Terminology

People-First Language

People-first language, also known as person-first language, is a way of communicating and writing that emphasizes the individual as a person first rather than defining them by their condition, disability, or other characteristics. The primary purpose of people-first language is to promote respect, dignity, and inclusivity when discussing individuals with various attributes, particularly those related to health conditions or disabilities.

Here are some key principles and examples of people-first language:

• Put the Person First: Instead of defining a person by their condition, attribute, or disability, you mention the person first. For example, "a person with a disability" instead of "a disabled person."
• Avoid Labels and Stereotypes: People-first language discourages using labels or stereotypes that can stigmatize or objectify individuals.
• Focus on the Individual, Not the Condition: Emphasize the individual's humanity, feelings, and identity before discussing their condition. For example, "a child with Down syndrome" is preferred over "a Down syndrome child."
• Respect Personal Preferences: When possible, use the language and terminology that individuals or groups prefer for describing themselves and their experiences. Not everyone may have the same preference, so it's important to ask and listen.
• Consider Context: While people-first language is generally preferred, it's essential to be aware of context. Some individuals or communities may use identity-first language when discussing themselves, as it aligns with their personal or cultural preferences. For example, many people with autism prefer to be referred to as “autistic,” “autistic person,” or “autistic individual.
  • The National Center on Disability and Journalism publishes a Disability Language Style Guide. We encourage you to familiarize yourself with common terms within this guide to ensure that you use accurate and inclusive language.

 

Universal Language

Authors should strive for clear communication to the intended audience in CEC publications. They should use precision and clarity of language. They should avoid jargon, including legal jargon, except when the legal term is the specific focus of the topic. They should also strive to make their language explicit versus implicit and remember the audience they are writing to.

Unless writing policy or legal updates, terms derived from any law frequently have meanings restricted by the law and can confuse readers. This is especially true for broad audiences that cross jurisdictions and international boundaries. Generally, authors should avoid using legal terms except when the focus of the topic is a specific legal requirement. For example, if the topic is individualized education planning for an individual with an exceptionality, the author should describe individualized education planning rather than using a specific legal term such as “Individual Education Program” or IEP. When the topic focuses on a specific national, state, or provincial legal requirement(s), using the specific term with appropriate citation and explanation would best facilitate precise meaning and clear communication.

 

Avoid Labels and Stereotypes

Those living with disabilities should not be sensationalized or dramatized. For example, portraying those with disabilities as inspirational or heroes implies it is out of the ordinary for these people to be successful and comes off as patronizing. Portraying people with disabilities as inherently vulnerable is not appropriate as it takes away one’s agency, and vulnerabilities are not an innate characteristic of various people or groups.

There is a fine line between avoiding stereotypes and labels and erasing one’s disability. Focus on skills or requirements, and only mention a person’s disability if it’s relevant. For example, you can talk about people who use braille rather than say they are blind. However, we must have open and respectful conversations around disability, prioritize inclusion, and center the voices of people with disabilities.

 

Disability is Part of the Human Experience

The medical terminology around disability can be problematic with its focus on “fixing” or “curing” disabilities. It removes agency from people with disabilities and depicts them negatively. For example, using terms such as “afflicted with” and “victim of” regarding disability perpetuates negative stereotypes.

 

Ableism and Informal Speech

Many phrases that appear in daily life can be ableist and inappropriate. Many people with disabilities are comfortable with certain phrases, such as “Let’s go for a walk,” “Have you heard about this?” and so on. But phrases such as “blind as a bat,” “deaf as a post,” and “lame” can be hurtful and can be reworded in less offensive terms.

 

Special Education vs. SpEd

It is common to abbreviate special education as SPED. However, this term can be considered derogatory, especially when referring to a person as such. This is generally considered an appropriate term for professionals in special education, though your experience may vary. Using abbreviations can also confuse and dilute your messaging if your audience is unfamiliar. CEC recommends utilizing the term special education instead of the abbreviation.

 

Additional Sources/Resources for Reference*

• National Center on Disability and Journalism Disability Style Guide
• Guidelines for Writing About People With Disabilities from ADA
• Language Accessibility from UserWay: Access for all language learners
• US Digital Accessibility from the U.S. Federal Government
• Inclusive Language in A Canadian Style Guide from Humber College (PDF)

*Inclusion of the links does not represent an endorsement from CEC or its components.