|
|
|
|
|
by dvlsg
2804 days ago
|
|
I completely agree, but I would also point out that being manipulative by using an evocative name isn't always great by default. Personally, I think it would be beneficial in those cases (shell shock, battered spouse), since dehumanizing suffering is awful at best. But then names like the "patriot act" also come to mind. Or for something a little closer to home, "anemic domain models". I suppose appreciating emotive language would depend on whether or not you agree with the purpose behind it. |
|
In this case, I imagine that psychiatrists, as a kind of medical doctors, would generally want to do whatever gets their patients the help and consideration they need. Thus, when they consider naming (or re-naming) a diagnosis, they should probably have that purpose in mind.
PR in general is neither good nor evil. But when people are seeking to do good, they should really make sure that their usage of PR (accidental or otherwise) aligns with their goals.