Choosing Your Words: Understanding Person-First and Identity-First Language

"You say tomato; I say tomoto." This familiar phrase highlights the differences in pronunciation but underscores the importance of personal choice and preference. When it comes to language, the choice between Person-First and Identity-First language is highly debated, especially when discussing topics like disabilities, identities, and personal experiences.

Some prefer Person-First Language (PFL), emphasizing the person before their disability. It focuses on the person's abilities and characteristics rather than defining them solely by their disability. For example, instead of saying "The autistic person," one would say "The person with autism," or instead of saying "A blind person," they would say "A person who is blind."

Others opt for Identity-First Language (IFL), placing the disability at the forefront of the description, emphasizing it as a core part of a person's identity. For example, one would say "The autistic person" instead of "The person with autism" or "A blind person" instead of "A person who is blind."

This approach, often preferred by people within the disability community, is a source of empowerment. They view their disability as a positive aspect of their lives and do not want it to be seen as a negative or a defining characteristic. It's about embracing their identity and inspiring others to do the same.

Both PFL and IFL models are rooted in respect for individuals with disabilities. Understanding the reasons for the 'debate' between the two approaches requires a deeper dive into the pros and cons of each. Let's start with Person-First Language.

Arguments in Favor of Person-First Language

Person-First Language places the individual before their disability. Here are some arguments in favor of Person-First Language:

Focuses on the person: It highlights the person as an individual, separate from their disability.
Reduces stigma: By focusing on the person, PFL can help reduce negative stereotypes associated with disabilities.
Aligns with current best practices: Many organizations and publications advocate for Person-First Language as a more inclusive and respectful approach. See "2020 AP Stylebook changes: Person-First Language, and the great 'pled' debate"

Arguments Against Person-First Language

While PFL is widely considered respectful, there are some arguments against its use:

Reinforces Disability as a Negative: Some individuals with disabilities argue that PFL, while intended to be respectful, can inadvertently draw undue attention to a person's disability. They believe that it suggests that a person's disability is something to be overcome or corrected rather than a natural part of their identity.
Lack of Consistency: No universal agreement exists on what constitutes a Person-First Language. Different organizations and individuals have varying preferences, leading to confusion and inconsistency in its use.

Now, let’s look at Identity-First Language to understand this as a choice.

Arguments in Favor of Identity-First Language

Identity-First Language places the disability before the person, emphasizing that it is a core part of their identity. Here are some arguments in favor of this approach:

Empowerment and Pride: Many people with disabilities view their disability as a positive aspect of their identity. IFL recognizes and validates this perspective, promoting feelings of empowerment and pride.
Normalization: By placing the disability at the forefront, IFL can help to normalize disability and reduce stigma.
Community Solidarity: IFL can foster community among people with disabilities. Language that directly acknowledges their shared identity helps strengthen their connections and support networks.

Arguments Against Identity-First Language

While Identity-First Language is becoming increasingly popular within specific communities, it's not without its critics. Here are some common arguments against its use:

Reinforces disability as a Defining Characteristic: Some argue that Identity-First Language places undue emphasis on a person's disability, potentially reducing them to a single aspect of their identity. This reduction can perpetuate harmful stereotypes and should be a cause for concern.
Oversimplification of Complex Issues: Identity-first language may not fully capture the nuances and complexities of disability experiences. Understanding that disability intersects with other identities, such as race, gender, and class, is crucial.

Choosing the Right Words is Important

Use respectful language: Avoid offensive terms or phrases that may be derogatory.
Be clear and concise: Be straightforward in your communication, making your thoughts, ideas, and words easy to understand.
Respect individual preferences: Always ask how a person prefers to be identified or addressed.

Remember, it's important to respect individual preferences. Everyone's experience with disability is unique. By respecting individual choices and preferences, you contribute to a more inclusive and understanding environment.