I have a son with 145 IQ, ADHD and ASD, and a daughter with "just" the high IQ, and I really would like this forum to understand that being gifted IS ALSO a special need, in that it comes with its own set of challenges that are outside of the range of normal.

So "neurodivergent" seems great, and "disabilities" seems great too. Regardless of whether you believe that ADHD is a disability (when it's severe, it most definitely is!), those two words seem to cover all the spectrum of neuropsychological situations that are outside the range of normal.

So I vote yes.

No

Anonymous wrote:Remember when disabled was considered an inappropriate term? We can’t keep chasing the latest fads on words.

Labels, Labels, Labels...

How about kids with special needs and disabilities. Covers everyone.

When i'm chatting with another mom from school or someone else who doesn't know DS's official diagnosis, and the convo is casual enough that i don't feel like dropping in fancy diagnoses or formal terms (that can change the mood really fast), i just say that DS has "some additional needs" or "some special needs". Seems like use of the word "some" softens the term and is absolutely still an accurate description of what's going on (he DOES have some special or additional needs relative to other kids). It somehow seems a little less aggressive than saying "he is special needs".

I don't really give a shit about all the nomenclature though, and mostly like to keep diagnoses to ourselves. Much like if someone has some other medical disease, they don't go around dropping the diagnosis in every random conversation; but if it comes up organically (like, why you won't be able to attend that event next week) people would say "oh i've got some medical stuff going on....".

Anonymous wrote:What’s next, you demand the schools change the name and spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours reprinting reports and anything with the phrase on it?

Who will be expected to do that? Teachers, admin? Will it take additional time from their day or will they hire new teachers to compensate?

If you’re reprinting an old report will someone be offended if the phrase appears and chastise you for it?

Do you expect them to rename special education teachers and change all the university level curriculum as well?

Is this really so important to you that you think the time and money that could otherwise be used by a child with special needs is better spent canceling the phrase “special needs”?

Relax, people should be able to freely discuss their opinions and yes feel free to share all your questions - but it's exactly that personality that is living in the past, wake up. There's another thread just below this one asking if SPED should no longer be used...it's a terrible term and no one should feel like they have to accept it in their daily lives either...

Remember when disabled was considered an inappropriate term? We can’t keep chasing the latest fads on words.

What’s next, you demand the schools change the name and spend thousands of dollars and hundreds of hours reprinting reports and anything with the phrase on it?

Who will be expected to do that? Teachers, admin? Will it take additional time from their day or will they hire new teachers to compensate?

If you’re reprinting an old report will someone be offended if the phrase appears and chastise you for it?

Do you expect them to rename special education teachers and change all the university level curriculum as well?

Is this really so important to you that you think the time and money that could otherwise be used by a child with special needs is better spent canceling the phrase “special needs”?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not all special needs are neurological in nature, makes zero sense.

But what is so special about "special needs" - it's a terrible term and more and more practitioners, clinicians, and academia are moving away from it.
What about "Kids Needing Extra Supports"

Parents are using it. We don't want to use medical technical term in our everyday life.

Try to use "neurodiversity and disabilities" term during informal conversation and see what people think of you.

Anonymous wrote:Not all special needs are neurological in nature, makes zero sense.

But what is so special about "special needs" - it's a terrible term and more and more practitioners, clinicians, and academia are moving away from it.
What about "Kids Needing Extra Supports"

Not all special needs are neurological in nature, makes zero sense.

Anonymous wrote:We've had this discussion before and every time, people complain that their children "just" have ADHD and so aren't disabled. FWIW, I agree with you that "special needs" is a terrible term.

Agreed, so why don't we just have "Neurodiversity and Disabilities"?

We've had this discussion before and every time, people complain that their children "just" have ADHD and so aren't disabled. FWIW, I agree with you that "special needs" is a terrible term.

This seems like the ADHD and ASD Forum but it's actually for all special needs, not just those.

May seem very minor but also appears a bit outdated...