Considering ethics of PDA research.
Does anyone else consider the potential impact of propagating a controversial construct, that is clinically unrequired and possibly heavily stigmatising?
Kind of expecting @milton_damian would pick up on this if I do not.
Does anyone else consider the potential impact of propagating a controversial construct, that is clinically unrequired and possibly heavily stigmatising?
Kind of expecting @milton_damian would pick up on this if I do not.
The point here it is a reasonable question, considering PDA strategies are good practice & widely practiced. Critique PDA represents features/ traits from accepted constructs also seems valid. Another point I have forgotten.
Then there is substantial dislike of "Pathological" descriptor & other "problematic" connotations around PDA, like like substantial non-compliance to societal/ cultural norms.
As I said it is a reasonable question, that someone like @milton_damian or anyone LSBU CAS/ CDS group could ask. Although, third panel member is not decided yet.
Simply by conducting PDA research, I am interacting with it, potentially helping to "normalise" it, so it is no-longer controversial. Meh.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
