As more and more people read their way through HR 3200, the health care reform bill, the more scrutinizing it undergoes. Off the start it has been offensive to the young and old alike. Now, it is seen offensive by those who are intellectually challenged.
The term written into the bill is mentally retarded, and many people have taken offense to the term. This leaves many to ask it's political correctness.
As it is widely accepted by many medical professionals, it is those that it represents that are left asking, "Why not choose a better term?"
In search of a politically correct term for mentally retarded, medical professionals throughout, accept the term as correct. Others challenge the term as to the context in which it is used, while some are left along the sidelines arguing among themselves as to which term is more correct than the other.
Contextually speaking, here is how it is written on pages 389-390:
"CERTAIN OTHER INDIVIDUALS. -- In the case of an individual who is a full-benefit dual eligible individual and with respect to whom there has been a determination that but for the provision of home and community based care (whether under section 1915, 1932, or under a waiver under section 1115) the individual would require the level of care provided in a hospital or a nursing facility or intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded the cost of which could be reimbursed under the State plan under title XIX, the elimination of any beneficiary coinsurance described in section 1860D-2(b)(2) (for all amounts through the total amount of expenditures at which benefits are available under section 1860D–2(b)(4)).".
With that, it still leaves many asking, "Is that the best term to use?" While many are not challenged with this disability, those that are diagnosed with or know someone who has been diagnosed with are among the ones offended. It also leaves the question open that, "If there are so many politically correct terms to use, is this the best term to cover the widest array of individuals?"
With a little more time on hand, answers to these questions, and many more, may be either answered or re-written as it appears that neither Congress or the Senate will have enough time to pass HR 3200 before they go to recess.
The term written into the bill is mentally retarded, and many people have taken offense to the term. This leaves many to ask it's political correctness.
As it is widely accepted by many medical professionals, it is those that it represents that are left asking, "Why not choose a better term?"
In search of a politically correct term for mentally retarded, medical professionals throughout, accept the term as correct. Others challenge the term as to the context in which it is used, while some are left along the sidelines arguing among themselves as to which term is more correct than the other.
Contextually speaking, here is how it is written on pages 389-390:
"CERTAIN OTHER INDIVIDUALS. -- In the case of an individual who is a full-benefit dual eligible individual and with respect to whom there has been a determination that but for the provision of home and community based care (whether under section 1915, 1932, or under a waiver under section 1115) the individual would require the level of care provided in a hospital or a nursing facility or intermediate care facility for the mentally retarded the cost of which could be reimbursed under the State plan under title XIX, the elimination of any beneficiary coinsurance described in section 1860D-2(b)(2) (for all amounts through the total amount of expenditures at which benefits are available under section 1860D–2(b)(4)).".
With that, it still leaves many asking, "Is that the best term to use?" While many are not challenged with this disability, those that are diagnosed with or know someone who has been diagnosed with are among the ones offended. It also leaves the question open that, "If there are so many politically correct terms to use, is this the best term to cover the widest array of individuals?"
With a little more time on hand, answers to these questions, and many more, may be either answered or re-written as it appears that neither Congress or the Senate will have enough time to pass HR 3200 before they go to recess.
