In my last blog post, I illustrated how I personally still have a lot to learn about psychosocial disability. Luckily, I am not the only one since multiple people attending the conference have asked “what is a psychosocial disability?”. By day three of the conference,  I still didn’t have a grasp on the concept: what mental health conditions are included? Is psychosocial disability the same as mental illness? Is it a more politically correct term?

Considering the theme of the summer school is psychosocial disability, it’s shocking that a concrete definition was not provided at the start since the attendees come from different knowledge backgrounds regarding the CRPD.

Overall, words and language has been another huge topic of the conference. During our seminar class, we discussed how terminology changes with the times and labels easily become misused and outdated. It makes using correct language and the right words a bit tricky. A few terms that stood out to me included “user-survivor movement” and “mad studies”.

Throughout the conference, many of the presenters have been referencing the user-survivor movement. According to a quick Google search, I found that this movement has had other names such as the ex-patients’ movement, the mental patients’ liberation movement, and the psychiatric survivors’ movement.

Simply stating “user-survivor movement”, in my opinion, is quite vague and when I first heard the term “user-survivor”, I was taken aback. The word ‘user’ has many definitions. Maybe it’s because I come from a city with an opioid crisis, but when I hear the word user, I think of this definition:

“one who uses drugs, especially as an abuser or addict”.  

The same applies to survivor, another vague term: what did this individual survivor? Since I am a Relay for Life volunteer, I automatically think of cancer (as in cancer survivor). In the case of the ‘user-survivor movement’, it makes me wonder why survivor was chosen instead of victim. I know victim-blaming is a huge problem in the states, but I am interested in knowing what the difference in survivor and victim is in this case.

Based on another Google search, I found that the ‘user survivor movement’ is more formally called the ‘service user survivor movement’. I found this discrepancy in terminology interesting since the panel and lecturers urge us not to abbreviate terminology. While most of us know what the speakers are referring to, I think using the full name is especially important when discussing the movement with the general population.

Another word that surprised me was ‘mad studies’, which involves studying various words regarding individuals who identify as mad. While the word ‘mad’ in the states refers to angry, I know that in other countries it refers to mentally ill. Therefore, I was really confused as to why an outdated term was used to describe a new discipline.

While I think it’s great that Mad Studies used the word to reclaim it in the community, I wonder if it’ll do my bad than good. The word is still very much used in common language and is also attached to pop culture icons such as the Mad Hatter. Since it is a new body of education, I guess only time will tell.

Overall, the language and terms presented at the conference illustrates that different backgrounds and experiences have different meanings and definitions; it’s a pretty neat example of ‘International Perspectives on Disability’ in motion.