Confusion about Disability Terminology

By Sam Shepherd

There is far too much confusion and debate around the terminology for disabilities. Before getting into the conversation, I want to first include that Rosa’s Law did replace previously harmful terminology with ‘intellectual disability’ in federal law; and that word shouldn’t be used anywhere. You can read more about that here.    

I will say that a person centered approach is ideal, saying “someone with a disability” versus “that disabled person,” and even more so when referring to people by their specific disability. The person centered approach is why 3DA’s mission statement is “giving a voice to every individual with a developmental disability,” to emphasize that everyone’s disability is different and that each person has their own unique abilities and difficulties based on their disability. To add, a person centered approach is also to let each individual be referred to by their terminology of preference. An example is someone with autism may want to be referred to as such, while another wants to be referred to as autistic. Some people with disabilities will call themselves ‘crippled,’ whereas many people may tell others that the term is offensive. What each person wants to be referred to as is what matters best; this also helps promote self advocacy.

Moving forward, ‘special’ and ‘special needs’ are also terms that are up for debate. On one side, there’s the Stop Special Campaign that wants the word ‘special’ removed from everyday language and policies, whereas the Special Olympics not only has ‘special’ in their name, but has the I am Special Campaign. Confusing, right? As I've seen advocates say before, the terminology shouldn’t be the focus, but how we treat the people with disabilities.

Onward, an important note for spelling disability terminology is to never capitalize the specific disability unless a person’s name is a part of the disability terminology. For example, Down syndrome was named after John Landon Down, hence why the D in Down is capitalized and the s in syndrome isn’t. This is also to emphasize the importance of the individual and not their disability, adding to the person centered approach around disability terminology. 

Overall, there is no set answer here but to emphasize that, even being in this field of work, the conflicting opinions over terminology is confusing and conflicting. What matters most is that the language isn’t hateful or ableist and that we don’t forget the absolute importance of giving everyone an equal opportunity and to always fight for the rights of individuals with disabilities.