A word about words

Perhaps I'm about to expose my liberal arts background.  Or perhaps I'll be saying the obvious, but this post is about the importance of labels, and how the words we use to describe people with disabilities matter.

I think we'd all agree that language evolves, and evolves in such a way that words we've used in the past just aren't acceptable in the present day.  I know that some people get annoyed about what they view as "PC" attitudes (and indeed, did you see P.C.U.?  It was released when I was in high school, and I remember thinking it was funny.  Features Jeremy Piven, of more current Entourage fame, as well as George Clinton and Parliament.  Rockin.). And some believe that labels polarize people, accentuate differences and not similarities, and contribute to a feeling of divisiveness in our society.

Well, hopefully the 90s era of policitizing labels has passed, as we all have become more aware of the importance of respecting others as individuals, with their right to self-identify as they choose.  But, as in other areas, attitudes towards those with disabilities have lagged.  Three examples for you.



Example #1: do you use the word "retarded"?  At all?  As in, "That's retarded."  I confess, in years past, I've said that without thinking.  I think it was a fairly common playground insult when I was growing up.  And now I'm appalled at myself, because the history of that word - and of its predecessor words - is quite sad.  See: History of Mental Retardation.  And I wasn't acting in a malicious way.  I was careless, and more than a little insensitive.  That probably characterizes most people who've used the word in an insulting manner.  (Consider joining this pledge to try to eliminate use of the word - Spread the Word to Stop the Word).

Two more examples from public figures:  Some of  you also might remember the brouhaha in the White House in 2010. Rahm Emanuel, then Chief of Staff, describing a group of liberal activists with whom he disagreed, dropped the f-bomb and then called them "retarded". Emanuel Apologizes.   Even President Obama put his foot in his mouth when, on The Tonight Show in 2009, he compared his apparently inept bowling skills to "the Special Olympics or something". Obama on The Tonight Show. Without getting into the politics, these are examples of politicians just not thinking about the potential impact of labels and words - from folks that you'd think would be highly attuned to the impact of words from such a public platform.

Labels matter.  The words we use to describe human conditions matter, because words shape societal attitudes and become ingrained in our consciousness.  So, here are a couple ways for us all to make a positive difference in the lives of kids and adults with disabilities.  First: think about the pejoratives you use, and try to be mindful of the history of the words and labels you use.  Humor and repartee are supposed to be fun - and it's just not funny when you denigrate a sub-group or population.

Second: recognize that these are kids, not disabilities walking around.  Simply put the person first.  A child with autism is a child first, who happens to have autism.  He is not simply an "autistic child" - he is more than a disorder, or a disease.  (You'd never call her a "cancered child", if she had cancer.)  I think that "people with disabilities" is better than "disabled people".  And I'm sure that you can create your own examples relevant to your daily life and the individuals in it.

People first.