[sixstringtheory]

On the point of "disabled people" vs "people with disabilities" I have this conversation a lot with my wife, who is an Occupational Therapist and who first introduced me to the idea of people-first language. I think there's merit in the idea, but I'm not sure it's a settled issue. She's also fluent in American Sign Language and studied Deaf culture as an anthro undergrad, and they are one of several examples of groups who diametrically oppose people-first language: Deafness is a defining and inseparable part of who they are as a person. I would love to hear the opinions of other people on this board who live with Autism, blindness, para- or quadri-plegia, or other forms of disabilities on the matter, as I don't see myself as being able to have an authoritative opinion, as someone who does not live with disability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People-first_language

[escapologybb]

I'm quadriplegic and I really think it is entirely context-based. If we were to meet in a bar is my wheelchair or the fact that I'm quadriplegic relevant? Of course not. In which case you'd just call me by my name.

The only time the fact that I'm quadriplegic to should become an issue is when it alters some plan, building, or some accommodation needs to be made to factored in to allow me to participate in the world. And in which case the questions should almost always be logistical, so for me the word disabled should really never come up.

For instance if we were going to a bar we would just make sure we went to one that had level access, problem solved and you haven't had to call me anything other than my name.

I have a small break in my neck, in all other respects I'm just like you and expected to be treated as such. Sorry these aren't more string together and coherent thoughts, I'm just thinking about it the first time properly!

Edited To Add: Stupid voice dictation software making me look crazy again, can somebody please make voice recognition software 100% accurate? Thanks!

[k__]

A few decades ago people would personify the word disability in Germany.

"Ein Behinderter hat dort geparkt" -> "A disabled was parking there"

But this changed drastically in my lifetime. We often just say "he is disabled" and mostly to people who are mentally challenged. For physical disabilities we often use the specific word directly.

If someone can't see or walk, we simply say it, we don't say he is disabled, it's already implied by his condition.

[escapologybb]

So has my one single factoid about the German language being wrong all these years? Well don't I feel silly?!

[camtarn]

Similarly with autism, some people dislike the person-first phrasing:

http://autismmythbusters.com/general-public/autistic-vs-peop...

[paulryanrogers]

"Deafness is a defining and inseparable part of who they are as a person"

Tangent: How true is that for people who become deaf at different stages of life besides birth?

[sixstringtheory]

That's a great question, and unfortunately we've reached the point where I'm afraid I can't speak authoritatively. I did a quick search regarding cultural vs. physical deafness, here are some interesting things I found:

https://nad.org/issues/american-sign-language/community-and-...

http://www.signwriting.org/about/questions/quest024.html

The reverse is also an interesting question: how does the Deaf community view people who seek to gain hearing through e.g. cochlear implants, like for a child born deaf? Answer: it's extremely controversial.

It's an very interesting subject for me because I love thinking about language and how it shapes cognition and culture–and sign language is such a different paradigm than spoken or written languages. That being said I still only have a beginner's level understanding of Deaf culture, at least w.r.t. how far a hearing person could ever get.

Edit: formatting