As caregiver to my two parents, both with dementia, it has become increasingly obvious to me that the term "dementia" needs to be refreshed, as so many other medical labels have been in the recent past (e.g., we now say "a person with diabetes" vs. "a diabetic person", and certain labels such as "retarded" are now considered pejorative. In French, the word dementia means "crazy" and is considered a harsh insult. The Alzheimer's Society here wants people to simply use the word Alzheimer's Disease for all dementias, but that is completely inaccurate and dangerously misleading, particularly in terms of treatment and caregiving. My mother, who is still aware of her dementia, hates the word. Given that half of all baby-boomers are projected to have some form of dementia, it behooves us to come up with a new term for it. I'm suggesting Diminishing Mental Capacity (DMC) or Brain Connectivity Disorder (BCD). My mother likes Brain-Fade! Any suggestions or thoughts on this topic? Much appreciated. I know it takes more than a chat-room to change these sticky labels, but we have to start somewhere.
Dementia means what it says - the loss or diminishment of mind. It's the reality of it that's painful, whatever you call it. A rose by any name would smell as sweet.
Remember when schools stopped describing students as retarded or slow and started calling them pupils with special needs or learning difficulties instead? And how fast exactly did these children's peers start jeering "special" and "LD" at their fellows? - usually, of course, not at the children who actually did have disabilities but just at any person whom they happened to wish to insult.
You can change the words hoping that it will kick-start a change in attitudes, it's always worth a try. But it's never worked yet that I can remember.
The big, big issue -- the elephant in the room -- is the stigma attached to all kinds of mental illnesses and disorders. And if rebranding the conditions helps overcome some of the stigma then I'm all in favor of it. As far as I can see, though, the name is seldom the problem."
__________
I totally agree with this. Working for a federal branch, this is a coming issue within federal agencies.
It's not the name so much as it is the effect it has had on society. If it affects someone on the Hill or in their districts, best believe that name for a program that has negatively affected someone is indeed getting changed.
Handicapped vs. Disability, Vocational vs. Technical Education, etc.
Dementia does have a negative connotation but that's exactly what's going on...mental decline.
I don't understand why "cognitive deterioration" isn't sufficient enough for the realm of dementia issues.
In my opinion what we NEED is to educate the public, at least so they understand the basic concept that there are multiple dementias and that they all result from profound, life shortening, irreversible (at least for now) damage to the brain.
I appreciate JeanneGibbs' comment about whispering something out in public - in the general sense, Alzheimer's can convey what's required in this situation, even if it's not medically accurate. And yes, it will take time to get a new label to stick. It starts with each of us, as I see it. I'm going to commit myself to using only the term "memory loss" - i.e., my mother suffers from memory loss - for the next little while, and see if it makes a difference in terms of how people react. Thanks for commenting on this topic, everyone.
"Memory Issues" is a good euphemism. I do not object to euphemisms; I think they can be valuable in the right context. Wouldn't most of us rather be "down sized" than "fired'? I use "memory issues" with my own mother.
But that gentle term does not begin to convey the reality of dementia. It leaves out the extreme anxiety, depression, delusions, paranoia, wandering, anger, hostility, depth-perception problems, sleep disturbances, incontinence, swallowing problems, and a whole host of a related disabilities that may or may not be a part of any individual's dementia. "Memory issues" is fine for what it is, but it is not a viable "new name" for dementia.
[By the way, isn't it odd we don't say, "she has blood glucose issues" or "he has trembling issues" or "she is in the hospital for lung fluid issues"?]
"Dementia" has the advantage that it is widely known. When we entered a restaurant and my husband was unsteady on his feet and confused about what to do with the menu I mouthed at the the waitress "dementia" and she immediately understood that he wasn't drunk. "Major Neurocognitive Disorder" is a fine category label IF it becomes widely known. I don't think that mouthing "MND" at the waitress would have accomplished the same thing.
Doctors do diagnose mild, moderate, and severe cognitive impairment. That is good, too.
Shall we call them cognitively challenged?
The big, big issue -- the elephant in the room -- is the stigma attached to all kinds of mental illnesses and disorders. And if rebranding the conditions helps overcome some of the stigma then I'm all in favor of it. As far as I can see, though, the name is seldom the problem.
Angel
But I'm also a diabetic. Person who has diabetes is just too many words. And to need to pussy-foot around implies (to me) that there is something shameful about being diabetic. It is just an adjective, like short or blue-eyed or funny. No adjective completely describes a person. I think the push to say "person with diabetes" is silly and wasted energy.
I also don't find anything pejorative about the term "dementia." It sure beats "senile."
Here is a link to the list - hope they wont remove. If they do, please google "old reasons for institutionalization". We would ALL be locked up!!
To me, dementia implies demented...which is more like insane than a brain disease. I do like Brain Connectivity Disorder (BCD). The DSM-5 which is the go to book for psychology has renamed dementia as Major Neurocognitive Disorder which I also think is good. This is the same book that renamed manic depression to bipolar disorder. I hope the new DSM-5 name catches on.
Angel