Title: Navigating the Complexities of Person-First vs. Identity-First Language in the Disabled Community

Intro

The debate surrounding "person-first language" versus "identity-first language" has always been a perplexing issue for me as a disabled individual. On one hand, I don't want my disability to be the sole characteristic people notice about me. Yet, on the other hand, I’ve reached a stage in my life where I embrace my disability and am proud to be part of the disabled community. This internal conflict makes it challenging for me to differentiate between these terms. I yearn for a world where such a choice is unnecessary. While I appreciate the idea of using whatever language a person is comfortable with, the default choice for a broader audience or public officials often tends to be person-first language. I'm not entirely comfortable with that being the automatic option.

What’s the difference?

Identity-first language is a way of referring to individuals that emphasizes what they consider to be a core part of their identity. Identity-first language is more common in the autism community, where some people identify as autistic and work to dispel the notion that autism is an unfortunate affliction or defining characteristic.

Examples of identity-first language in the autism community could include “autistic person” or “autistic individual.”Although there are many ways to define these terms, these definitions came from Disability Rights Texas. I think their definitions and examples break down the terminals into their simplest form, which allows the individual to open up their minds to what other situations may apply.

People-first language, on the other hand, puts the person before their disability or condition. The theory here is that someone is a person first and not defined by their disability. Historically, people with disabilities were often referred by the name of their disability, which denied their individualism and, in a way, dehumanized them.

A broad example of people-first language is “person with a disability.” More specific examples could include “an individual with Down syndrome” or “a person with an intellectual disability.”

Embracing Identity and Overcoming Societal Norms:

In my teenage years and early adulthood, I was deeply entrenched in the medical model of disability, seeking solutions for what society deemed "wrong" with disabled individuals. However, as I’ve matured, I no longer question my identity. While I don't want my disability to be the only thing people notice about me, I’ve come to accept the harsh reality that it might be the first, and sometimes the only, aspect they see. This might sound disheartening to some, but I hope that if my disability is all they know, they will also recognize that I strive to achieve many things in my lifetime. I graduated from college with honors—a feat not many able-bodied individuals can claim. Furthermore, I pour more of myself into my work than the average able-bodied person.

Confronting Employment Biases

When job hunting, I go to great lengths to demonstrate to potential employers that while it may take me a bit longer to figure out the necessary equipment and to acclimate to the job, if they take a chance on me, they will get an employee who gives 110% to ensure clients receive what they need. Instead of fixating on the type of language that should be used, I believe more effort should be directed toward eliminating employer biases against people with disabilities. These biases often remain concealed despite being technically illegal. If I’m being completely honest, I don't have a strong preference for either type of language. What truly matters to me is that people are willing to engage with me and look beyond my disability or my wheelchair. I want them to recognize that I offer a unique perspective to society that might otherwise be overlooked.

Conclusion

The ongoing debate between person-first and identity-first language highlights the broader issue of how society perceives and interacts with disabled individuals. While language is important, the focus should shift towards fostering an inclusive environment where biases are dismantled and the true potential of disabled individuals is acknowledged. Ultimately, it's not about the labels we use but about the respect and understanding we extend to one another. In my view, the real progress lies in our willingness to see beyond disabilities and appreciate the diverse contributions each person brings to the table.