Our society has a tendency to point out differences in people by using labels, and while some labels may be more general methods of obtaining somebody’s attention, how do we really know if the person really wants to be referred to in that way? Throughout the day, we all are referred to by various labels – Sir, Ma’am, Dude – some more appropriate than others. Why are certain labels used and not others? Is it our physical appearance? Is it our demeanor? Does it depend on who is using the label when referring to us? Before this course, I had heard of person-first language, but I did not fully understand the fundamental logic of the concept until completing the interactive lecture during week 1. I found it interesting that there are some specific groups that prefer to not be referred to using person-first language, such as the Deaf population. This curiosity led me to research the use of person-first language and explore whether there were other groups that do not prefer person-first language. Interestingly, I found that those individuals on the autism spectrum have two camps with regard to the use of person first language. In one camp, the individuals consider autism to be a defining part of them describing how their brain works and prefer to be referred to as “autistic” (See Jim Sinclair interview). On the other hand, there is a camp that does still consider the term “autistic” to be disrespectful to the person (See Kathie Snow article). Needless to say, this separation in the autism population confused me at first. How am I supposed to know whether I will be using the appropriate term when working with this population? Upon further reflection I came to the realization that, perhaps, it is not up to society or the general autism population to decide, but rather, each person individually. We all have our beliefs and reasons for our preferences – I believe the same should hold true when determining how to refer to a population of individuals with diverse abilities. While this individualization may result in a situation where you are corrected, I think the important thing is that there was no intention of being disrespectful and that in the future you refer to them how they requested. As Judy Endow suggests, it has to do more with the attitude than the actual language when it comes to the person-first concept.
snow.pdf |
interview_with_jim_sinclair.pdf |