Why take your kids?

[DisneyMom]

Addendum to my post above:

http://autismdiva.blogspot.com/2007/07/ ... -rush.html

Syndrome- I read the link. Very interesting, but I think the focus was more on
Doctors who might diagnose Autism to get services/therapy rather than say PDD-NOS diagnosis that has traditionally not qualified. All of this is to supposedly line the pockets of therapists who provide early childhood intervention. the Blogger stated that many of these children end up not having any deficits at all. So did the therapy change the outcome for these kids? We'll never know. There is a huge movement to catch Autism by the medical community, I think infants are being screened for it a minimum of 3 times in their first year. I'd like to think that is for the patient's benefit, not the therapist's.
All that being said, I think these cases are different than "parents lying to get special priviledges". I really don't know where to stand on the therapy fence, since my son never got ABA,etc, just normal Special Ed services that public school provided at the time, such as they were. I wonder if he would be much improved if he got them, but I kind of doubt it, he seemed to make his strides spontaneously, if late in the game.
Other than SSI, which provides him with approximately $600.00 a month to support himself on, and we are grateful for that, I am not aware of any special programs out there for him. The case manager at SSI explained that the money is intended to keep disabled living with their families.
If he gets a paying job, that amount will be adjusted down. Either way, he will probably always live with me, as California is horribly expensive. Hope I can figure out a plan for him after Hubby and I die.

[hobie16]

I get snarky remarks for using "big" words...

One of the better lawyer's in San Francisco philosophy was, "Why use a small word when a big one will do." I always thought it was an intelligent was to go.

[Mayonnaise]

One of the better lawyer's in San Francisco philosophy was, "Why use a small word when a big one will do." I always thought it was an intelligent was to go.

Did you read the rest of the paragraph? The point is that not all "big" words are actually long. "Apt" is three letters long. I caught flack on another message board for "whilst." From what I gather, "big" words are just words the speaker doesn't know, or doesn't normally hear, regardless of size. The trouble I have is knowing which words other people are likely to know, and which ones they aren't, aside from the obvious (scientific terminology, trade jargon, etc.)

8^)

[BRWombat]

One of the better lawyer's in San Francisco philosophy was, "Why use a small word when a big one will do." I always thought it was an intelligent was to go.

Eh, I'm not so sure. I'm all for proper use of words great and small -- and from my posts here you guys know that I don't shy away from the big words myself. ("Sesquipedalian" is my all time favorite word. Look it up.)

But one of my biggest pet peeves as a lawyer is the use in our profession of big words when smaller ones will work as well. Too often I see this being done when it's not necessary, and it's usually because either (1) the lawyer is trying to make himself or herself sound important, or (2) it's to confuse or conceal the true meaning of the words from someone.

Given that language is intended for communication, the trend across the legal profession is plain English and has been for decades, but you still get some who are proud of their "legalese" and use it wherever possible. Granted there are times I have to craft some pretty inelegant sentences and use some big words to remove the possibility of misinterpretation, but for the most part I try to write clearly so that anyone can understand.

[Mayonnaise]

("Sesquipedalian" is my all time favorite word. Look it up.)

My 6th grade English teacher assigned us 5 Sesquipedalian words to look up and learn the meaning of each week. We had to put the word, it's definition, a picture from a magazine representing it, and use it in a sentence on a page of looseleaf and put it in our "Sesquipedalians" binder. On Friday she'd call on 5 students to define each of the 5 "Sesquas", and heaven forbid you didn't have yours done and you got called on, you'd get marked a 0 for Sesquas for the week.

8^)

[darph nader]

Sesquipedalian? When in the heck would you ever get to use that? Scrabble maybe. :D: "Yes Alex,I'd like sesquipedalian for $1,000". (yes,I looked it up)

[GRUMPY PIRATE]

Did you read the rest of the paragraph? The point is that not all "big" words are actually long. "Apt" is three letters long. I caught flack on another message board for "whilst." From what I gather, "big" words are just words the speaker doesn't know, or doesn't normally hear, regardless of size. The trouble I have is knowing which words other people are likely to know, and which ones they aren't, aside from the obvious (scientific terminology, trade jargon, etc.)

8^)

You should do what I do went someone complains at wrokd about BIG words. My reply is "You don't understand the word?, I'l use smaller words and more pithy statements when I am talking with you, and I will talk slower so you can comprehend"

Usually shuts them up.

Eh, I'm not so sure. I'm all for proper use of words great and small -- and from my posts here you guys know that I don't shy away from the big words myself. ("Sesquipedalian" is my all time favorite word. Look it up.)

But one of my biggest pet peeves as a lawyer is the use in our profession of big words when smaller ones will work as well. Too often I see this being done when it's not necessary, and it's usually because either (1) the lawyer is trying to make himself or herself sound important, or (2) it's to confuse or conceal the true meaning of the words from someone.

Given that language is intended for communication, the trend across the legal profession is plain English and has been for decades, but you still get some who are proud of their "legalese" and use it wherever possible. Granted there are times I have to craft some pretty inelegant sentences and use some big words to remove the possibility of misinterpretation, but for the most part I try to write clearly so that anyone can understand.

hehehehhehee

Reminds me of when DW was considering going to law school. She became a para-legal for a few years to see if she would like the work.

When some of the lawyers would speak in latin terms, she would correct their latin. (she went to a private school in Boston and had six years of latin!)

(yeah, I got her to write out some "bad" sayings for me! hehehehehehe)

[DisneyMom]

Reminds me of when DW was considering going to law school. She became a para-legal for a few years to see if she would like the work.

When some of the lawyers would speak in latin terms, she would correct their latin. (she went to a private school in Boston and had six years of latin!)

(yeah, I got her to write out some "bad" sayings for me! hehehehehehe)

Even geniuses like to have fun! :p:

RUM? (you said I could invoke it anytime! ;) )

[Alyssa3467]

Talk about disgusting--does anyone here remember that really sad case of the boy who had a twin sister, when they did the circumcision they used an electric device with the power turned on too high, and the resulting disfigurement led a doctor to suggest maybe they should raise him as a girl. Then they were referred to a psychologist who believed gender was flexible, and he pushed the parents to make their son a daughter, and when he started getting into adolescence he was made to take female hormones. That kid had an uphill battle. Worst of all was he and sometimes his sister would have appointments with this quack, and he would actually force them to commit incest with each other. He would also molest them, the boy especially. Finally, the boy broke free, but the damage had been done. He got a new, more knowledgable psychiatrist, had a doctor restore what he'd lost, at least partially, and found a nice lady with kids from a former marriage. He could be a husband, but not a father, so he became a stepfather. But despite all this, that stupid quack couldn't be convicted, and to the day he died he refused to recant or otherwise admit he was wrong in his beliefs. Unfortunately, despite all the good that was finally coming his way, that young man committed suicide. You can imagine how the parents thought.

I think what you're trying to describe is the so-called "John/Joan case," involving David Reimer and Dr. John Money. The twins were boys, and as stated, a circumcision did not go as planned, and Dr. Money suggested raising the boy as a girl, thinking that nurture would win over nature. And despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, Dr. Money continued to call his work on Reimer a "success." :mad:

It always bothers me seeing a little boy going for the princess toys, or the Minnie or Daisy plush, and being told he can't have them because they're for girls. I think kids should be allowed to play with whatever toys they want. And if little Timmy says he wants to be a girl, deal with it appropriately. Beating the snot out of him and making him play with boy stuff isn't the way to go and will only make him distance himself in the future.

I'm going to stop here rather than ramble on...

[Widget]

I hear you. At work we are told to ask professionally. There are days when I think that I am the only one who listens. I often see 'official' paperwork filled out with partially spelled out words. That annoys me no end. It is one thing to leaves notes to yourself and use abbreviations but when it is something that anyone, including customers, can see it should be done correctly.
My biggest pet peeve had to be the use of self mute for self mutilation. (I'm a licensed veterinary technician and sometimes see animals that have chewed open sites.) Every so often I'll have another person come up to me and say so and so is a self mute. I've gotten to the point where I will ask "It doesn't make any noise?" I usually get a blank stare back for a few seconds and then get a sarcastic "No. Self mutilation. You know what I meant."

Did you read the rest of the paragraph? The point is that not all "big" words are actually long. "Apt" is three letters long. I caught flack on another message board for "whilst." From what I gather, "big" words are just words the speaker doesn't know, or doesn't normally hear, regardless of size. The trouble I have is knowing which words other people are likely to know, and which ones they aren't, aside from the obvious (scientific terminology, trade jargon, etc.)

8^)