Dear All,

Hearing more off-list than on, still thanks to all who have responded regarding so-called "invisible disabilities,"  regarding communications at the U.N. General Assembly and elsewhere.

 

The thing is that even though we believe suffering is not invisible but instead often  ignored, it remains that pain is called an "invisible" disability because someone can be said to look fine on the outside but is really suffering inside.  We believe that people react to pain as something awkward, and may often claim not to see it, as a coping strategy - but that is a different matter. It is culturally complex and context sensitive but has become known as invisibility, whether inadvertent or on purpose.   Some to make their disability more visible dress way down to try and emblemize the real suffering. Some dress up as in "chin up" to try and avoid labels of malingering.

 

But the suggestion to replace "invisible" with "non-apparent" does not sit well with reality.

 

I have been hearing from people in PWPI off-list supporting the phrase "invisible" with all its ironies, but nonetheless.

 

There is no time to get back to those posting, so instead let's look at Google output (not sure what you will get).

 

Just now: "chronic pain" (omitting acute) - 141,000 website hits. A Hundred Forty One Thousand .

 

Now as for :"chronic pain" (again, omitting acute) - 56 occurrences. Fifty Six.

 

Those are the apparent  stats.  As to why another group should apply new labels, even though they are well meaning, that seems not very *Nothing About Us Without Us.*

 

But of course for the inclusion intended, thank you.

 

Best wishes, LDMF.

For Identification Here:  Persons with Pain International, drawn from many pain groups internationally.  Convention accredited.