Especially in youngsters with developmental problems there is a role for both areas to play. Due to the way current legislation stands it is possible that educative input is required but, because the label is medical, the input may not be forthcoming and there is fragmented division of services which is not the most effective solution. If your label is a commonly found one then provision may be better established but the less common labels, such as EDS, have to work to establish recognition. Sadly labels can be harmful if only at the level in which society takes the label. It is strange to say that some labels are more acceptable than others.
Some labels excite more public empathy than others.
Another reason why namers must act with great care. Additionally labels can be limiting when they lead people to think of the descriptions or manifestations of a condition in a narrow sense. It encourages the failure to view where labels, and therefore, conditions overlap. It was this area of interest which initially led me to become involved in the London discussion. The programme on Developmental Co-ordination Disorder seemed to be showing youngsters who may have had EDS as well.