Talk:Learning disability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Its fine that you do not agree that Learning Disabilities should be in category disease. However, they are considered by most people to be diseases. They are in medical texts. They are treated with medicine and therapy by doctors. Taking them out of the category diseases because it sounds negative is quitePOV.

Also, Dyslexia is by no means a small thing for many people with it. Certainly it can be small for someone with mild dyslexia, but categorizing the disease as a whole that way is rather dismissive to people who have severe difficulties because of it.-NickGorton 19:15, 28 August 2005 (UTC)

Classifying learning difficulties along with the common cold is also quite POV I reakon. We would not say at an autistic person is 'desiesed' and when we treat somebody with learning difficulties we don't try and cure them like we would a desease, just to help them overcome their difficulty. Yes of course learning difficulties are in medical texts, but so are a lot of things that are not desieses, such as breaking your leg for example. I know you are a doctor, and I am not, but I really don't like that classification. Learning difficulties are much cloaser to a disability and I think that most people with disabilities (myself included) would be asolutely horrified if somebody came up and said 'you have a desiese'. I reakon that the difference is that a desiese indicates some outside influence coming and effecting the body such as germs, or even just the ravishes of time, but a disability is just the way somebody is, it doesn't change much and the only way you can get rid of it is to make some change to that person such as adding prothsetics for a phisical disability or strong drugs for some psycological disability, and even then it doesn't go away but is just hidden or something like that.

Sure dyslexia isn't that small, but even the profound dyslexia isn't as dibilitating as a lot of other things. I would really love it if you could give the name of some other smallish learning difficulty but dyslexia is the best I can think of. I have some dyslexia myself (part of the reason that you had to spell check this page, so I know that I am generalising and being over simple, however I thought it would be good if we could suggest a milder learning difficulty, as well as creating red links for some pages that need writing. I guess the same thing could be said about any learning difficulty, if it is mild you can get around it, but I think that the difference is that as a percentage of total sufferers many more people have mild dyslexia then other learning difficulties, and that the worst case senario is not as bad. (c.f. the common cold is a mild desiese, it's not that you cannot die of it, it's just that almost everyone who catches it doesn't and will recover quickly). --Sim 19:12, 29 August 2005 (UTC)

NPOV tag[change source]

An anonymous user has placed an NPOV tag on the top of this page, however I think that this article is perfectly good. Can anyone else see anything? Archer7 16:12, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Thoughts on using the phrase Learning Differences?[change source]

I do not suggest this in an effort to use a more "politically correct" description of the condition but to suggest a more realistic name. Everyone learns differently for many different reasons, using the term disability can make a person feel hopeless and less than. I look forward to feedback. bobdog54 (talk) 11:27, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

No, because the phrase is too vague. What we need to capture is that some people do not get to the standards of performance which would make for a normal life in a modern community, or whose behaviour makes it difficult for them to fit in. That is captured by learning disability, but not by learning differences. Also, there is broad agreement as to what topics should be included as learning disabilities. As an encyclopedia, we have to think "what will people expect to see under such-and-such title"?
Incidentally, I don't think the page does an adequate job as it is now. Much more is needed on how these disabilities are classified and defined. Macdonald-ross (talk) 11:49, 17 October 2016 (UTC)