Even time I see it written it goes down as "PWD (person with diabetes)"; they need to explain what the acronym is
so no, it is simplier just to write "diabetic"
Other PWD expansions:
- Person With Disabilities
- Petroleum Warefare Department
- Phsphoglucan, water dikinase
- Portugese Water Dog
- Psychological Warfare Division
- Public Works Department
- (if lowercase pwd) Unix Command "print working directory"
Because Unix pwd is always lowercase I had never realized the connection before but I will admit when I had long hair I did look a little like the guy on the far right :-). Unix geeks actually pronounce it as a word, something like "pwud"
This conversation reminds me of this:
http://youtu.be/jeGKuTZtkpg
I used to try to say that I had diabetes or was diabetic. I didn't like "a diabetic" because I don't like labels. My friends with MS aren't "sclerotic" I use PWD when in the DOC because I have enough typos and it is less keying. The view that the general public (aka the great unwashed, normal etc) is that as "a diabetic" I'm overweight - through my own doing, lazy - again through my own doing, and eating the wrong things all the time., If Iit comes up and I said "I was a diabetic" I got you don't look like "a diabetic". But if I say I have diabetes, or I am diabetic "using the word as an adjective, not a noun, I don't get guilt-tripped and told that I would be cured if I just got active, ate right and lost weight. a background, I am very active, thin, and am the queen of broccoli. And please note, I am in no way ashamed of my diabetes, I just don't want to be labeled and thus limited.
One of my pet peeves is when writers use an acronym and don’t define it at first use. That seems like insider code intended to exclude the uninitiated. I’m guilty of that at times but always try to write it out.
I don’t mind being referred to as a diabetic. I’m also a walker, eater, breather, and reader. I don’t think for even a second that these descriptors encompass the totality of what comprises me.
That being said, I always defer to how a person wishes to be described. Some people take exception with diabetic. I happily call them a person with diabtes, or PWD. It’s a simple human courtesy, social “grease.”
Your comments are why I love your presence here!
I agree completely.
and besides . . . it's a good topic of discussion
What is a person with alchoholism called? How about autism? Anorexia? Bulimia? If you are a person with depression you are depressed. If you have a condition of sepsis you are called septic… Of particular note in this group–If you have the condition of hypoglycemia you are hypoglycemic. If you suffer from dementia you are demented. If you exhibit thr traits of narcissism you are narcissistic. a pessimist is pessimistid. This is just the English language with all of its peculiarities I wouldn’t take it too personally.
To reply to both Tim and an earlier post by Zoe:
I call people whatever they want to be called.
I call myself 'diabetic'. Things with 'ic' at the end are cool and precise--genetics, physics, electronics. Really, what I have learned from the hard-core posters here might in that sense be called 'diabetics'--as in: "The precise application of the principles of tight control to one's own BG" (well, maybe 'glycemics').
Tim: Yes, to me pwd (which I often type) means 'print working directory'. But PWD is an environmental variable set to the current working directory, so either case has a unix meaning.
Zoe commented on something I've been meaning to add to these discussions for a while. The "People with..." construct originated with the AIDS community in the 1980s. It was specifically minted to replace the term "AIDS victims...", since the people with AIDS (now people with HIV) at the time did not consider themselves victims. In that particular case, I personally feel that the change in nomenclature was justified.
That does not stop me from making silly jokes in the spirit of Tim's post. In my day job, we talk about things called PWMs--'Positional weight Matrices'. I sometimes call them 'People with Matrices'
--ZZ
The difference is that absence of the word "a" in your examples. Yes I am diabetic, I don't appreciate being defined as "a diabetic". I have friends dealing with autistic children it is using the word as a descriptor not as a noun. I try to remember to not to use words that work well as adjectives as nouns. Just like I would say that I am "a diabetic ballet dancer" the emphasis was where I wanted it - the ballet dancer part. So going back to your examples, the person is alcoholic, the child is autistic. To me it is important because of the negative assumptions by others about the fact of being diabetic. And if I wanted to go even further, I find that when a "title" - like A ballet dancer" it is something I chose to do or be, II didn't choose diabetes. It probably seems petty to you and that's fine. Having dealt with diabetes for so long when it was even more socially unacceptable, I am of course more sensitive to it.
Thank-you, artwoman. I love your presence here, too!
I am an alcoholic (by some estimates) and a diabetic and I have an autistic child.
rephrasing those things to “i am a person with alchoholism, diabetes and a parent of a child with autism” doesn’t really change anything or enhance my position, or others perception of it in my mind.
So although I guess I can relate to people having their preferred way of being defined, I really don’t buy in to it all that much. Diseases are by their nature a negative subject so I guess I can relate to people not wanting to be called “a _______(pick your disease)”.
We change the terms to something we are happy about and all of a sudden we lose all concern about the sentence structure “I am a ballet dancer”. “I am a millionaire.”
I guess I would say "I am alcoholic, I am diabetic and my child is autistic" Rather than "I am an alcoholic, I am a diabetic, and my child is an autistic." That's the joy of everyone being different and having different preferences.
Many Diabetics have issues with the WORD, I have been a Type 1 for 33 years & just call myself a DIABETIC. I'm lucky that denial has never been a part of my life but in watching friends and family not treat their illnesses I understand why new definitions have been created. I have worked with a support group to help other Diabetics, oddly enough many people get caught up on the word, like when people whisper the word C-A-N-C-E-R, as if you say it out-loud you will then die from it.
A lot of my sensitivity to the use of "diabetic" as a noun is that people I worked for that used it as a noun also used my diabetes as a reason not to consider me for promotions or plum assignments (the "I would never promote her, she's a diabetic") the people who described me as diabetic (using the word as an adjective) or said that "yes, she has diabetes" have always been supportive, actually respectful of my being able to manage diabetes well and work in a stressful field. Yeah I probably am picky about it. At least I try to do the same for others with other situations. It never has been a case of my being in denial. I "came out" early after my diagnosis.
Congrats to one and all. Do you realize what a wonderful, informative and downright fun discussion thread this has become and that, judging by a few other diabetes groups I have dipped into tentatively, it could easily have become rancorous with a lot of name-calling?
So blessings on TuD and our Founder, Manny, who set the tone from day 1. I think sometimes we take it for granted. But this is fun and respectful and you are all wonderful human beings!......Blessings, as ever.....Judith in Portland
Love this idea!
-Tavia Vital, PWD, BSN, BA, RN, CDE.
(You start with the initials they can’t take away and in order of acquisition. I definitely acquired diabetes before I went to college! Maybe if I put PWD at the end, someone COULD take it away from me).
This cracked me up!!
I think I’ll use PWD and when someone who does not have diabetes asks, I’ll say it stands for Portuguese Water Dog. Hahaha!!
I have only used it as a acronym in the cyber world...as a very general term for diabetes...I'm (more specifically) insulin dependent and that's what I will tell someone if needed. I have no need to split hair's over what my diagnoses is now, was then, or needs to be.
When I was Dx (oops theirs another one) I was told that I had Sugar Diabetes, and it was usually only spoken in a whisper around family.