Hacker News Reader

Comment by verisimi | Hacker News Reader

> 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