Related articles

Don’t use illness as a label

"I am writing to comment on the use in Therapy Today of the words ‘anorexics’ and ‘anorectics’ as nouns. They show up in two brief articles published in the July issue"

Learning zone

Dilemmas

This month's dilemma: Cameron gets on well with his therapist. They have developed a quasi-supervisory relationship during his counselling training and now he thinks she might be an ideal supervisor

 Read more

Student column

We’ve always been told throughout the counselling course that the journey each of us will follow during training will change us

 Read more

Counselling and Psychotherapy Research (CPR)

is a peer reviewed, quarterly international journal. Visit http://www.cprjournal.com/ to read abstracts, receive regular e-bulletins and access the research glossary

Hindsights

Why I became a counsellor

What makes a good therapist? What values do you hold dear? Former nurse Els van Ooijen wanted to be able to help her patients emotionally, but also to understand and heal herself

 Read more

Feedback

We value your feedback. Like most websites, Therapy Today.net is in ongoing development. If we can make the site more user-friendly or relevant to you, please let us know Leave feedback

Volume 19
Issue 9
November 2008

 

At the risk of becoming an inverted pedant, I felt I had to write to address the issue raised by Caroline Vermes in the letters pages of October’s therapy today.

  • Inverted pedantry?

  • by

  • Anthony Hall-Shaw
  • At the risk of becoming an inverted pedant, I felt I had to write to address the issue raised by Caroline Vermes in the letters pages of October’s therapy today. There is hardly a month goes by without someone writing in about labelling people as schizophrenics or anorexics and it seems to get the goats of counsellors who have been over-influenced by the politically correct brigade. Obviously, political correctitude was initiated with the right intentions but, like all good incentives and laws, pedantry and jobs worth-ism ruins the inspired gist in the first instance.

    As counsellors, don’t we all know that a person with schizophrenia or anorexia is not just a schizophrenic or an anorexic? Don’t we know that people are flesh and blood and sometimes have problems? Is that not obvious? One might refer to a very wealthy person as a ‘millionaire’; surely we can all intelligently assume that he is a person as well can’t we? Following the pedants’ logic, are we to refer to the rich person as a ‘person with millions of pounds’? Should Chris Tarrant’s programme be renamed ‘Who wants to be a person with millions of pounds?’ I wonder if it actually upsets anyone to be labelled as a millionaire or an anorexic? Similarly, when we learn someone’s occupation, they don’t announce themselves as ‘a person who knows about accounts’ – they are an accountant. Isn’t it obvious that there is more to the person than the behaviours and who does it actually upset? With respect, I think this obsession with labelling is just a waste of ink.