Live data from Hacker News

Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

reason.com

801–810 of 1001 posts

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#801
post #778

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, if you meant an MN that isn't part of the United States, I totally missed that.

I was referring to the social services scandal that is rocking the state of Minnesota, and which involved fake autism diagnoses. [1] 1: https://www.mprnews.org/story/2025/09/24/feeding-our-future-...

Wow, they got caught and prosecuted and everything! What a scary epidemic of fake diagnoses.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#802

It's funny how upset most comments are with the realization that a lot more people are disabled while most of the users in HN are probably on the spectrum

There's something a little ironic about calling every user on a website disabled on an article about overdiagnosing disability

I'm not ironic, you're ironic.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#803
It is interesting how accommodations can reveal dysfunctions in educational practice. In my courses, requests for accommodations generally change the course design for all students. This is because the accommodation does not alter expected learning outcomes, but it is clearly something that aids students with difficulty learning the material succeed. My goal is that all students succeed in the expected learning outcomes. I don't want the course to be challenging for the wrong reasons. So often the request reveals something I was doing that is unnecessary and makes the class more difficult for little reason. That isn't to say that there are not learning environment that should add additional stress. Sometimes such conditioning is needed so that one can succeed in the challenges they are being trained for. That isn't the case for my students.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#804
post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The original article which is linked in this post goes into much better detail: https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/2026/01/elite-universit... Schools and universities have made accommodations a priority for decades. It started with good intentions, but parents and students alike have noticed that it's both a) easy to qualify for a disability and b) provides significant academic advantages if you do. Another big acc…

>Another big accommodation request is extra time on tests. Yep. Speaking from experience, top colleges will give students with ADHD or similar conditions as much as double time or more on exams. One college I know of sends them to a disability services office to proctor it, in which they simply don't enforce time limits at all. Coincidentally, there's an overwhelming number of students with ADHD compared to before th…

having infinite time on exams is level of the the ADHD cheating iceberg

level 2 of the ADHD cheating iceberg is having medically approved methamphetamines to infinistudy before exams e.g. ritalin

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#805

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> people that are just in the line where they are very productive workers anyway Of course, that applies to everybody who achieves a stable career at all. Exceedingly few people (if anyone) are competent and capable at everything, even when you're just talking about basic skills that are handy for common, everyday work. Your doctor may be a incorrigibly terrible driver, your bus driver may pass out at the sight of bl…

Well put. > A lot of modern, aspiring-middle-class and online culture Theres also a pernicious way of identifying with the struggle. Instead of I have trouble focusing in certain situations, so maybe I should find ways to spend my time (careers, hobbies) that work well with that. We instead go to 'I have ADHD' and my 'job' should make special accommodations for me. Regardless of whether a job should or should not mak…

> It also makes discourse hard because the (this is causing me to truly not be able to function) gets mixed in with the (this is a way that my brain behaves, but I can mostly live a life).

They're both two sides of the same coin though. You can get a neurodivergent person to a level that they're able to function in life, but they won't thrive or be happy.

Do we think it's enough for people do be a productive worker or do we actually want to give them the ability to live their life to its fullest?

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#806

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're reading more into what I said than what I intended. I'm not endorsing the specific behavior, but I am pointing out that if there's a "cheating" lever anyone can pull to improve their own situation, it will get pulled if people think it's justified. There's plenty that do get pulled and plenty that don't. In the US, SNAP fraud is sufficiently close to nonexistant that you can't tell the difference in be…

Some levers are accessible to everyone, but the implied social contract is that you only pull it if you actually need it, because the system doesn't have enough resources for everyone to do it.

Yes, I agree.

Trouble is, getting teenagers to accept and live by that isn't something that will pan out. Societies have been trying for millenia.

If your system built for teenagers relies on the social contract in this way, it's a bad system. People who are over a half decade from a fully developed brain aren't going to grasp this.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#807
post #477

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how getting 50% extra time on exams is anything remotely close to cheating. Almost nothing I do in my day to day job comes close to being as time-boxed or arbitrarily restrictive as exams were in college.

Why don't all students get the extra time, then?

If everybody gets extension, say a 2 hr test becomes 3 hrs, then eventually there will be someone who claims 3 hrs is the new normal time and still demand an extension over that.

It really depends on the perception of whether the goal of the extension is to give disabled students an edge over "normal" students or to give everyone a fair(not necessarily equal) opportunity to complete the test.

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#808
Are we overlooking the possibility that ADHD is skyrocketing in generations which are now entering colleges (due to cell phone use and software designed to hijack their attention, the tiktok-ification of the internet, and so on) and students at demanding colleges are more likely to seek diagnosis?

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#809

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Easily wayyy more than that given both the loosening standards of what a disability is combined with over-diagnosis. But I get your sentiment. When I was a kid, disabled meant you were in a wheelchair or needed someone to physically feed you, and now it means you have an Adderall prescription.

Sounds like the old definition was missing a lot of people with disabilities.

People have different ideas of what "disabled" means.

Broadening the definition makes it less useful in many ways. I would consider "disabled" to mean one of: - Unable to ambulate effectively (requires crutches or worse) - Unable to look after oneself as an adult (for any combination of reasons) - Unable to use tools and items most people would consider standard - eg. can't hold a pencil, write, type, whatever.

That's a fairly harsh definition of disabled, but all of these people unambiguously require accommodation because of their incapacity. It's also off the top of my head, so I'd happily broaden it if you want to argue the point.

If I can talk to someone for an entire day and not realise or notice they are disabled in some way, I question the definition being used - how helpful is it in deciding how we should allocate additional resources and help in that case?

Re: Why are 38 percent of Stanford students saying they're disabled?

#810
Gee idk could be toxic environment

medical industrial complex

toxic food

air pollution

enshittification happening in all industries

it's destroying the integrity of the human genome with each subsequent generation worse and worse and will result in a culling of the species over time toward more stable subgroups likely in more remote regions not affected by these things as much

Post reply on HN