latest election news: Could The 2012 Paralympics Erase The Word Disability?

Saturday, September 10, 2011

Could The 2012 Paralympics Erase The Word Disability? | Suite101 ...

: An international symbol of disability - Pink Sherbet Photography

Could next year's disability sport event change the English dictionary forever?

A rather interesting suggestion has been made in London, England, today. Now, the thing about the word 'interesting' is that I, for one, can never tell whether it's being used positively or negatively. It's a bit like another word I hear used a lot- disability.

The problem with the word 'disability' is that unlike the word 'interesting,' most people see it as a negative thing and, therefore, use it negatively.

Remove The Word

I guess that is why Sir Philip Craven has made the suggestion that has been revealed today by BBC News. As London marks International Paralympic Day today in Trafalgar Square, the president of the International Paralympic Committee has said he refuses to use the "D-word."

Disabled himself, the former wheelchair basketball player thinks the London 2012 Paralympic Games will make the word 'disability' a thing of the past.

'Doesn't Work'

Sir Philip told BBC News: "It needs to be removed from the lexicon as it pertains to human beings.

"I mean, let's face it, if a machine gets disabled, it doesn't work. And that is the way that the word has influenced people's minds in the past."

I can see where he is coming from. After all, disabled people are not machines. We do have parts of ourselves that 'don't work' perfectly, but then, don't non-disabled people have things that they find difficult, or even impossible, to do?

Same Difference!

Sir Philip wonders what the word 'disabled' means. He points out that there are significant differences between a person in a wheelchair and a blind person. This is, of course, true.

However, a person in a wheelchair and a blind person have one significant thing in common. They are both unable to do something that most other people take for granted. In this way, although they may be different to most of the rest of society, they are similar to each other. They both face challenges, although the specific challenges may be different. They both face prejudice and discrimination from people who don't face those challenges and, as a result, don't understand them.

Surely those similarities mean more than any differences? Personally, I think they mean quite a lot. That's why, although I understand what Sir Philip is trying to say, I find myself agreeing much more with disability rights campaigner Clair Lewis, who said that the term 'disabled' "unifies the community."

I also agree with her point that "changing the word doesn't actually fix anything." After all, we will all still face the same problems we are facing today whether we replace the 'd-words' or not.

Disability Has It's Advantages!

What could we replace them with, anyway? 'Impairment' and related word 'impaired' is one possibility that has been suggested.

Personally, though, I think it would be far better to respond to the negative use of the word 'disabled' with a clever comeback like "at least it means I don't have to do the washing up!"

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article is for educational purposes only and should not be used for diagnosis or to guide treatment without the opinion of a health professional. Any reader who is concerned about his or her health should contact a doctor for advice.