I have always hated labels when referring to people. I have often been known to say ‘labels are
for tins not people’, but as is usually the case something happens in your life
to challenge your views.
I am talking of course about children who do not have a
diagnosis. They can have many symptoms but do not know the cause. They do not
have a recognised ‘label’. If you say
to someone that a child is undiagnosed it does not really answer the question
of what is causing the problems with that child. It can lead to some people thinking that there can’t be anything
really wrong with the child otherwise you would have been given a name for
it. It can even happen that doctors
themselves or other people in the medical profession do not really take you or
the child seriously when you present them with a list of symptoms but the tests
come back negative.
Filling in forms whether it be for claiming DLA or just
holiday insurance can be a minefield – so like it or not, sometimes a label is
needed, something that encapsulates all of the various symptoms a child might
have and puts them under one category which is recognised.
The meaning of symptom and diagnosis can get confusing so
according to Wikipedia (sorry could not lay my hands on my O.E.D.): -
Diagnosis is the identification of the nature and cause of anything
Children and adults may have a long list of symptoms but may never have a diagnosis as to the cause and it is important to keep that in mind. It could be argued that a recognised term such as SWAN although it sounds nicer, friendlier than undiagnosed basically really means the same thing so why not just use undiagnosed?
What if you were to have all of these symptoms on a regular basis?-
- Exceptional thirst
- Dry mouth
- Frequent urination
- Loss of weight
- Weakness or fatigue
- Blurred vision
Can
you imagine having to list off all of those or write them down on a form if
there was no recognised collective name for these symptoms and taken separately
it could be said that we have all experienced at least one of these symptoms at
some point in our lives without any cause for concern. But say to someone that you have Type 1 Diabetes or put that on your application form and you get instant recognition.
Given that, you can understand why the term ‘undiagnosed’ can sound a little weak.
I
believe that the acronym SWAN (syndrome without a name) was originally invented
by a member of the medical profession to describe an undiagnosed child. This
was then used by the original founder of the SWAN support group (whose
grandchild the consultant was referring to) and continues to this day. Although the group itself is getting more
and more recognition thanks to The Genetic Alliance and in particular the hard
work done by Lauren Roberts, this is still not a generally recognised
name.
Some people have said that their child’s physiotherapist or consultant etc likes the term SWAN and will use it when referring to their child but to the outside world it generally refers to a bird!
To get back though to the topic under discussion here, I suppose the question I am asking is should SWAN become a globally recognised term and if so would it help? I believe that some attempts were made once before by the original founder but it was treated then as a bit of a joke by the upper echelon of the medical profession.
The more I discuss this possibility the more questions come into my mind.
A friend of mine who has a child with a diagnosed disability once told me that it doesn’t matter whether you have a diagnosis or not you still have to fight for everything. We like to think we live in a balanced and fair society but the truth is we do not. Shouldn’t we therefore be spending our time, money and resources trying to get all children/adults with different needs accepted by society rather than putting them into categories and inventing names?
On the other hand there are times when a recognised term other than undiagnosed, could clearly have its advantages.
Like it or not we do feel comforted in some way by ‘labels’. Just being told that a child is undiagnosed can sound as if what is being said is ‘we don’t know the answer therefore there is nothing more we can do’. Parents could come out of such a meeting feeling isolated and alone. On the other hand, if parents are told that their child has no diagnosis but this is a lot more common than people realise and it is known as SWAN then the parents have still been told the same thing but they at least come away with a sense of belonging and knowing that there are others out there.

A really interesting discussion Anne. I agree with your point about hating 'labels' and even with label some diagnoses are so obscure that they need explaining. but I hate filling forms in an writing 'undiagnose'd' like I'm a fraud and there's actually nothing wrong with my child at all, I'm just after money, but I also feel silly writing swan since I doubt people recognise that term yet. What ilikeabout the term swan is the use of the word syndrome. To me, that says, h has a syndrome, something that can't be 'fixed'. They don't know what it is yet, but it IS real!
ReplyDeleteI never write undiagnosed. I write diagnosed with... and list a huge amount of the little things we do know. If I use a general term I'll say neuromuscular junction disorder of unknown aetiology, or developmental delay of unknown aetiology. Sounds more clinical which works better for the bureaucrats I find.
ReplyDeleteWould having SWAN globally recognised help? Yes. As a label for medical purposes, no as it's meaningless as all the SWANs are so different, for the forms, perhaps, but again it's meaningless as they need details of what is wrong and SWAN is a vague as the word 'undiagnosed'. I can have a sore finger and not know why, and it's undiagnosed. I can have a genetic condition that makes life a tiny bit harder for me than other children that is undiagnosed, should I get the same level of benefit as a SWAN with complex needs just because I am also a SWAN? Of course not. Would having the term help medical professionals and families feel like there was a community? You betcha, and *that* is where the value lies, in my opinion anyway x
To me the label doesn't matter as it is for us a way of getting some help. Not necessarily that much... But even just a bit of awareness helps. I feel for all SWAN people, as I think I would have found that much harder for the very reasons you have described - no understanding. It still wouldn't change the child to have a label or name, but it could help the parents. Maybe the label should be SWD - syndrome without diagnosis - to get away from the bird confusion?! Sorry if that's too silly!!
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with the general feeling so far ie SWAN would be of more benefit to people if it were a globally recognised 'term', rather than used as a name for a diagnosis. After obtaining an MRI scan privately this showed that my Granddaughter has an underdeveloped brain and this I think is used on forms etc with a further explanation if needed. So in our case I suppose we do have a diagnosis of sorts(ie we now know what is causing her difficulties) but we still do not know what caused this underdevelopment in the first place. This I suspect could be a typical scenario for many.
ReplyDeleteYou've raised a very important issue here Anne. A label like Down's Syndrome that explains a recognised pattern of symptoms is meaningful to everyone, & I would put that under the heading 'diagnosis.' I still don't say that Chrissy is diagnosed with anything. I say that for many years the cause of her problems was unexplained then her chromosome abnormality was identified. There is no syndromic picture emerging so it has no name, & isn't a label as such. Labels need to be fit for purpose otherwise there's no point in having them - I describe Chrissy as having autism, epilepsy etc that are thought to be caused by a rare chromosome disorder rather than confusing people by saying she has a 1q21.1 microdeletion. It's important for new parents to be told that their child probably has a genetic disorder but one that isn't able to be identified yet - we found that a useful explanation to pass on.
ReplyDelete