Originally Posted by therdogg
Because, we're talking about pathology, when there's something WRONG, not when something is super-right. Two standard deviations above the norm puts someone in the top 2 percent of the population. To take the top 2% of athletes, and to call them "special needs" really diminishes the real issues facing the disabled population in the lowest 2% who cannot walk or use their arms. Yoiu could argue that these super-athletic children have "special needs," gifts that need to be fostered, they drive you nuts cause they always want to play catch, they are competitive and overly-driven, etc etc. But these complaints ring hollow in the ears of parents whose children have cerebral palsy, etc. Same with the top 2% socially, or intellectually. It just gets ridiculous after awhile and renders the term "special needs" meaningless.