Dear Tipsters,
 
At one time, the degrees of "mental retardation" were identified by the 
adjectives moron, imbecile and idiot, terms that we do not officially use 
today. However, when Binet's test was used to define them, this was a big step 
forward from the previous rather subjective judgments that were being used.
 
The terms we use may change, but there are still "degrees" that are 
operationally defined by ranges of scores. 
 
Stuart
 
 
___________________________________________________________________
 
Stuart J. McKelvie, Ph.D.,           Phone: (819)822-9600, Extension 2402
Department of Psychology,              Fax: (819)822-9660
Bishop's University,
Route 108 East,
Borough of Lennoxville,
Sherbrooke,
Québec J1M 1Z7,
Canada.
 
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 
Bishop's University Psychology Department Web Page:
http://www.ubishops.ca/ccc/div/soc/psy
___________________________________________________________

________________________________

From: Christopher D. Green [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thu 1/26/2006 6:58 PM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences
Subject: Re: Mental Retardation - Improper terminology?


Jean-Marc,

I think that the phrase "mentally retarded" has been replaced by other 
euphemisms in recent years (e.g., "developmentally delayed"), especially in 
communitites of individuals who view themselves as "advocates" for such 
individuals. Note, however, that "retarded" was itself a euphemism when it was 
introduced. All euphemisms like this begin to lose their appeal when the 
general public begins to see through them and they then re-acquire all the 
negative connotations they were originally supposed to evade -- about once per 
generation. This is a never-ending cycle. You may wish to use the term your 
student has suggested simply to avoid pointless controversy. Or, you may decide 
to use some "official" term (such as that in the DSM) and explain to the 
student, and class (since she made it a public isssue), that you are using it 
as a technical term (to avoid confusion with other superficially similar 
conditions).

Regards,
-- 
Christopher D. Green
Department of Psychology
York University
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
M3J 1P3 

e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
phone: 416-736-5115 ext. 66164
fax: 416-736-5814 
http://www.yorku.ca/christo/
============================
.



Jean-Marc Perreault wrote:


        Hi Tipsters,

                   I'm facing a rather surprising situation at the moment. In 
discussing Intelligence and its distribution in the population, I naturally 
touched on the "gifted", as well as on "mental retardation". One student was 
offended that I would use such a "crude and archaic" term. She then went to the 
Learning Disability centre where she volunteers and shared with them that I was 
still using such terminology (mental retardation). According to the student, 
when she told them about it (director, supervisor, psychologist), they just 
about spit their coffee on the spot! She reports that they could not believe I 
would use such terminology. Wow!

         

        Ok. So, after talking with the student, I started to wonder if I had 
perhaps missed the boat at some point or another. So I went back to all the 
Intro texts lining my bookshelf (thanks to all the publishers who keep sending 
them my way), and looked up various sections on intelligence. Well, they all 
use Mental Retardation as a classification, even the Canadian Edition (as 
Canadians sometimes tend to be very politically correct, I thought that for 
sure I would find some form of warning in there).

         

        Here are two that I looked at:

         

         

        Myers, D.G. (2004). Psychology (7th ed.). Holland, MI: Worth.  On page 
439: The degrees of Mental Retardation.

         

        Lefton, L.A., Brannon, L., Boyes, M.C., & Ogden, N.A. (2005). 
Psychology (2nd Canadian ed.). Toronto, ON: Pearson. On page 298.

         

         

        And the list goes on... Geee... Even the DSM has it as a 
classification. It feels rather strange to being accused of being so 
discriminatory and backwards when in fact I strongly urge my students to stay 
away from labelling individuals. As such, I press them to avoid using such 
terms as "schizophrenic, alcoholic, depressed", and so on when referring to 
individuals. I tell them to talk about the conditions instead.

         

        So, I'm curious to hear about your opinions on the matter. Is it still 
ok to talk about Mental Retardation? Or should I move towards what her mentors 
suggested: Mentally challenged, or even "gifted" (she said they were moving in 
that direction to replace mental retardation).

         

        Cheers to all!

         

        Jean-Marc 

        --- 
        You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
        To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 



--- 
You are currently subscribed to tips as: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

<<winmail.dat>>

---
You are currently subscribed to tips as: archive@jab.org
To unsubscribe send a blank email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to