Skip to main content
. 2014 Aug 20;49(4):381–415. doi: 10.1111/1460-6984.12101

Table 1.

Pros and cons of diagnostic labels

Negative consequences Positive consequences
Focus on what is wrong with the child; may ignore aspects of environment; localize problem in the child Provides an explanation and legitimacy
Parents take no responsibility Removes blame from parents
Child feels failure inevitable, stops trying Removes blame from child
Excuse for what is really consequence of bad teaching Removes blame from teachers
Leads to stigmatization, social disadvantage and exclusion Promotes understanding and awareness of particular difficulties; legal protection against discrimination; can give sense of belonging: support groups; allows for group action; can lead to emphasis on positive attributes
Resources denied to those who do not meet specific diagnostic criteria; cynical use of labels to get extra funds Leads to access to resources; in some countries may not be able to access these without a diagnostic label
Focus on label rather than assessment of child's specific needs; tendency to stereotype; generalizations may obscure important differences Recognize common patterns across children with similar difficulties
Child may do better with skilled teaching and not need/ benefit from other intervention Child can receive targeted intervention
Same label used with different meanings leads to confusion Facilitates communication among professionals
Undue reliance on unreliable criteria, especially IQ Objective criteria from formal assessment identify problems that might otherwise get missed
Medicalization of non-medical disorders; social problems attributed to medical causes Recognition of biological as well as social causes of difficulties
Planning in terms of numbers with difficulties, rather than making changes that benefit all children Need to know how many children affected, for planning resources and documenting progress
Groups studied by researchers are artificial and findings may not generalize to most children Researchers need to generalize across groups; labels allow for continuity across research