this post was submitted on 16 Mar 2025
31 points (91.9% liked)

UK Politics

3509 readers
155 users here now

General Discussion for politics in the UK.
Please don't post to both !uk_politics@feddit.uk and !unitedkingdom@feddit.uk .
Pick the most appropriate, and put it there.

Posts should be related to UK-centric politics, and should be either a link to a reputable news source for news, or a text post on this community.

Opinion pieces are also allowed, provided they are not misleading/misrepresented/drivel, and have proper sources.

If you think "reputable news source" needs some definition, by all means start a meta thread. (These things should be publicly discussed)

Posts should be manually submitted, not by bot. Link titles should not be editorialised.

Disappointing comments will generally be left to fester in ratio, outright horrible comments will be removed.
Message the mods if you feel something really should be removed, or if a user seems to have a pattern of awful comments.

!ukpolitics@lemm.ee appears to have vanished! We can still see cached content from this link, but goodbye I guess! :'(

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Wes Streeting Thinks Mental Health is Over Diagnosed.

Who’s gonna tell him ?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

'Bet folding money' or 'speculate baselessly'?

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 2 points 3 days ago (1 children)

I wouldn't call 40+ years of exposure to politicians' half truths and twisting of words "baseless", but you do you.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

This is, in fact, baseless. There are experts in, e.g., ADHD, who thinks it's over diagnosed, so the base assumption here is: he's referring to those experts.

Given the real questions about over-diagnosis, your assumption, 'I bet in this interview I didn't listen to he was referring to a report I haven't read' is, indeed, baseless.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 3 points 3 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Likewise, there are experts in neurology and psychology who dismiss said assertions, pointing to our progress in understanding and ability to diagnose now what we couldn't previously.

Many individuals previously labelled "difficult", "lazy", and "unmotivated" are now understood to be afflicted with medical problems. We can't yet do all that much about it, but we know more than we did.

As you can see, it largely depends on how much background knowledge you already have on the subject at hand as to what conclusions can be drawn from the wording.

Perhaps your view might not be the correct one, after all?

Edit: It is worth drawing attention to the fact that it suits no politician to lose the oft derided "lazy do-nothings" supposedly responsible for society's decline, or at the least a "drain on hard working families".

The pounds sterling cost of the entire welfare state would fit numerous times over into the unpaid taxes of the likes of Amazon et al.

So who exactly are the politicians really looking out for?

Edit 2: Going forward, Labour under Starmer will continue to be Tories in Red ties. The less well educated voters will, instead of "voting Labour 'cos they always have" will be taken in by "the pretty lie" and vote for Farage's Fascists instead, you just watch.

[–] frankPodmore@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Equally, we shouldn't label certain patterns of thinking as 'disordered' when they're actually just different. We certainly shouldn't medicate differences away. Over diagnosing is (almost by definition) not a good thing and we should take seriously the possibility that it's happening with some disorders. This in no way precludes supporting those who do have disorders.

[–] slakemoth@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 day ago

The problem is not the factual accuracy of what he's saying but why he would say it.

To anyone who follows politics even remotely, Wes clearly here is doing a dog whistle. He's signalling to the boomers that labour also thinks people with mental health issues are just lazy. Hes doing reactionary politics on purpose.

[–] Fluke@lemm.ee 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

You are correct for the most part.

However, until the "world of work" accepts those "differences" without needing laws to force them to do so, labelling of differences will remain a requirement for those that require the help.

Taking away some the pittance they get to assist with how the world refuses to service the "different" is bad enough, to justify it with intentionally bent statistics and the medical opinions of "experts" that are actually economists is pure Tory territory.

Starmer's Labour is as bent as they come, and they're handing power to Reform at the next election with their disgusting policies. Calling it now for future reference.