Comment by Aurornis | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Aurornis | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

That article is not claiming that “time blindness” is a real standalone condition. As the other commenter already explained, it’s not among the conditions with actual diagnostic criteria and agreed-upon symptoms.

The first sentence claims that it’s something people with ADHD might experience, not a specific condition. In other words, it’s just the therapy-speak way of saying “chronically late”.

Note that the date on the article is also very recent: Only a few months old. This date is after the trend was popular on TikTok. It was likely written in response to the trend, as a way of capturing search engine traffic from people searching for it.

This is representative of the issue I was describing: There’s a sense among some people that using the therapy-speak terminology for something transforms it into a different type of personality attribute, for which they can’t be held responsible. Saying “I have a problem with being on time” and “I have time blindness” are functionally equivalent, but some people want to believe they the therapy speak labeled version warrants different treatment.

So because those people are ignorant of the nomenclature, they must not really experience those issues? I never asserted that it was a standalone condition, in fact I attributed it as related to undiagnosed conditions that do have names.

Applying formal-sounding nomenclature does not transform accountability like you’re suggesting.

Also, being able to Google a TikTok-famous phrase and get hits from SEO-targeted blog posts like this doesn’t really make it official nomenclature. They’re just trying to capture traffic with trending keywords. This is a very obvious SEO article.

Saying “I have a problem with being on time” and “I have time blindness” are functionally equivalent. Applying therapy speak doesn’t change the situation.

This is all very much missing the point, though. Someone who believes they have “time blindness” should recognize that they have a higher need for additional measures to address their issue, including more use of time keeping aids, alarms, and even accountability from external parties. Trying to use a labeled condition to escape accountability for one’s actions is not only unhelpful, it goes against the entire purpose of therapy.

The problem becomes more clear when you imagine the same idea applied to other issues: If someone is constantly lashing out and yelling at people, they don’t get a free pass for saying they have “an anger issue”. They’re still accountable for the consequences of their actions, regardless of what name you put on it.

The intersection of this with employment, specifically, seems hairy to me.

Is time blindness a disability that requires accommodation? To what extent, and who decides? If not, what makes it different from other disabilities that do get accommodation or some kind of protected status?

(These are meant to be rhetorical questions, but I’m sure someone has a direct answer, so I’d be interested in that too, because I really don’t know)

JAN[1] says "time management" is a disability (limitation, in their words) that requires accommodation.

[1] https://askjan.org/limitations/Managing-Time.cfm?csSearch=10...

Employers only have to provide accommodations for actual diagnosed disabilities. And even then legally required accommodations only have to be reasonable. If the job fundamentally requires showing up for meetings and completing assignments on schedule then employers don't need to allow disabled employees to be late.

AHDH is an actual diagnosed disability. If I have to take meds that would leave you tweaking for 3 days then employers better allow me being late sometimes.

> better allow me being late sometimes

That would depend on the jobs requirements, wouldn't it? In some roles that might be a complete deal breaker. For example, anything customer/client facing. If you can't perform the jobs duties with reasonable accommodation, maybe you should find another job?

Similarly, if you are 3 feet tall you'll likely never be the worlds slam dunk champion. Not even if they provide you with a step-stool. It's not your fault, or the employers. Sorry, I guess.

Nope. A disability diagnosis isn't a blank check where employers have to accommodate everything you want. If the job requires being on time then at least under the Americans with Disabilities Act an employer is totally allowed to fire an employee who shows up late. There are some nuances here that won't fit in a comment so consult an employment attorney if you have questions about your legal rights.

You've really missed the point there, what I said was that these people who are using the term "time blindness" are not using official terms, and that ignorance does not detract from their life experience. Psychologists refer to this as executive dysfunction, which that article specifically mentioned.

I'm not sure why you're attempting to discredit it, was the Masters in Science of the author, and the review by a doctor not sufficient for you?

I never missed your point, I made no comment on people failing to hold themselves accountable for their behaviour. You certainly seem unable to comprehend that not everyone experiences time as you do.

> Applying formal-sounding nomenclature does not transform accountability like you’re suggesting.

"You have an unlicensed condition, citizen!"

That's not what they said. Whether your condition is diagnosed or not, it's your responsibility to take care of it. If you're chronically late, you should set timers or write notes or whatever helps—whether you've got class-A ADHD and take meds or just assume there's something wrong with your sense of time.

Just saying "I'm time blind, sorry not sorry, deal with it" is not an appropriate reaction to causing trouble to your surroundings.

You're missing my point. I'm not trying to deal with the 'conditions' that individuals or groups say they have. My point is that if a group says a person has a condition it's considered real, but if an individual says so, it's not. It's a point about deferring to authority over what is existent or not.

Who defines conditions, says that ADHD is real, for example? It wasn't in earlier generations. The are terms of social (group) art - special names that are generally accepted as meaningful.

In the USA it's mainly the American Psychiatric Association which defines whether ADHD or any other mental health condition is real.

https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm

Sure, I'm not disputing that.

Yeah this is sadly common. People with autism, adhd, or who are trans are infantilized and have their agency removed from them when dealing with the medical establishment. In a "I will tell you how you feel" way.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com