NLD a phony diagnosis?

Hasn’t the LDA from time to time made disclaimers about virtually all speakers and authors in general?

Hasn’t the LDA from time to time made disclaimers about virtually all speakers and authors in general?

Hi,

I don’t know the answer. I realize that no matter who is sponsoring a conference, they can’t promise that every speaker will be wonderful.

But I do have a problem with an LD organization inviting a speaker who says a specific type of LD is a phony diagnosis. If they were to say the same thing about CAPD/Dyslexia, most of the visitors to these boards would be outraged and rightfully so.

What if NAMI invited a speaker who said that schizophrenia is due to bad parenting? Again, people would be outraged. That’s why I don’t see this as simply an issue of CA-LDA not being able to guarantee that all speakers will be good.

Also, an organization like CA-LDA has a responsibility to think of the consequences of this action. If several educators who have no idea what NLD is (realistic scenario) and hear Ms. Lemer talk and get the impression that NLD is minor and easily remediated, then students with with NLD can forget about obtaining any accomodations.

The issue in my opinion is that the NLD Community understands that a skeptical public doesn’t believe the seriousness of our difficulties even though we don’t like it. But it never crossed our minds that an LD organization would invite a speaker discrediting NLD. That is the ultimate in betrayal and cannot go unchallenged.

PT

I share your concerns, though I am not as emotionally involved — I’m used to people disagreeing with my view of DS and his ‘LD’ which I prefer to call dyslexia…I’m somewhat of a Davis ‘thinker’, so I am used to being called ‘snake oil’ — it really doesn’t upset me any more — so don’t be upset with my rambling opinions, please! My biggest hope is that you, or some others from this board, will be attending to hear what she has to say, in order that we can judge her position clearly.

I agree that the title of the seminar is guaranteed to attract attention — and I disagree with the title! but I want to be the (sort of) devils advocate: I myself (personally) believe that ‘ADHD’ as a dx is in its infancy — that it is, IMO, technically wrong to label a bunch of symptoms a ‘disorder’ when we don’t ‘for sure’ know the cause. I can see a wide range of ‘ADHD’ types in my experience…making me personally (as a former gifted and therefore intellectually arrogant kid) wonder if we aren’t seeing SYMPTOMS of several causes, instead of ONE disorder. And since sometimes it is only a ‘disorder’ of ability to conform to the norm, is it really fair to call it a ‘disorder’? Might it be an extreme variation…but entirely necessary to the future of the race????

BUT of course I don’t go about saying, ergo, ADHD is a ‘false’ dx! Because kids SUFFER from those symptoms, and society’s failure to assist/support them without special help — the reason the dx is NEEDED! Maybe it isn’t perfect, but it beats the old-fashioned labels: lazy, stupid, immature, ‘won’t try’, labels that HURT much more than they helped…unlike ‘ADHD’. We might call ADHD something else, or have refined it further and more accurately when our grandkids are running about, but it is NOT false— nor, obviously, is NLD. But I feel the same way about NLD…especially since I am likely somewhere on that spectrum, in some ways…I don’t like the ‘disorder’ label, I guess, unless we are SURE it is a ‘disorder’ and not just a ‘variation’, a ‘person type’ which occurs less often and therefore requires more acceptance from the majority. Is NT necessarily BETTER? Only if conformity is your goal…

Could it be that she feels, as I do, that we are labeling something a ‘disorder’ prematurely? Still HATE her terminology tho…this is why I am hoping plenty from the NLD community will be there to actually HEAR what she has to say…I didn’t have time to read her site carefully…but I do share your concerns re what the educators who attend may get from her!!!! It wouldn’t be the first time a reasonable therapist got carried away with the attention garnered by controversy and went too far. This COULD be damaging — but hopefully the NLD community, by speaking out, can reduce any negative effects. (and the general ‘LD’ or NA folks will support you, never fear!)

Anyway, I’m glad you brought this up on all the boards…bears watching, for sure!

Hi Elizabeth,

I understand what you’re saying as sometimes I wonder if I am really the one with the disability when certain situations comes up. Geez, I’ll bet because I refuse to play the dieting game, that some people think I am weird since this society is so fat phobic and diet obscessed.

But as you later mention in your post, the label is needed to obtain assistance for kids with this diagnosis. Also, as the website of a local college says, people with learning disabilities are entitled to accomdations while people with learning differences are not.

Also, at one place of employment, by disclosing my LD, people started understanding that what seemed to be simply an issue of being “too emotional” actually had a valid label. Now, it definitely wasn’t a rose garden every moment in getting people to truly understand LD but disclosing was definitely the right choice.

Regarding labeling something prematurely, that definitely does occur as I hate to admit it but NLD is now starting to become diagnosed when it shouldn’t be. But that doesn’t mean that NLD isn’t a valid diagnosis.

Also, someone did some research on Ms. Lemer and found that she was on the editorial board of an optometry journal. Since Ms. Lemer is claiming that what is diagnosed as NLD is really a visual issue, it is hard for me to not think that she has strong biases and is not interested in presenting factual information.

If she had said NLD is misdiagnosed as anything else such as CAPD, ADHD, Dyslexia, Depression, etc., she would have alot more credibility.

Elizabeth, you haven’t done this but alot of people are under the mistaken impression that we don’t want to hear about remediations and think it is hopeless. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Anyway, thank you for your support. It is greatly appreciated.

PT

“Elizabeth TO”]I share your concerns, though I am not as emotionally involved — I’m used to people disagreeing with my view of DS and his ‘LD’ which I prefer to call dyslexia…I’m somewhat of a Davis ‘thinker’, so I am used to being called ‘snake oil’ — it really doesn’t upset me any more — so don’t be upset with my rambling opinions, please! My biggest hope is that you, or some others from this board, will be attending to hear what she has to say, in order that we can judge her position clearly.

I agree that the title of the seminar is guaranteed to attract attention — and I disagree with the title! but I want to be the (sort of) devils advocate: I myself (personally) believe that ‘ADHD’ as a dx is in its infancy — that it is, IMO, technically wrong to label a bunch of symptoms a ‘disorder’ when we don’t ‘for sure’ know the cause. I can see a wide range of ‘ADHD’ types in my experience…making me personally (as a former gifted and therefore intellectually arrogant kid) wonder if we aren’t seeing SYMPTOMS of several causes, instead of ONE disorder. And since sometimes it is only a ‘disorder’ of ability to conform to the norm, is it really fair to call it a ‘disorder’? Might it be an extreme variation…but entirely necessary to the future of the race????

BUT of course I don’t go about saying, ergo, ADHD is a ‘false’ dx! Because kids SUFFER from those symptoms, and society’s failure to assist/support them without special help — the reason the dx is NEEDED! Maybe it isn’t perfect, but it beats the old-fashioned labels: lazy, stupid, immature, ‘won’t try’, labels that HURT much more than they helped…unlike ‘ADHD’. We might call ADHD something else, or have refined it further and more accurately when our grandkids are running about, but it is NOT false— nor, obviously, is NLD. But I feel the same way about NLD…especially since I am likely somewhere on that spectrum, in some ways…I don’t like the ‘disorder’ label, I guess, unless we are SURE it is a ‘disorder’ and not just a ‘variation’, a ‘person type’ which occurs less often and therefore requires more acceptance from the majority. Is NT necessarily BETTER? Only if conformity is your goal…

Could it be that she feels, as I do, that we are labeling something a ‘disorder’ prematurely? Still HATE her terminology tho…this is why I am hoping plenty from the NLD community will be there to actually HEAR what she has to say…I didn’t have time to read her site carefully…but I do share your concerns re what the educators who attend may get from her!!!! It wouldn’t be the first time a reasonable therapist got carried away with the attention garnered by controversy and went too far. This COULD be damaging — but hopefully the NLD community, by speaking out, can reduce any negative effects. (and the general ‘LD’ or NA folks will support you, never fear!)

Anyway, I’m glad you brought this up on all the boards…bears watching, for sure![/quote]