Photo Credit: Greater Kashmir
Our society is yet not inclusive to accept persons with disability, celebrate diversity and treat them as normal human beings. Often, people who work in the disability sector come across people who are genuinely unaware and have scant knowledge about disability. They would like to know and would not like to disrespect people with disability, but tend to use language and terminology, which can offend, disrespect persons with disability or compromise their dignity.
The government of India and states of the Union have statutorily accepted 21 disabilities under the Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016, which became effective from 2017. And yet we often come across government circulars, advertisements for reserved jobs for persons with disability and even people in higher authorities in government apart from common people loosely using terms like “handicapped person”. It is offensive.
Also, we need to understand that persons with disability with their impairment, if at all remain “handicapped”, it is when we as governments, society, fail to provide them barrier-free surrounding and public spaces (physical as well as virtual)!
With a stringent legislation, which bans offensive terms like handicapped to describe persons with disability, it is all the more pertinent that people in society become aware and sensitised. With education, evolving technology and skill development, persons with disability are competing everywhere, provided they get equal opportunities and a level-playing field in terms of barrier-free surroundings.
In such an emerging scenario, they are no more looking for sympathy. Instead, they want the society to extend to them a hand of empathy on equal terms, with equity and justice on par with others. It is in that context that we should understand disability with a more open mind based on a set of guidelines recently released by the United Nations.
Till the United Nations (UN) Convention on Rights of Persons with Disability came into existence in 2006, the charity model of disability prevailed predominantly worldwide. Legislation and implementation of a comprehensive Rights of Persons with Disability Act, 2016 in India was an outcome of government of India signing the UN convention in 2008.
Till the convention became operational, by and large, disability was viewed from a charity perspective and it was viewed as a burden or a “problem” that persons without disabilities must solve. In many societies traditionally, disability was associated with superstitions, blind beliefs and consequent stigmatisation.
Now the UN has come out with yet another path-breaking step in disability with a set of comprehensive guidelines, which have been prepared by the United Nations office at Geneva as part of efforts to implement the United Nations Disability Inclusion Strategy, launched in 2019.
These practical guidelines aim to foster the consistent use of respectful language at the United Nations. They contain, both the recommended terminology and the terms that are considered inappropriate, and help reader to avoid common mistakes and to comply with United Nations terminology standards.
1. Use people-first language: People-first language is the most widely accepted language for referring to persons with disabilities. People-first language emphasises the person, not the disability, by placing a reference to the person or group before the reference to the disability. For example, we can use expressions such as “children with albinism”, “students with dyslexia”, “women with intellectual disabilities” and, of course, “persons with disabilities”.
However, the people-first rule does not necessarily apply to all types of disabilities. If in doubt, you should ask the person or group how they choose to identify.
2. Avoid labels and stereotypes: Disability is a part of life and of human diversity, not something to be dramatised or sensationalised. Persons with disabilities should, therefore, not be portrayed as inspirational or “superhuman”. This language implies that it is unusual for persons with disabilities to be successful and productive and to live happy and fulfilling lives. Descriptions of persons with disabilities as “courageous” or “brave” or as having “overcome” their disability are patronising and should be avoided. Persons with disabilities are the same as everyone else in terms of talents and abilities. So try to use as much normal language as possible. The term “survivor” is sometimes applied to people who have recovered from or adjusted to a health condition.
Furthermore, the portrayal of persons with disabilities as intrinsically vulnerable is inappropriate. Vulnerability is produced by external circumstances and is not innate or intrinsic to the person or group concerned. Moreover, everyone can be vulnerable in a given situation or period of time.
Avoid labelling people and do not mention a person’s disability or impairment unless it is relevant, particularly in internal communications and emails. You should focus on skills or requirements and point to a person’s impairment only when it brings clarity or provides useful information. On the other hand, disability should not be made invisible either. Always ensure that disability is duly included in your conversations and work.
3. Do not use condescending euphemisms: Some expressions have gained popularity over time as alternatives to inappropriate terms. However, many of them reflect the misguided idea that disability needs to be softened. We should, therefore, not use terms such as “differently abled”, “people of all abilities”, “disability” or “people of determination”, as they are all euphemistic and can be considered patronising or offensive. “Persons with disabilities” is a more neutral term than “differently abled”.
The term “special” used in relation to persons with disabilities is commonly rejected, as it is considered offensive and condescending because it euphemistically stigmatises that which is different. This term should not be used to describe persons with disabilities, including in expressions such as “special needs” or “special assistance”. We recommend more neutral or positive language when possible such as “tailored assistance”.
4. Disability is not an illness or a problem: The medical model of disability views disability as a health condition that needs to be fixed or cured. Under this model, persons with disabilities are not seen as rights holders. Similarly, persons with disabilities should not be referred to as patients unless they are under medical care, and only in that context. You should also avoid labelling persons with disabilities by their diagnoses (for example, “dyslexic”), as this reflects the medical model of disability. Use people-first language instead (for instance, “person with dyslexia” or “has dyslexia”).
Expressions such as “suffers from”, “afflicted with” or “stricken with” are inappropriate. Instead, you can simply say that a person “has [a disability]” or “is [blind/deaf/deafblind]”.
The term “victim” should not be used unless strictly relevant. It is inappropriate to say that a person is “a victim of cerebral palsy”, for example. Cerebral palsy does not make the person a “victim”.
Avoid referring to a person “inside” a disability (for example, “the man inside the paralysed body”) or “beyond” their disability (for example, “she transcended her disability”). Our bodies and minds cannot be separated from who we are. This is ableist language that is offensive to persons with disabilities.
5. Use proper language in oral and informal speech: Most persons with disabilities are comfortable with the words used in daily life. Normal language. You can say “let’s go for a walk” to a person who uses a wheelchair or write “have you heard the news?” to a person who is deaf. However, phrases such as “blind as a bat” or “deaf as a post” are unacceptable and should never be used, even in informal context.
You should also be careful with use of metaphors like “blind to criticism” and “to fall on deaf ears” in your day-to-day life. Often during the heat of electioneering in our country, we come across politicians using such metaphors inadvertently, but undermining the dignity of persons with disability. This is not acceptable.
Misused terminology can also be inappropriate and hurtful, so avoid saying “I must have Alzheimer’s” when you yourself (or to any other person) forget something or “they’re paranoid” when people seem to be acting with excessive mistrust. Never use disability-related terms as an insult or to express criticism. For example, do not use the word “lame” to mean “boring” or “uncool”.
Article Credit: navhindtimes