5 ms·

I'm not sure how much that definition holds water. Am I disabled if I'm temporarily not able to do cognitive work?

zepto 5y ago
Yes?
philipyoungg 5y ago
You take the word "disabled" literally. And yes, it's situational. That's what we learned in experience design. Another example: a parent holding their baby. They "lost" one arm in that situation.
- tolbish 5y ago
  We are in agreement on being technically disabled. But having a disability also has a legal meaning that is separate from that. For instance, we as a society don't call someone disabled for not being good at math, unless something else has been diagnosed that causes that. If you created technology that assists with mental math, we wouldn't call it "a tool for the mathematically disabled".
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - pseudalopex 5y ago
    It's called dyscalculia when severe enough.
    - tolbish 5y ago
      So someone who doesn't have dyscalculia, but is just having a bad day and isn't doing math well...we wouldn't say they are still disabled, and we wouldn't call it a situational disability.
      - pseudalopex 5y ago
        We wouldn't call them not good at math either. Most people wouldn't call it a situational disability because they don't know the term. But it's a common term in relevant fields.
        tolbish 5y ago
        I have seen multiple people throughout my life say "I can't do math today" while referring to their work and then avoid doing computationally-heavy tasks for the day.
        pseudalopex 5y ago
        "Can't do math today" and "not good at math" are different.
        tolbish 5y ago
        It's "temporarily being not good at math", which is the point.
        pseudalopex 5y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27213499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27213499
  - kristofferR 5y ago
    Exactly. I'm sitting on the couch now with my laptop on my lap, so I can't walk right now, but I'm not leg disabled. I'm not partially blind just because I can't see with my eyelids closed.
    - tolbish 5y ago
      Perhaps I should have led with those examples.
  - akiselev 5y ago
    > For instance, we as a society don't call someone disabled for not being good at math, unless something else has been diagnosed that causes that. It is part of the definition for intellectual disabilities though. From [1]: > An individual is generally diagnosed as having an intellectual disability when: (1) the person's intellectual functioning level (IQ) is below 70-75; (2) the person has significant limitations in adaptive skill areas as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical skills; and (3) the disability originated before the age of 18. "Adaptive skill areas" refer to basic skills needed for everyday life. They include communication, self care, home living, social skills, leisure, health and safety, self direction, functional academics (reading, writing, basic math), and work. Being bad enough at math that it impedes day to day life is not sufficient to qualify for intellectual disability under the ADA but it's one of the major factors. I think the point is that even capable humans are often in situations where they are functionally disabled - like when they're really exhausted or inebriated or mentally/physically overloaded - and all of these accessibility technologies are helpful in those situations. It's not about the ADA definition but humans in practice. [1] https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/persons-intellectual-disabilities-workplace-and-ada https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/persons-intellectual-disa...
    - tolbish 5y ago
      We are just talking about being bad at math temporarily. Let's take a physicist who is having brain fog for a day. In this case, it would be weird to say they are situationally disabled or disabled at all. I think your term "mentally/physically overloaded" would be closer to what I am speaking of. Not sure about "functionally disabled".
      - KittenInABox 5y ago
        I think it's fair. That's what temp disability is for, workers comp, etc? If I strain my back and I'm bedridden for a few days I think I'm pretty disabled. Similarly, if a vaccine knocks me flat on my butt for a day, people get it, I'm disabled for that day and I need accomodation.
      - pseudalopex 5y ago
  - b3morales 5y ago
    As a thought experiment we could consider whether the legal specifications would be necessary if this awareness of situational and widespread ability differences was more established in our culture. What if all doors, everywhere, were easily opened by anyone regardless of whether they were standing, around a certain height, and had free use of their arms? I think likely we would still need some kind of formal recognition, but it's interesting to ponder.
- anticristi 5y ago
  Trust me, I got super powers during parental leave. Some days I wondered why we need a second hand at all!
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
shadowoflight 5y ago
Yes, and if we as a society were more accepting of these types of situational disabilities, workplaces would be much healthier.
- tolbish 5y ago
  All situational disabilities? Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? Not that I completely disagree with you, I just want to understand what we are defining. edit - Yes, workplaces should cater to legal disabilities. The question here is if employers should in any way cater to functional disabilities, not disabilities as diagnosed in the DSM. See elsewhere in this thread.
  - macintux 5y ago
    > Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? Not the person you're replying to, but certainly if you e.g. lose a child, your workplace should be sensitive to that and not fire you because you're unable to show up to work that day.
  - heavyset_go 5y ago
    > Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? If they don't want to violate the ADA, yes. For example, major depression can be a disability, and employers are bound by the ADA to not discriminate against people with that disability and to provide them reasonable accommodations.
    - tolbish 5y ago
      I think we are confusing the casual term disabled with the legal term disabled. Of course employers should work with legal disabilities. We are talking completely about "functionally disabled" such as your arm being temporarily occupied, or you having a foggy brain and can't to math that day.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
dylan604 5y ago
Maybe impaired is the better word? Similar to you are not driving while disabled from drinking, but you are driving impaired?
- tolbish 5y ago
  That would be a more accurate term.
dkonofalski 5y ago
Yes, you would be. I don't understand what the importance of the distinction is in terms of being able to use a device like an iPhone, iPad, or Apple Watch.
wittyreference 5y ago
Yes. As a physician, I wish more folks appreciated that “disability” is a property of the relationship between a person and their environment, and can emerge (or disappear) based on changes in that persons capability as well as changes in their environment. For an obvious example: a patient with reversible heart failure can’t walk without severe shortness of breath today, but they can in three months. Today they need disabled parking; three months from now they do not.
- tolbish 5y ago
  Can we apply "disability" to all abilities, like being hungover and therefore temporarily sensitive to light and sound, or should it apply to specific ones, like being injured and therefore temporarily sensitive to light and sound?
  - _jal 5y ago
    I don't know what a doctor would say here. Just noting that medical jargon sometimes carries moral or legal tones independent of any actual medical distinction. For instance if you're taking a legal drug that habituates you, they don't like calling you an addict, so you're experiencing cessation syndrome. A change in legal status of the drug would presumably lead to a terminology change. And I'm not going to revisit DSM fights, but suffice to say, a number of changes made to certain diagnoses over time reveal more about sociopolitical changes than anything having to do with psychiatry.
    - nkmnz 5y ago
      Your statement regarding legal status of a drug and addiction is wrong. Alcohol and tobacco are legal drugs and you can not only evolve a dependency on them, but if your addicted you’ll be called an addict. The same is true for other legal drugs used as medication, e.g. benzodiazepines or opioids. If you’ve developed physical and/or psychological dependence on such a drug, you might suffer from withdrawal, which is not a different thing than discontinuation, but rather a special case thereof. Addiction and withdrawal compare to dependency and discontinuation like a hoarder compares to someone who relies on the service of a cleaning lady.
bruce343434 5y ago
not able = disabled
legostormtroopr 5y ago
This is how the W3C defines it for WCAG standards. In part this is because good acessibility helps everyone, whether you realise it or not. For example, if you are in cold weather you have gloves on which limits your manual dexterity - you can't touch the watch without taking off your gloves, or can't turn the dial - in that situation you have the same dexterity as someone with one hand or limited finger grip. The same goes if you are holding a basket or child. Alternatively, you have good eye sight and good hearing... for now - unfortunately this probably won't always be the case. But as you age (or if you go to a loud concert) this can change rapidly - having alternate ways of using technology will come in handy in unexpected ways. Designing for situational disability, ie. I cant use a device in this way right now, will have dramatic impact on users with permanent disabilities - but also helps people with situation disabilities right now. (Also I'm not sure why this comment is being so viciously downvoted, its a good question.)
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  I think the votes are because the asker argued so stubbornly with answers they didn't like.

Yes?

You take the word "disabled" literally. And yes, it's situational. That's what we learned in experience design. Another example: a parent holding their baby. They "lost" one arm in that situation.

tolbish 5y ago
We are in agreement on being technically disabled. But having a disability also has a legal meaning that is separate from that. For instance, we as a society don't call someone disabled for not being good at math, unless something else has been diagnosed that causes that. If you created technology that assists with mental math, we wouldn't call it "a tool for the mathematically disabled".
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- pseudalopex 5y ago
  It's called dyscalculia when severe enough.
  - tolbish 5y ago
    So someone who doesn't have dyscalculia, but is just having a bad day and isn't doing math well...we wouldn't say they are still disabled, and we wouldn't call it a situational disability.
    - pseudalopex 5y ago
      We wouldn't call them not good at math either. Most people wouldn't call it a situational disability because they don't know the term. But it's a common term in relevant fields.
      - tolbish 5y ago
        I have seen multiple people throughout my life say "I can't do math today" while referring to their work and then avoid doing computationally-heavy tasks for the day.
        pseudalopex 5y ago
        "Can't do math today" and "not good at math" are different.
        tolbish 5y ago
        It's "temporarily being not good at math", which is the point.
        pseudalopex 5y ago
        https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27213499 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27213499
- kristofferR 5y ago
  Exactly. I'm sitting on the couch now with my laptop on my lap, so I can't walk right now, but I'm not leg disabled. I'm not partially blind just because I can't see with my eyelids closed.
  - tolbish 5y ago
    Perhaps I should have led with those examples.
- akiselev 5y ago
  > For instance, we as a society don't call someone disabled for not being good at math, unless something else has been diagnosed that causes that. It is part of the definition for intellectual disabilities though. From [1]: > An individual is generally diagnosed as having an intellectual disability when: (1) the person's intellectual functioning level (IQ) is below 70-75; (2) the person has significant limitations in adaptive skill areas as expressed in conceptual, social, and practical skills; and (3) the disability originated before the age of 18. "Adaptive skill areas" refer to basic skills needed for everyday life. They include communication, self care, home living, social skills, leisure, health and safety, self direction, functional academics (reading, writing, basic math), and work. Being bad enough at math that it impedes day to day life is not sufficient to qualify for intellectual disability under the ADA but it's one of the major factors. I think the point is that even capable humans are often in situations where they are functionally disabled - like when they're really exhausted or inebriated or mentally/physically overloaded - and all of these accessibility technologies are helpful in those situations. It's not about the ADA definition but humans in practice. [1] https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/persons-intellectual-disabilities-workplace-and-ada https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/persons-intellectual-disa...
  - tolbish 5y ago
    We are just talking about being bad at math temporarily. Let's take a physicist who is having brain fog for a day. In this case, it would be weird to say they are situationally disabled or disabled at all. I think your term "mentally/physically overloaded" would be closer to what I am speaking of. Not sure about "functionally disabled".
    - KittenInABox 5y ago
      I think it's fair. That's what temp disability is for, workers comp, etc? If I strain my back and I'm bedridden for a few days I think I'm pretty disabled. Similarly, if a vaccine knocks me flat on my butt for a day, people get it, I'm disabled for that day and I need accomodation.
    - pseudalopex 5y ago
- b3morales 5y ago
  As a thought experiment we could consider whether the legal specifications would be necessary if this awareness of situational and widespread ability differences was more established in our culture. What if all doors, everywhere, were easily opened by anyone regardless of whether they were standing, around a certain height, and had free use of their arms? I think likely we would still need some kind of formal recognition, but it's interesting to ponder.
anticristi 5y ago
Trust me, I got super powers during parental leave. Some days I wondered why we need a second hand at all!
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

shadowoflight 5y ago

Yes, and if we as a society were more accepting of these types of situational disabilities, workplaces would be much healthier.

tolbish 5y ago
All situational disabilities? Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? Not that I completely disagree with you, I just want to understand what we are defining. edit - Yes, workplaces should cater to legal disabilities. The question here is if employers should in any way cater to functional disabilities, not disabilities as diagnosed in the DSM. See elsewhere in this thread.
- macintux 5y ago
  > Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? Not the person you're replying to, but certainly if you e.g. lose a child, your workplace should be sensitive to that and not fire you because you're unable to show up to work that day.
- heavyset_go 5y ago
  > Should workplaces cater to people who are emotionally disabled in some way? If they don't want to violate the ADA, yes. For example, major depression can be a disability, and employers are bound by the ADA to not discriminate against people with that disability and to provide them reasonable accommodations.
  - tolbish 5y ago
    I think we are confusing the casual term disabled with the legal term disabled. Of course employers should work with legal disabilities. We are talking completely about "functionally disabled" such as your arm being temporarily occupied, or you having a foggy brain and can't to math that day.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]

dylan604 5y ago

Maybe impaired is the better word? Similar to you are not driving while disabled from drinking, but you are driving impaired?

tolbish 5y ago
That would be a more accurate term.

dkonofalski 5y ago

Yes, you would be. I don't understand what the importance of the distinction is in terms of being able to use a device like an iPhone, iPad, or Apple Watch.

wittyreference 5y ago

Yes. As a physician, I wish more folks appreciated that “disability” is a property of the relationship between a person and their environment, and can emerge (or disappear) based on changes in that persons capability as well as changes in their environment. For an obvious example: a patient with reversible heart failure can’t walk without severe shortness of breath today, but they can in three months. Today they need disabled parking; three months from now they do not.

tolbish 5y ago
Can we apply "disability" to all abilities, like being hungover and therefore temporarily sensitive to light and sound, or should it apply to specific ones, like being injured and therefore temporarily sensitive to light and sound?
- _jal 5y ago
  I don't know what a doctor would say here. Just noting that medical jargon sometimes carries moral or legal tones independent of any actual medical distinction. For instance if you're taking a legal drug that habituates you, they don't like calling you an addict, so you're experiencing cessation syndrome. A change in legal status of the drug would presumably lead to a terminology change. And I'm not going to revisit DSM fights, but suffice to say, a number of changes made to certain diagnoses over time reveal more about sociopolitical changes than anything having to do with psychiatry.
  - nkmnz 5y ago
    Your statement regarding legal status of a drug and addiction is wrong. Alcohol and tobacco are legal drugs and you can not only evolve a dependency on them, but if your addicted you’ll be called an addict. The same is true for other legal drugs used as medication, e.g. benzodiazepines or opioids. If you’ve developed physical and/or psychological dependence on such a drug, you might suffer from withdrawal, which is not a different thing than discontinuation, but rather a special case thereof. Addiction and withdrawal compare to dependency and discontinuation like a hoarder compares to someone who relies on the service of a cleaning lady.

bruce343434 5y ago

not able = disabled

legostormtroopr 5y ago

This is how the W3C defines it for WCAG standards. In part this is because good acessibility helps everyone, whether you realise it or not. For example, if you are in cold weather you have gloves on which limits your manual dexterity - you can't touch the watch without taking off your gloves, or can't turn the dial - in that situation you have the same dexterity as someone with one hand or limited finger grip. The same goes if you are holding a basket or child. Alternatively, you have good eye sight and good hearing... for now - unfortunately this probably won't always be the case. But as you age (or if you go to a loud concert) this can change rapidly - having alternate ways of using technology will come in handy in unexpected ways. Designing for situational disability, ie. I cant use a device in this way right now, will have dramatic impact on users with permanent disabilities - but also helps people with situation disabilities right now. (Also I'm not sure why this comment is being so viciously downvoted, its a good question.)

pseudalopex 5y ago
I think the votes are because the asker argued so stubbornly with answers they didn't like.