I was thinking about the term "Asynchronous" today, and how there was an earlier discussion somewhere on this board regarding the use of the term "gifted". I remember someone wasn't really fond of describing people as "gifted" (kcab, I believe?). I agreed with whoever it was at the time, but I didn't have time to post the couple days that discussion was happening! Amazing - I actually found the thread.
*** Link no longer working ***
Anyway - I've grown much more comfortable with the terminology since doing research and reading on this topic and rejecting the gifted denial somewhat. But I could really see how throwing the term "gifted" around too heavily in front of a parents of ND children who could set them off. Before I knew DS was gifted, an aquaintence of mine used to talk about her gifted children in such an annoying tone that reeked of superiority. She definitely threw it around like a status symbol. Anyway, I definitely avoid that terminology in general conversation.
Anyway, thinking aloud on the computer here, I was wondering if it would make the world and legislators more comfortable using the term "Asynchronously developing" to describe children. It could also used to describe LD children accurately I think. Maybe we could be funded the same on both ends of the spectrum. Ahhh ... it's fun to dream.
