![]() This claiming can be about disability more generally or with regards to a particular disability. ![]() The argument is straightforward: use of these honest, candid and less euphemistic terms and phrases enables groups and the individuals within them to "claim" their disabilities with pride. Identity-first language promotes use of phrases like "amputee," "diabetic" and "disabled person" (but not "victim" or similar negative words) where disability identity comes first. Some writers and scholars from the field known as disability studies, as well as advocates and activists from disability culture, prefer what is known as identity-first language for disability. Not all members of the disability community think person-first language is the best choice. Is there any alternative to person-first language? There is, and it is known as identity-first language. Doing so hinders understanding and can even trivialize other, more important qualities possessed by the individual. Use of either positive or negative labels inevitably over-emphasizes one aspect - disability - of a person's life. Such undue praise can marginalize, isolate, or unduly glorify what is a medical fact or quality that is but one part of the individual's experience. Similarly, placing people with disabilities on a pedestal ("You are so brave to keep trying despite your disability! You are a real hero!") is not a good idea, either. A phrase like "stroke victim," for example, is not innocuous, as it suggests that a person succumbed or was passive. Within its " Publication Manual," the APA also urges writers as well as speakers to avoid using any language that refers to disability in a deleterious or pejorative manner. Using phrases like "person with a disability" and "individual with an amputation" emphasizes the person and not his or her condition. When referring to disability, the American Psychological Association (APA) urges that it is often best to "put the person first." In practice, this means that instead of referring to a "disabled person," use "person with a disability." Why? The reasoning goes like this: Phrases like "disabled person" or "amputee" focus on a condition more than the person who is affected by it. Now that we know the distinction between disability and handicap, how do we refer people who have disabilities? However, she actually is not handicapped herself rather, the handicapping element is in the environment, not within her. In this case, a wheelchair user is handicapped - her mobility through use of her wheelchair is disrupted - by the missing ramp. Older buildings that lack ramps for wheelchair access, for example, present a handicap for people who use wheelchairs. ![]() The first term - handicap - refers to an obstacle imposed on people by some constraint in the environment. In everyday life, some people use the term handicap or refer to people with disabilities as the handicapped. Other disabilities are not necessarily apparent, for example, acquired brain injury or chronic depression. Thus, someone with congenital blindness has a disability, as does someone who must use a wheelchair for mobility purposes. A disability is present when activities usually performed by people (such as walking, talking, reading or learning) are in some way restricted. First, what does disability itself mean? A disability is a condition or quality linked to a particular person.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |