I want to write
about the issue of language and disability mainly for my non-disabled readers,
but I also want to explain the words I have chosen to use within future posts.
There are a few different opinions about certain terms, and I think it is fine
for each disabled person to use whatever words they feel comfortable with. I
want to share my views here not just to educate non-disabled people but also to
justify my choices to disabled readers who may or may not share my opinions.
Please be aware that I do not speak for all of the disabled community. If you are not sure which words a disabled person prefers, just ask them.
Many disabled people
and all social workers (I hope!) will be familiar with the social model of
disability. This article basically explains the social model and why some people prefer the term
'disabled person' rather than 'person with a disability'. If you aren't
disabled, I strongly advise you read the article.
It is worth saying
that some disabled people do not like either term. I once watched a documentary
where a guy who used a wheelchair was designing a brand new type of wheelchair,
and he said that when the army dispose of a bomb they disable it, then it ceases
to function. He felt as though saying he was disabled was like being compared
to something which ceases to function.
Generally speaking,
in the UK we prefer 'disabled person' and in the US 'person with disabilities'
is the preferred term. There are also differences between the US and UK about
the term used to describe discrimination against disabled people. This blog post
and this one
explain about that.
I am intending to
use the following terms:
Disabled person/people I have chosen this
because I subscribe to the social model (despite it's limitations, which I will
explore another time). I will not be offended if you describe me as a person
with a disability, because I do not feel as strongly about the issue as others
do. But I will always describe myself as a disabled person because that is how
I identify.
Disablism The word used in the UK to describe
discrimination against disabled people. I am using it for the same reasons as I
use the word disabled. However I do disagree with the term ableism (mainly used
in the US). I feel it is misleading and I was very confused by it when I first
came across it.
Living with As in,
I live with ME. Yes, sometimes I suffer
with it, but I do not like to dwell on that and it is not the case the majority
of the time. This term also has no emotional connotations, it is simply a
statement of fact.
Experience/experiencing I experience symptoms such as headaches. Again I am going to use this term
as it has no emotional connotations. My experience of symptoms is never a good
one (unless I am experiencing fewer symptoms relative to, say, the number I was
experiencing yesterday) but it isn't necessarily bad. Often it is indifferent,
sometimes even funny (I tend to fall over quite a bit and sometimes muddle up
words*)
Accessible/Disabled (facilities e.g. car parking
space, toilet) I will probably use these words interchangeably, but I am
trying to move towards using the term 'accessible' because it is becoming more
widely used in the UK and has a positive connotation; I can go there because it is accessible.
Impairment(s) Again, this is to do with the
social model. An impairment is what a disabled person has; a condition,
illness, or something else. There is no emotion attached, and it is a good way
of talking about these things without having to call it 'a disability', because
some people don't feel comfortable with that.
It is also easier to explain your access needs using this term, rather
than having to explain the confusing medical names of the condition(s) you
have.
Because of my impairment, I need to do X this way,
instead of that way.
My impairment means I need to use a wheelchair.
Wheelchair user/using a wheelchair I vastly
prefer this term to 'wheelchair bound' or 'confined to a wheelchair'. This is
because there are connotations of pity with those terms, and no-one, no matter
how severe their mobility impairment, is glued into their wheelchair. Someone
might need a harness or lap belt for their own safety, they might spend a lot
of time in their wheelchair, but they almost certainly get out to go to bed at
least, even if they use a hoist to do so. More people than you think can get
out of their chair and walk a bit (I can), and even people who cannot walk at
all might get out to sit on their sofa or a comfy chair.
I prefer the term
'reliant on a wheelchair' if someone cannot get around without one, or
describing wheelchair use as 'full-time' /'part-time' or 'indoor'/'outdoor'.
These are factual statements which describe how and where someone uses their
wheelchair. I am a part-time wheelchair user
and I use my wheelchair outdoors and in large indoor spaces such as shops.
Non-disabled I feel this is currently the best
term we have for describing people who are not disabled. I don't like the term
'able-bodied' (although I sometimes use it because I am still training myself
to use 'non-disabled') because it implies that disabled people can't do things
because of problems with their body, and this is in direct conflict with the
social model.
It also implies that
non-disabled people do not have impairments. It is possible for someone to have
an impairment, yet not be disabled. My husband has dyslexia, but it now has
very little impact on his daily life and he does not face barriers to normal participation
in society. I was the same before I had ME. I have mild dyspraxia, but I never
considered myself disabled because of it.
Carer By this I mean an 'informal' carer such
as a friend or family member, not a paid carer. This is a very difficult term.
I have become aware since reading disability blogs that many disabled people
are not comfortable with this term, however, no alternative has been thought up
as yet (please correct me if I am wrong about this). I think many carers are ok
with this term, certainly the main organisations which represent carers still
use the term. However, I am very aware that my husband hates the word, although
technically he would be considered to be my carer. As there is no alternative,
I will be using this term, although sometimes I might put it in quote marks if
I am finding that it doesn't feel comfortable in a particular context.
You will have
noticed that I try to steer away from anything emotional in the terms I have
chosen to use. This is because, when talking about my condition, the fact that
I'm disabled or my access needs, I have no desire or need to invoke emotion in
the person I am talking to. It is not that becoming disabled and being ill is
not an emotional experience, far from it. But there is a time and a place for
discussing such things, and I have no desire to discuss them with total
strangers like shop assistants when all I need from them is to tell me where
the lift is.
I think that pretty
much sums it up for me. I might edit to add further terms as and when I use
them. If you would like some further reading on the issue of language and
disability, you can find some here, here
and here.
You do not have to agree with everything you read, but I encourage you to read
different perspectives to aid your understanding of various points of view.
EDIT: This is another different perspective to read and consider.
EDIT: This is another different perspective to read and consider.
*Please note: not
all disabled people will find it funny if they fall over or muddle up their
words. For people with communication difficulties, the experience can be quite
frustrating. Also, for some people falling over means they hurt themselves.
This is clearly not a laughing matter. The best thing to do is to take the cue
from the person. If they laugh, it is ok for you to laugh along with them.