How important is language? Do the words we use really matter? Research shows that people tend to perceive and think about things in similar ways. What differentiates us as human beings is the language we use to filter, enhance, and frame our perceptions and thoughts. “Languages do not limit our ability to perceive the world or to think about the world,” wrote Antonio Benitez-Burraco, “but they focus our perception, attention, and thought on specific aspects of the world.” The terms we use may not change another’s perception or thought process, but a particular word could refocus how a thought or perception is viewed.
As Alex Shashkevich has pointed out, if we say, “girls are as good as boys at math” (subject-complement) that carries a different meaning than if we say, “boys and girls are equally good at math” (subject-subject). The first example sets boys as the standard, by which girls are compared. “Changing a phrase,” adds Lydia Brown, “even if it holds the same literal meaning — alters the subtle connotations and nuances of the speech and communicates a different meaning and context than the original phrasing.” These findings could be of particular interest in the ongoing debate in the neuro-typical community over the use of person-first vs. identity-first language and the use of the terms “disabled,” “deficits,” and “impairment.”
Both identify-first and person-first proponents want people to be seen as valuable, although they use different lenses. Identify-first users see value in acknowledging a person’s parts, while person-first users want to be known outside of any other components. Identify-first users argue that they are acknowledging the truth that, for example, disability challenges will not disappear just as a person cannot be separated from their skin color. Saying someone is “an autistic person” is a way of acknowledging that autism is a part of the way they perceive and interact with those around them. Person-first users base their argument on acknowledging the worth of the human as an individual not to be defined by their disorder. By putting the person first in the phrase “a person with autism” makes the person themselves first and foremost.
[perfectpullquote align=”left” bordertop=”false” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]
When there is a need to bring about dramatic change in how something is viewed, as there is in the neurodiverse community, words matter.[/perfectpullquote]
How a person identifies themself is up to the preference of that individual person. My son, for example, prefers the term “autistic person.” If I had to choose, I would pick that for him, too. My son’s autism shapes how he responds to the world around him in thought, perception, language, and action.
Another dichotomous dynamic of a neurodiverse brain is strength-based vs deficit thinking. A strength-based approach focuses on talents, abilities, and strengths. Deficit thinking looks at remediation to mitigate deficits.
Focusing on an individual’s strengths does not mitigate the fact that challenges exist. In his work, Thomas Armstrong suggests that renaming “differences” as something positive does not make the distressing effects go away.
Personally, I do not think it is harmful to focus on strengths, but I do think it is harmful to ignore or diminish the challenges of disabilities. I have seen with my son the challenges of depression, loneliness, and low self-worth that autism can bring. Ignoring those could result in self-harm. So, while we celebrate and use his strengths of presenting information, ability to focus, unlimited database of knowledge, and quirky sense of humor, we also ensure that he receives mental-health support to deal with the emotional pain of being neurodiverse in this society. It is hoped that if he surrounds himself with others who share his interests and knowledge, he will find his niche. That a piece of focusing on living through our strengths may play a positive role.
Why worry about identifying language such as strength vs deficit? Because we know that words are powerful and can change attitudes. When there is a need to bring about dramatic change in how something is viewed, as there is in the neurodiverse community, words matter. The goal is to empower people who have been misunderstood and often mis-labeled by choosing our words carefully and deliberately. What words can we use that will celebrate strengths, support challenges, and further understanding of neurodiverse people? Letting them decide is a great place to start.
_______________________________________________________________________
Michelle Smith is a school administrator specializing in twice-exceptional learners and a Doctoral student in Cognitive Diversity in Education at Bridges Graduate School. She holds an M. Ed in Administration and Leadership and has nearly 30 years of educational experience.
