For one of my class's finals, I have to write a two page paper in one hour, on what an addict is. This bothers me,and not because I have to write a paper in one hour. Admittedly, I have done that before. It bothers me because an addict is a person. A person who may have made and gotten caught up in some poor choices. A person who may have had a very difficult childhood. A person who may have done some very selfish and stupid things, or a person trying to cope with secrets. Who knows?
Any one of us could develop an addiction. Life is complex and we often get addicted to things while trying to escape. We are all different, and thus we act differently when struggling with addiction. Asking me to summarize is asking me to generalize. I know and love a lot of addicts; I am not comfortable lumping them together. I try my hardest not to lump any group of people together. I know that my readers are probably thinking that the professor wants the clinical definition of an addict, and I realize the importance of having such a definition. Look it up, though. It is three sentences long. We are doing people with addictions a disservice by saying that if you do ABC you are not an addict , but if you do XYZ , you are one. It makes treatment difficult to individualize, and closes the minds of helping professionals.
I think this is just an example of problems that come from a society that thrives on summary and black and white answers. I have spent a lot of time working with children with Autism. People would ask me "What are they like?" I responded "Which one?" Yes, kids who are autistic have similar tendencies, but they are all different people with different interests and issues. Overemphasizing their similarities and down-playing their uniqueness sets them up for failure. If new teachers believe, coming out of college, that they will be able to tell with one interaction whether or not a kid has Autism (or ADHD, or Dislexia, etc.) , they will be completely unprepared to provide them with an adequate education. This is also true for someone who may try to give them psychological or physical assistance. You cannot help someone who you are trying to label, you're too busy labeling. There isn't enough time to figure out what they need from you.
Remember that the VAST majority of teachers, therapist, doctors, nurses, and social workers enter those fields because of a desire to greatly improve peoples lives. So by teaching them to generalize, we are selling them short, too. They deserve to feel satisfied with their work.
I've scratch the surface of the danger of summary. Other than causing problems for individuals who need treatment and our workforce, generalizing of course, also, causes intolerance. This is in my opinion, is its worst side-affect. That's a whole other post.
We all just need to slow down and deal with people rather than diagnoses. Stop summarizing, and observe.
Any one of us could develop an addiction. Life is complex and we often get addicted to things while trying to escape. We are all different, and thus we act differently when struggling with addiction. Asking me to summarize is asking me to generalize. I know and love a lot of addicts; I am not comfortable lumping them together. I try my hardest not to lump any group of people together. I know that my readers are probably thinking that the professor wants the clinical definition of an addict, and I realize the importance of having such a definition. Look it up, though. It is three sentences long. We are doing people with addictions a disservice by saying that if you do ABC you are not an addict , but if you do XYZ , you are one. It makes treatment difficult to individualize, and closes the minds of helping professionals.
I think this is just an example of problems that come from a society that thrives on summary and black and white answers. I have spent a lot of time working with children with Autism. People would ask me "What are they like?" I responded "Which one?" Yes, kids who are autistic have similar tendencies, but they are all different people with different interests and issues. Overemphasizing their similarities and down-playing their uniqueness sets them up for failure. If new teachers believe, coming out of college, that they will be able to tell with one interaction whether or not a kid has Autism (or ADHD, or Dislexia, etc.) , they will be completely unprepared to provide them with an adequate education. This is also true for someone who may try to give them psychological or physical assistance. You cannot help someone who you are trying to label, you're too busy labeling. There isn't enough time to figure out what they need from you.
Remember that the VAST majority of teachers, therapist, doctors, nurses, and social workers enter those fields because of a desire to greatly improve peoples lives. So by teaching them to generalize, we are selling them short, too. They deserve to feel satisfied with their work.
I've scratch the surface of the danger of summary. Other than causing problems for individuals who need treatment and our workforce, generalizing of course, also, causes intolerance. This is in my opinion, is its worst side-affect. That's a whole other post.
We all just need to slow down and deal with people rather than diagnoses. Stop summarizing, and observe.
No comments:
Post a Comment