the Collesseum now ! Equal rights to see mass murder !

He is on This Morning at the moment. He seems really sweet.

cyber - yep, agree completely. By trying to get the words right, you risk tying yourself up in linguistic knots. However, it is good that the plasticity of English allows itself to be modernised and fine-tuned but I wonder how other languages (that are not as word-rich as English) cope??

Riven Tue 17-Mar-09 08:31:39 Add a

"We are disabled by barriers/society, not our impairments."

But what about if you're in pain? Whatever society does, whatever clever devices get invented and funded, dd will still be crying with pain on a regular basis, because living in a body like hers hurt. I suppose you could train yourself to not care about it- but it's hard.

Cory, to some extent, you can, too. Or get pain relief that works fairly well. With arthritis I know that I'm in pain every day at some stage. And the ASD sensitivity doesn't help either. Sometimes fairly mild pain, sometimes the sort that screams at me. I've mostly learned to ignore it, and it doesn't stop me from enjoying life. But it does make it harder. It has given me a much, much better understanding of mobility problems, though. A set of wonky steps and I'm struggling to stay upright. A countryside ramble becomes more like a mountaineering assault course. Yet small achievements become as triumphant as any marathon runner could feel after 26 miles.

For me, the social model is a bit faulty by itself, but it's still useful...

Did anyone hear Matthew Bannister interviewing Otto and his adoptive mother this afternoon?

Although Otto was asked some questions, I found it quite patronising that a lot of the questions about how he felt were put to his mum instead of him

I think the media although may have twisted this a lot, I can't help feeling that his mum is actually appealing for someone to take on the role of his primary carer (speaking as someone who felt dropped into the deep end by the parents of my XP, DS's father, at a very young age) but I really hope that isn't the case