Both Jenny Horsman (2000) and prominent compositionist Mike Rose (1985/1997) point to dangers of further alienating students from pursuing literacy learning goals, in college or other community programs, by correlating medical conditions such as PTSD or medical terminology with the learning problems demonstrated by students who have experienced trauma or less than adequate preparation for college. They argue that using medical terminology—such as “remedial”—hides the social conditions that gave rise to the trauma or underpreparedness, and suggests that inherent in the medical model is the notion that individuals who can be repaired or fixed, should be repaired or fixed before the public and personal investment of education begins. Such notions of people, medicine, and education are unacceptable to the activist educator and, as I have shown, are answered within the theoretical framework of enactionism. Enactionism suggests instead that individuals are subjects with agency operating within dynamic systems of other individuals and their communicative products: ideas and behaviors. Thus, the medical information about PTSD should be seen as integral to the social condition of students’ needs as they pursue literacy goals. Moreover, this medical information about PTSD should be seen as evidence, an object to be manipulated (e.g., by factoring it into the ideas and behaviors of teachers of traumatized students), and not be confused with the totality of any student’s subject position.