At first, there were “retarded” children. Then they became “mentally retarded.” Then “mentally handicapped.” Next, it was “mentally impaired,” followed by “mentally disabled.” A few years later, it was “developmentally disabled.” “Mentally challenged” also had a run in there at some time. Now, home from work a bit early and listening to the television in the background, I heard the term “mentally delayed” used to identify someone who was retarded. There’s only 746 hits on Google for “mentally delayed,” but people are using it.
Why does the term that means “retarded” change so frequently?
Before that, it was “mongoloids”, and before that, “imbicles”. But a large part of the reason is that the term starts being used as a slur, and so a new, “neutral” term comes into use.
Actually, “developmentally disabled” encompasses more than just mental retardation. In California, “developmental disability” is defined as 5 categories:
Mental Retardation
Cerebal Palsy
Epilepsy
Autism
Fifth Category - any condition that mimics the disability of any of the other 4 categories.
As scientists study more about these categories and are able to group them in a more meaningful way, names and classifications can change over the years. It’s not always about changing the stigma associated with mental retardation.
Mental Illness is yet another grouping of conditions that is more psychological in nature that I am not as well versed on. A person can also be dual-diagnosed with a developmental disability and a mental illness, even with multiples of each classification.
In the good old days, “moron”, “imbecile”, “idiot”, actually described just an IQ level, but not the cause of it. It became archaic when scientists discovered the conditions that caused the lower IQ levels.
The OP seems to believe there’s some single linear progression from one term to another. Perhaps various terms have been used at various times, all of which were imperfect or inaccuarate descriptions of the problems being dealt with?
Likewise, terms used for educational programs for such individuals are also subject to fairly rapid change. Special Ed has given way to Resource Classes, which are being replaced by Applied [subject]. I’d estimate that within a year or two of the debut of the next fashionable term, it too will be used as a term of derision by cruel kids who want to imply that their peers ride the short bus.
That’s what I’m thinking, like colored -> negro -> black -> African-American, only the changes are every five years instead of every 25.
Maybe one term becomes offensive, but I don’t see kids taunting each other with “Nyah! Nyah! You’re mentally handicapped!” yet. The kids progressed from “idiot” to “retarded”, but stopped there, while it seems like the mental health professionals kept inventing new terms every few years.
It was discussed by John Ciardi in his excellent Dictionary of Euphemisms. What happens is that a term become looked upon as pejorative. At that point, people begin to coin a euphemism for the term to create a neutral way to discuss the issue. But people begin to catch on, and the euphemism becomes a pejorative. Then a new euphemism is coined, and the process continues.
It’s not just mental issues. At one point, people were “crippled.” Then they were “handicapped.” Then they were “disabled.” Then they were “physically challenged.” The rate of this process seems to be speeding up as time goes by, which is the reason it’s not as linear as it once was: people come up with euphemisms before the term becomes fully pejorative. It’s also very rapid in the field of education, where instead of solving problems, it’s much easier to rename or redefine it.
Not entirely true… My oldest son is about to begin a “Special Education” program. The director of the program calls it that, with an apologetic nod to what we the parents knew as “special ed.” Yes, it’s for kids who have developmental, emotional, physical or learning disabilities or delays. But that is the term applied here in the public school district, according to the school administration.
Special Education can also refer to gifted and talented programs, BTW. I’m going to stop now, before I veer into GD territory.
I was at a Special Education PTA meeting tonight, and I’ve been around people involved in them for almost my entire life. They had resource rooms where I went to school and a few other out-of-classroom programs, which I understand are not in fashion these days, but that’s not a replacement for specal ed, it’s just one form of it.
Interesting; I didn’t know it was still in use anywhere. Then again, I’m no expert in the field, so there ya go. FWIW, I’ve always preferred “Special Ed” as it’s actually descriptive of what it is, and can be used at both ends of the performance spectrum for those with educational needs different from most.
Another condition that’s subject to fairly frequent name changes is the one where a person can’t empathise with others. They used to call such people psychopaths. Then, about about a decade or two ago, they became sociopaths. These days, the preferred term seems to be ‘antisocial personality disorder.’
I always thought the term “psychopath” was a little silly, since all it means is “one with a mental disease.” That’s pretty broad. Even sociopath (“social disease”?) is strange. I like the specificity of antisocial personality disorder.
But, “antisocial personality disorder” still isn’t a very good name. It implies, to me at least, a person who is excessively rude and unsociable. In fact, many sociopaths are quite charming and likable. The problem is that they don’t have an effective moral compass, due to their lack of normal empathetic ability.
It used to be–and still may be, since this was just a few years ago–that every student with an individualized education plan (IEP) at APS (Albuquerque) had to have on the IEP why the student needed an IEP. Amusingly enough, this was marked as “disability.” So, if you were in the gifted program, your disability was that you were smarter than a lot of people in the school, as it was marked “disability-gifted.”
I knew a guy who was both really smart and had a degenerative muscular problem (at least, I think this was his problem) that required him to always be in a wheelchair and have an aide during classes. Really a great guy to know. I’ve always wondered which one got more attention from the bureaucrats, the wheelchair or the brains.