Ann Coulter's use of the R-word

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

But ALS is an simple acronymn, easy to remember with no unfamiliar medical-sounding words in it. Trisomy 21 sounds very clinical at best, especially since most people probably have no idea what either trisomy or 21 (in this context) mean. I, too, would be surprised if it caught on easily.

I guess my question would be what those with Down Syndrome/Trisomy 21 and their families prefer it be called. They'd get the deciding vote in my book.

Over time, medical terminology sometimes trumps patient wishes. It may not change quickly but it should.

[shirley1929]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Trisomy 21 is by far more common than Trisomies 13 and 18 which are also not compatible with life and not in the public lexicon, so this is not a problem. There is no need for anyone but physicians and those effected to know what Edwards (18) and Patau (13) entail or what their names are.

Probably, but as someone who read almost every pregnancy book she could get her hands on, 1) I'm scared to pronounce Trisomy because I have never heard it spoken, and 2) In my mind, Trisomy =/= Life. DS/T21 = life (and then some!), so I do think it should have a distinguishing name. DS is clearly the wrong one...but I don't think that automatically makes T21 the correct one.

Originally Posted by MysticCat

But ALS is an simple acronymn, easy to remember with no unfamiliar medical-sounding words in it. Trisomy 21 sounds very clinical at best, especially since most people probably have no idea what either trisomy or 21 (in this context) mean. I, too, would be surprised if it caught on easily.

Exactly

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

It may not change quickly but it should.

I agree, now that I know the background on the DS name (admittedly, I didn't know it before). I'm just not sure Trisomy 21 is the right one.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Over time, medical terminology sometimes trumps patient wishes. It may not change quickly but it should.

Perhaps it should, but a change like this shouldn't be imposed from the medical profession, especially since we're not talking about patients in the conventional sense of someone with an illness. We're talking about people born with and living their lives with an unalterable condition, and about their families. It's not just something these people have, it's part of who they are.

As the father of someone with an eponymic syndrome, I can vouch for the fact that it can, in a sense, become part of one's self-identification, without any regard at all to any knowledge of the person for whom the syndrome was named. The use by many of "Aspie" these days is an example of that. And I'll acknowledge that "Aspie" is not universally liked by those with Asperger Syndrome. But many do like it, and it shows an appropriation of and identification with "Asperger" independent from knowing anything about Hans Asperger.

I can easily see why many, especially in the medical community, consider it offensive to "honor" Down by calling the condition Down Syndrome. But to be honest, I can also see how many with Trisomy 21 and their families would find it offensive to have a "new" name imposed on them. It's the difference between "we have decided we'd rather be called ___" and "someone else has decided that we shouldn't be called ____ and should instead be called ___." In a situation like that, my inclination would be to go with the preferred medical term in medical contexts, but go with the term preferred by those with the condition in all other contexts.