The Red-Light District

I myself think "mental illness" is biased. I don't consider myself ill, although I have mental health problems. Instead I see my suffering as a natural concequence of more than ten years of abuse in my childhood. There are alternatives to the medical, psychiatric illness model. The network of users and survivors of psychiatry actually prefers ”psychosocial disability” to "mental illness".

I am Norwegian, and in Norwegian I think we have a better word than disability: "funksjonsnedsettelse", which literally means function reduction.

Nor do I agree that "having" a problem as much better than to "be" or to "suffer from" it. I may be depressed, traumatized or feverish. But only a fool would believe that a human being can't be more than one "thing".

PC nonsense. No one can give offense, it can only be taken. When you realize this, you realize freedom. You cannot insult me unless I am willing to accept it. If you call me "stupid" or "insensitive," I simply understand that you are telling me something about yourself, rather than me, since you don't know me.

The whole tone of this article is, by your logic, more insulting than the individual terms you discuss. Your constant use of "should" and "shouldn't" is patronizing...as if you have the right to tell us what we should and shouldn't do.

Just who do you think you are?

Nevermind, your article tells me.

I think it does matter how we talk about one another. Words do matter. I just want to add, though, as mother to an autistic boy, that person-first language in the autism community has been considered inaccurate and potentially harmful when it comes to autism, which we have of course in the DSM as a developmental disability. Jim Sinclair wrote an important, quintessential article about how he doesn't "have" autism. Saying this suggests it's something that could be treated or done away with. It suggests some sort of disease. Instead, he feels he IS autistic. His neurology is different from those who aren't autistic. It is an essential part of who he is.

"I am with disability/illness" - ???????- I have never heard this expression and... it sounds silly to me.

I 'have a disability' (but it hasnt got me)/am 'disabled', I am unable to do some things, unable to live in the way most people do- but of course am able to do some things that some 'normals' cant, as of course everyone, 'disabled or not' has abilities and 'inabilities'.

and to me it's not so much the actual word/expression used that can be offensive it's the meaning that people infuse the word/expression with-
any word can be made to be 'offensive' (gay at some point used to mean "happy/joyful"...)- and offensive words can be 'non offensive'-
if my friend with a big smile says "eh crip, would you like me to help you with this?" I am not at all offended, nope I'm happy that he is aware that I might (but also might not, as my 'inability' to do things varies) find it difficult to do 'whatever'

what needs to change is the attitude to and the understanding of "disability"- just once again changing the word/name/expression isnt going to change anything-

I get where you are coming from. My disability is invisible. The supportive device I wear is under my clothes. I don't really tell people about it or any of the limitations I have. I found that once people knew about it, it was the primary way they saw me and the lens they used to see everything else about me.

Mine is the result of a lasting injury. To me, I am the same person but with the limitations of the injury.

I've never seen the word by the commenter from the Norway, but it's going to be my new label for myself. I'm the same person, but with reduced functioning.