- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
February 2012 Moms
lancyjo
member
212 Facebook Admin.
Explain this to me...
lancyjo
member
As I was lurking on another board, someone posted about her home day care and how she keeps an "autistic child". Several people corrected her that it was "child with autism, not autistic child".
I'm really confused, because to me these are just semantics. I have a friend whose child has autism, and I don't want to put my foot in my mouth when speaking to her.
Explain to me why it's "child with autism", not "autistic child".
212 Facebook Admin.
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Explain this to me...
This exactly. My friends son has DS and she says when people say he is a "down syndrome kid" it makes it sound like that is all he is. That really "having down syndrome" is just a small part of who he is.
I don't have first-hand experience with this, but I worked at a summer camp for about 7 years for "kids with muscular dystrophy," and several of the kids (now young adults) and their families are now some of my close friends. The idea behind this "person first" language is that people with various disabilities or delays are "people first," separate and apart from a medical condition they might have.
For instance, if every time anyone refered to you, Lancy, as "Aria's mother," even in conversations where your status of Aria's mom was completely irrelevant to the conversation, you might begin to think that your only identity in your community is tied to your status as Aria's mom--vs. any other parts of yourself that you also think are key aspects of your overall identity. For example, "Aria's mom is a really great singer," or "I saw Aria's mom in the grocery store," or "Aria's mom always makes me laugh." At some point, you might think, yeah, I am indeed Aria's mom, but I still am Lancy. My status as a mother doesn't completely and totally define my true identity. It is a part, yes, but not the entire identity.
So, when people always refer to my friends as "wheelchair kids" or "disabled adult, etc., it constantly shoves the message down their throats that people see their disability or assistance devices first, and their individual identity second. For instance, the woman talking about how she runs a daycare and keeps an "autistic child" makes me think that she views the "austism" as the most important aspect of that child, not his sweet personality, the fact that he has a beautiful smile/laugh, the fact that he is super into science, loves movies, etc. In a different context, I know moms of girls who hate when their daughters are constantly referred to as "the blonde girl" or "blondie," even when the color of their hair is not important or relevant to the conversation. They are afraid that their girls will pick up on the "blonde stereotype" if their "blonde hair" is the most important identifying feature that people pick up on.
So, a way to combat that thinking is to say a "child with ______" vs. "a __ child." The first way ensures that you first think of the kiddo as a kiddo, and then address the characteristic that is somehow different or something you want to discuss.
Does that make sense?
Yep, I agree with others. This child is not their diagnosis...the child has a diagnosis.
Some people get offended by things like this sometimes. I don't know that I would necessarily, but I'm not in their shoes. I've 'seen' people get offended by being referred to as "Aria's Mom". They would say no, I'm Lancy, Aria is my daughter (used you as an example because it's your post). But, do you see what I did there. Yes, I really did see someone get livid one time about this. She did not want to be defined as 'that' child's mother, but as herself who happens to be a mother to that child.
Sometimes it's a fine line!
ETA: looks like Sooner and I went to the same place with this one.
...and now I know!
Thanks ladies!
212 Facebook Admin.
This, per my husband with the special ed. degree, the diagnosis should not define the child!
My Ovulation Chart
Ok...now explain it to me.
So I guess I'm really in the minority here but I don't get it. I read all of your responses and it just seems overly PC to me. I think it is just the way my brain works...I try to say things the least complicated way. If I want someone to know that I am Allison's mom (to use Sooner's example) I would introduce myself as Allison's Mom because that makes sense... If I'm explaining to someone that a child is autistic, I would say he is autistic. I think if it is information you are trying to deliver it is ok to put it first.
For example if someone asks if anyone have any experience with autism, why can't I say, "I take care of an autistic child, Danny. Danny is an awesome soccer player." Why is that not ok? Danny is indeed autistic, so does it really matter where I put that in a sentence as long as I don't always refer to him as Danny, the autistic child?
I guess I don't get the logic Sooner used (and I know it was just an example) if we aren't always using the diagnosis in reference to the child. It feels too...protective - for lack of a better word.
I'm frustrating myself because I can't write this as clearly as I want to...
ETA - a little more clarity
I think it boils down to respect for the person and consideration for their abilities and disabilities. My mother is disabled- visibly so. She's used to people making all sorts of assumptions about how to interact her and sadly we see focus on her disability by others more than all the wonderful things she is capable of. It's tough to be different from others and so the extra sensitivity can help a lot- even if it's not 'as easy'.
It may seem very 'pc', but isn't it worth it if it helps people and children to feel less labeled or limited?
You know, as a special ed teacher, this phrase has always bothered me. I don't like labeling people like that. We don't say "He is multiple schlerosis," or "She is Down Syndrome." So, why do we say he IS autistic? The only one close that I can think of is being a diabetic...I just like person first language better, and I am not on the bandwagon of everything having to be so PC. If it were my kid, I wouldn't want people putting them in a box like that.
It is a bit PC to some extent... but after reading the responses, I turned the situation on myself. If Aria was autistic, I wouldn't want her to be defined by that. I wouldn't look at my daughter and see autism, I would look at her and see my sweet Aria Jo.
What if you took out "child" and replaced it with your child's name? By making sure that people would say "Allison, who has autism" instead of "autistic Allison", you would ensure that people see your child first, and her condition second.
212 Facebook Admin.
But do people actually say it like that? That's where I'm coming from. I think in terms of how we speak...
"Allison has autisim" & "She is autistic"
Yeah, if someone referred to her as "autistic Allison" it would annoy me - mostly because it sounds like they are making fun of her. But I think it has a lot to do with the context. If we were having a discussion of children with disabilities/autism/etc I think it is ok to say "autistic child" v. "child with autism." I guess it is sort of a personal thing though. This doesn't bother me but something else that others would just shrug off may bug the heck out of me. And, admittedly, I have no experience with this so it is 100% possible that my opinion would change if I had personal experience.
Until you posted this I didn't realize there was a preference on how to say this...good learning. It would just be easier if we could all look at each other without noticing the differences but I don't see that happening anytime soon (at least not on this side of Heaven anyway!)
I don't think anyone would say "autistic -child's name-", I was just using it as an example.
Where I'm from, most people wouldn't be offended by any of this, because we're not very PC. I'm glad I know now though, so I don't offend my friend.
212 Facebook Admin.
ditto! The joys of living in the "backwoods" right!
Good to know it could be offensive though since I had no idea!
I see your point and before this post I thought about it the same way. However if people who have autism (or their loved ones) find it offensive to have things worded in a certain way I'm more then happy to try to be conscious of that and change how I phrase things.
I agree with Jen. It doesn't bother me to try to use words that people think are empowering or inclusive, as opposed to the alternative.
Also, as to what Lena is saying, yes "autistic" is a valid word, and it can be used to say "Jane and *** are autistic" as a way to explain certain characteristics of Jane and *** to a doctor or to a group of people or another mom on a playdate. That is not a problem at all. The problem (as many have said) comes from when you say "that autistic child in my kid's class," "the autistic boy next door," etc. In those contexts, you are implying that the autism is the most important "identifying" characteristic of the kid, not his red hair, or the fact he is on the baseball team, or he is a straight-A student, etc. So, it implies that the disability that limits them is the most relevant way to identify them, as opposed to their myriad accomplishments/non-limiting attributes. "Autistic" is certainly not a bad word--it just isn't really appropriate as the "identifier" in front of the kid's name.
This!! Although I've heard that the Down syndrome community is way more picky about people first language than the autism community. I personally prefer people first language but I'm not offended if people don't use it. It can get very wordy!
I don't think anyone would go around referring to the child as autistic, disabled, deaf, blind, or anything like that. But in certain situations, it may need to be referenced. In my example and as Lancy said, I wouldn't mind being referred to as Ian's mom. However, that's not something that should be "PC" in certain settings...like referring to someone with disabilities. A lot of this is about being "PC" and sometimes it can be a little much!
Let's make this personal with our board, for refernce sake. Goldenleaves daughter Lauren, has down syndrome...she is not "DS" she is Lauren. I wish she was on so she could give us all her perspective on this. However, from reading her blog, she's ok with it all. She's ok with the fact that Lauren has down syndrome and I believe she's even ok when people speak up about it. However, what seems to bother her the most, is when people just point and stare (and I don't want to put words in her mouth by any means).
I think a lot of 'referencing' the child in whatever manner really does depend on the setting, the parents, why it's being referenced. And I'll make this personal. I have a nephew who has Aspurgers. He is my nephew, he is not Aspurgers. But with us, it never really gets discussed. It's not really an "issue". We all know it, it is what it is. But there are some people who are just SUPER sensitive about these kinds of things and sometimes you kind of have to read the person/situation to determine what's best. Sometimes it's just best to not even mention whatever the 'issue' is! That way, you don't step on anyone's toes.
ETA: and lo and behold, there's Goldenleaves...posted while I was!
Exactly. I think the context is really what matters. Sometimes it's necessary and makes sense to refer to the "autistic child," "blind child," "deaf child," "Johnny's mom," etc. not ALWAYS but in certain contexts.
JM, I don't think anyone would argue that sometimes it needs to be discussed, but let's say you're meeting with a new sports coach and want to discuss your child's special needs because he/she has autism. You could just say "my child has autism" instead of "my autistic child". But it would also be correct to say "my child is autistic". From how I understand this thread (because I honestly had no clue before reading this) it's not the word "autistic" that people take exception to, it's placing it before the child's name because that's kind of like saying the child is defined by that characteristic. Like with your nephew - wouldn't you feel a little sad if you hear another kid or adult refer to him as "the Asperger's kid"? That's just not how you want your nephew to be known or characterized.
ITA with everything you said!
Disclaimer: I am a dirty lurker.
I was due in Feb, but baby boy #3 decided to come in January. I have found the Jan board to be pretty boring, so I have continued to be a dirty lurker on this board and have posted a few times. Today, I think I could offer some perspective, so I am jumping in.
I have a 7 year old boy. He is a gorgeous little boy with big blue eyes and thick blonde hair. He is in 1st grade. He loves Captain Underpants books. He is a superstar in Math. He wrestles and plays hockey. He also happens to have Asperger's syndrome, an autism spectrum disorder.
I also have a 3 year old boy. He is a spunky little guy with the brightest blue eyes you have ever seen and floppy blonde hair. He loves Curious George. He likes to ride his trike and swing for hours on end. He goes to preschool. He has known all his letters uppercase and lowercase since he was 18 months old. He happens to have PDD-Nos, an autism spectrum disorder.
My boys are, I suppose, autistic. However, it is not who they are, it is just something that they live with, like blue eyes or a love for math and letters. It is a part of their every day, but it does not define who they are.
To me, I feel it is offensive to define the child by their disability. I always knew this, but until I lived it, I really didn't understand why.
So in conclusion, yes it may feel overly PC for people, but it generally accepted form in the special needs world.
For me, I do not say "my child is autistic" because in my mind it is still such an absolute statement. When I have had conversations such as the one you outlined above, I might say, "My son B is going to be on your team this year. B lives with autism. As we get going with the season, I would love to help you with strategies that will make this fun and successful for B and for you as B's coach."
I know this doesn't seem like a big difference, but we really do everything we can to help others learn to know our children as people and not as the autistic boy. A little bit more positive language can go a long way, in my experience.
ETA: this was supposed to be in response to Jen0204's post above.
https://www.xojane.com/issues/i-am-not-a-person-with-a-disability-i-am-a-disabled-person
Here is the link I mentioned earlier. I have never visited this website before, so I don't know anything about its credibility, although the article does seem to have legitimately been written by a woman in a wheelchair. The link was posted on Facebook by a friend of mine whose daughter has spina bifida.
I find the author's perspective interesting, given that she is probably very much in the minority.