Which one of the following would be considered an example of person first language?
|
In our most recent tip sheet from AccessATE and DeafTEC, we discussed communication and safety in the workplace for employees with disabilities. Within the communication section of that tip sheet, the concept of “person-first” language was mentioned a few times. There are two general models when describing a person with a disability: person-first and identity-first language. Both are valid, and ultimately up to the individual with the disability. Remember, whenever you’re unsure what to say, it’s best to ask. Here, we’ll dive into each language model, and the importance of asking. Show Tip Sheet: Workplace Communication & Safety for Physical Disabilities Person-first language is defined as a linguistic practice that puts a person before a diagnosis, describing what a person “has” rather than asserting what a person “is”. This avoids using labels or adjectives to define someone, e.g., “person with diabetes” instead of “a diabetic person”. Person-first language aims to separate a trait – such as a disability – from the person, as putting the descriptor first can reinforce a sense of inherent inferiority to people without disabilities, and/or a sense of permanence, which is not always the case with all disabilities. Putting the descriptor first can reinforce stereotypes and/or lead to discrimination or otherwise unwanted different treatment. Person-first language emphasizes that a person with a disability is, first and foremost, and person like everyone else. It articulates that the disability is a secondary attribute, not the core or whole of the person’s identity. Person-first language is generally considered to be standard etiquette and a safe guess for many circumstances, including general terms like “people with disabilities”. However, if a person prefers identity-first language, you should respect that preference. Not all people with disabilities prefer to use the person-first language model for their specific cases. Identity-first language puts the descriptor first, and is more common among specific disability communities. One such example is the deaf community, where “deaf person” is generally preferred over “person with deafness”. This linguistic model positions disability as an identity category – something that is embraced, and describes membership within a wider cultural group. Identity-first language is largely born of the Disability Pride movement, asserting that disability is nothing to be ashamed of. This model also posits that a phrase like “disabled person” still contains the word “person”, and that person-first language can feel like trying to sidestep the fact that someone has a disability. For that reason, it asks if a person is truly, completely “seen” if you don’t acknowledge their disability. Language evolves and changes over time, and it’s everyone’s responsibility to try their best to keep up and be respectful. The many terms that now exist around disabilities, including the difference between person-first and identity-first language, can seem confusing. When in doubt, it’s best to just politely ask. Asking can sometimes feel awkward or invasive, but people with disabilities prefer to be asked for the sake of being identified correctly, rather than someone taking a guess and risk being disrespectful. It’s also important to try not to become frustrated or defensive if corrected on a term – think of it as a learning opportunity, and an opportunity to better understand your friends and colleagues! Additional Resources
The People First Respectful Language Modernization Act of 2006 was enacted by the Council of the District of Columba on July 11, 2006 to “require the use of respectful language when referring to people with disabilities in all new and revised District laws, regulations, rules, and
publications and all internet publications.”1 “People First Language” (PFL) puts the person before the disability, and describes what a person has, not who a person is. PFL uses phrases such as “person with a disability,” “individuals with disabilities,” and “children with disabilities,” as opposed to phrases that identify people based solely on their disability, such as “the disabled.” The phrase “mental retardation” is offensive and outdated. The terms
“developmental disability,” “cognitive disability,” or “intellectual disability” may be substituted as more respectful options. The following table gives examples, in alphabetical order, of ways to substitute PFL for outdated and/or offensive terminology. Outdated term: Replace with: A “afflicted with disability” "autistic" “has autism” “has autism” “crippled” “has a disability” D “the disabled” “disabled adults” “disabled people” “disabled children” “disabled voters” Etc. “people with disabilities” “adults with disabilities” “people with disabilities” “children with disabilities” “voters with disabilities” Etc. “feebleminded” “has a cognitive disability” H "a handicap” “the handicapped” “handicapped buses” “handicapped bathrooms” “handicapped parking” “handicapped buses” “handicapped bathrooms” “handicapped parking” Etc. “a disability” “a disability” “accessible buses” “accessible bathrooms” “accessible parking” OR “buses accessible to people with disabilities” “bathrooms accessible to people with disabilities” “parking accessible to people with disabilities” Etc. “the insane” “insane person” “insane adult” “insanity” “imbecile” “invalid” “people with a mental health conditions” “person with a mental health condition" “adult with a mental health condition” “mental health condition” “person with a disability” “person with a cognitive disability” “people with a disability” "maimed" “the mentally ill” “mentally ill person” “mentally ill adult” Etc. "moron" “person with a mental health condition” “person with a mental health condition” “person with a mental health condition” “adult with a mental health condition” Etc. “person with a disability” “person with a developmental disability” “person with a cognitive disability” “learning disabled” “lunatic” “has a learning disability" “person with a mental health condition” “suffering from disability” “has a disability” W “wheelchair user” or 1 People First Respectful Language Modernization Act of 2006, page 1, lines 15-16 * Multiple examples taken from “People First Language” by Kathie Snow, 2005, available at http://www.disabilityisnatural.com. Fact Sheet Prepared July 2006, by The Arc of the District of Columbia. For more
information, contact: T.J. Sutcliffe, Director of Advocacy & Public Policy Fax: (202) 529-1852 What is personal first language?“People First Language” (PFL) puts the person before the disability, and describes what a person has, not who a person is.
What is personPeople-first language (PFL) is a way of speaking. and referring to people with disabilities that. respects them as human beings, rather than. dehumanizes them. It emphasizes the person first and their disability.
What is person first communication?People-first language is used to communicate appropriately and respectfully with and about an individual with a disability. People-first language emphasizes the person first, not the disability.
Why is personPlacing the person first and the disability second helps eliminate stereotypes that can form, and it emphasizes the individuality, equality, and dignity of these individuals. Sentences that include terms like "the disabled" neglect the human aspect of a person's disability.
|
