Is the word "handicapped" offensive?
 

Today was reading the school newspaper and came across these three letters to the editor:

http://media.www.jhunewsletter.com/m...-3824703.shtml

It looks like the three students are in a class on sociology of disability and wrote the letters together, perhaps as an assignment, in response to an earlier article encouraging the administration to build a handicap-access ramp for a new building on campus. I was totally floored by the response. Since when is the word "handicapped" not PC? I don't mean to offend any actual handicapped (or whatever the right term is) people, but I was totally unaware of this.

This part of the letter, in particular, was strange to me:

Dictionary.com defines "handicap" as "any disadvantage that makes success more difficult." Obviously, this definition has many negative connotations. By using the word "handicapped" to describe people with a disability, we imply that they have something wrong with them; the population of people with disabilities disagrees with this assessment. They see their disabilities as attributes or personal traits, not as something negative that needs to be eliminated.

Yes, their lives are more difficult because of their disability - that's why it's a disability. But I don't see why that has a negative connotation. It's not like saying the person is inferior, just that life is harder for them (which is something I doubt they'd dispute). Moreover, and I hope this doesn't come out wrong, there actually is something wrong with them. A part of their body doesn't work properly. That's not a thing they should be looked down on for, but yes, it is something that is physically wrong with them. It is not a "personality trait". And I think 99% of people with disabilities would readily agree to having that trait eliminated if there was a cure.

And this part just annoyed me because of the incorrect usage of the word "coined":

Although "handicapped" has been (wrongfully) coined for centuries, words like "handicap" or "handicapped" are erroneous and even belittling in referring to the people with disability.

Anyway, what do you guys think? Am I way off base here, or do you think these students are looking to be offended? It might be worth noting that none of them are actually disabled.

I think it is just a case of overly PCness. Am I the only one who doesn't understand how handicap and disability have different connotations? According to the dictionary "Any disadvantage that makes success more difficult. Compare that to disability which means you are missing an ability to do things that most people can.

Nope.

I would love to hear what somebody who is actually disabled thinks (although I do realize that no one person can, or should be forced to, speak for an entire class, minority, religion, etc). To me personally, I cannot even comprehend how handicap would be offensive. To me the word handicap implies a disadvantage that can be overcome, which is positive if anything. I am trying to gauge if this is something that people with disabilities find offensive, or if it is something that PC police with no direct tie to the term have taken it unto themselves to declare offensive without any personal experience.

I thought you had to be smart to go to Johns Hopkins. Seized instead of ceased seriously?

Hey now, most of us are! :p

Also, it wouldn't be a phenotype if it was an acquired disability, like being in a wheelchair as a result of a car accident. I need to look this kid up...

ETA: Yikes, this Moses character is a Pre-med. After spending 4 years with a bunch of America's future doctors, I have to say that many (but certainly not all!) are people I'd never let treat me unless they do some serious growing up in med school.

I'll take your word on the phenotype since I'm pretty weak with the biological sciences. Then again this is the same idiot who had no idea what coined meant. The editor should have put a disclaimer that the letter wasn't edited in any way.

Somebody correct me if I'm wrong, but genotype is the gene for something and phenotype is the actual expression of the gene. As in, the gene for blue eyes is a genotype, and the actual eyes being blue is the phenotype.

So if someone had the genes for a disabling chronic condition, their disability would be a phenotype... but if they were physically or mentally handicapped as a result of an accident, that has nothing to do with their genes and is NOT a phenotype.

According to wikipedia :D, the phenotype is a combination of genetic and environmental factors. So something like poisoning would count, but I don't know about trauma.

same here.

I have never heard of the word "handicapped" being offensive... at least not to the point where it would warrant this type of response. I mean, how many times have you heard the term "disabled parking?" I'm guessing not that many, if at all.

I actually looked up the origin of the word, and Snopes gives a very detailed response.

http://www.snopes.com/language/offense/handicap.asp

Kind of interesting, actually.

When I hear handicapped I think a mobility disability, and disabled as including all disabilities. By mobility I'm thinking of people who may have a health condition that can flare up at times, or a mental or emotional diagnosis. I just use disability and disabled to be all encompassing.

When it comes to ramps or bathrooms, I use the term "access" as some older people may not be disabled, but find ramps, doorknobs, and bathrooms easier to navigate, as well as people with strollers and children. Needing a little help or an accommodation isn't a disability, but does make things more accessible.

I guess I'll be going at this from two sides.

I was born with a handicap and have lived out my life that way. It's no longer terribly noticeable because I had numerous surgeries and very intensive therapy and interventions to combat it when I was younger. I wore AFOs (aka-forrest gump shoes) until I was in 7th grade and refused.

The word handicapped doesn't bother me, but I can see and understand why it would bother someone with a more obvious exceptionality. The negative connotation and stigma that has become the word handicapped is what makes it offensive. Not the word or use of the word itself.

Now, as a special education teacher. Terminology has changed to become more "person centered". To call someone handicapped, disabled, or special is not something that is smiled upon in the SPED profession. An example of this is: Instead of saying, "Johnny is autistic" you would say "Johnny has autism". As it was stated in the excerpt--a person is not defined by their exceptionality. Their exceptionality is just another trait they have. And, if you noticed--I don't use the word "disability", instead "exceptionality". The word disability implies that there is something someone can't do. Most times, it's not that these people CAN'T do it. They just do it a different way than most of the people around them would.

I'm not sure if that makes any sense at all, but there you have it.

That's a nice explanation. It puts the patient as the more important of the two factors. What I found interesting in the article is the statement that people with disabilities don't have anything "wrong" with them and that "They see their disabilities as attributes or personal traits, not as something negative that needs to be eliminated." Medically, they DO have something "wrong" with them, and except for the militant deaf population, I doubt there are many in the handicapped population (hard to lump them all since it includes so many people with so many varying issues and diagnoses) who would turn down an opportunity to get rid of their medical problems and lead a "normal" life.

This.

The "person-centric" change is a good one, and one that is simple and easy to implement - in language studies, it's much more effective language too, for what you're trying to accomplish with the descriptor. It's win/win.

However, use of terms like "exceptionality" is the opposite, in my mind - it's shuffling deck chairs on the Titanic in its truest form. There is nothing innate about the word "disability" or "handicap" or whatever that gives them connotation beyond their denotation - it's not an etymological property. It's a property of the way society at large views people who have a [exceptionality/disability/problem/challenge/whatever]. By changing the word, you're simply putting that word to the test next, once it becomes in heavy use - think "retarded" going to "mentally handicapped" going to "challenged" going to "special" and how each still carries stigma with it.

Is it really an improvement on the whole, or a temporary fix until language catches up? It seems much more the latter, and that's (not coincidentally) why I don't think "handicapped" should be viewed as offensive. In fact, it could be argued that all of these attempts to create a new, specialized, non-offensive language for various afflictions, maladies, lifestyles and challenges serves only to separate them more from "everybody else."

I agree with this. I think your whole post is spot on. It will never end.

A lot of it I think also has to do with the intent people have when using these terms as well. There are other words to describe various type of people that can be used either way.

This.

I wouldn't take offense to something being said when the person expressing themselves had no ill intentions when using such words.

I have an uncle who is mentally handicapped. And yes, that's what I say. Without going into the entire story and possibility of causes, around thirteen years old, he started having epileptic seizures. Eventually, he was having them so frequently, he had to be put on numerous medications which essentially "handicapped" him, and put him in a wheelchair. Even to call him mentally challenged or disabled seems weird to me. Ironically, as slow, and as barely talkative, and needing as much help as he does in life, he is extremely intelligent. My mom's side of the family has a tradition of playing Trivial Pursuit at Thanksgiving and Christmas. My uncle will be put on a team, and won't say much during the entire game. But when a question pops up that people don't even understand well enough to answer, he'll randomly blurt out the correct answer.

I think there are too many variations of mental and physical illnesses to make such definitions of "handicapped" and "disabled" encompass them all. And whichever word you use, I think it will eventually be looked at in a negative way.

However, I can understand the changing from "He is autistic" to "He has autism." But at the same time, I also wouldn't take offense if someone said the former.

I guess I just don't understand the extreme change from handicapped being ok to use, to it becoming extremely offensive. Even the word "retard" took centuries to be changed from a verb to a noun, and then considered offensive.

And to be completely honest, I am becoming tired of all of this PCness. Especially when people are simply following trends and using words that have been used for years, not knowing that they have apparently taken on a negative connotation.

I agree. And, I see a big difference between the terms "handicapped" and "disabled". To me, a handicap is an obstacle, disabled is unable to function anymore (such as .. no longer able to work, on Social Security Disability because of it).

We were always encouraged to do this, even when I was in OT school 25 years ago. (OMG! 25 years ago!!!!!!!!!!!) That said, we, as a society, tend to do this with everything. We don't "search Google", we "Google". We aren't "of Italian heritage", we "are Italian".

In some ways, I do understand what they are saying because of my Crohn's Disease. When I was first diagnosed, I felt like the Crohn's defined who I am. I was walking Crohn's Disease. It took a few years to start feeling like I am a person with Crohn's Disease and that it doesn't define me. This was an INTERNAL struggle. After I had surgery and was on maintenance meds, I got SO angry that I still had to go for regular blood work and get B12 supplements for the rest of my life because it added to feeling like the disease defined me. I imagine that everybody with a handicap, challenge, disability or serious illness feels that way at some point and the terminology would grate on you when you're in that place.

You just described how I feel every time I walk onto UNC campus for an appt with the neurologist, physiatrist, and/or orthopedic surgeon.

(speaking of, I'm due for an appt soon.....ugh)

Interesting discussion. So... what should be done about golfers?

I almost brought up golfers! Don't bowlers get a handicap too?

^^Lol

Am I the only one who disagrees with the statement made in the article that said: I disagree that the definition itself has negative connotations. Personally, I think if the term "handicapped" is used only in the context of this definition, it is much less offensive than many other terms used in the past.

While the terms "handicapped" or "disabled" are by no means perfect terms, they are much better than some of the words used to describe individuals in the past. I think we are getting closer to finding more sensitive terms for these types of things, as shown by AlwaysSAI's point about saying "Johnny has autism" rather than "Johnny is autistic." Some people are okay with being defined by their disability, some want to be seen as more than it. (I use the term "disability," even though I dislike it, because that is what I have been taught is the correct term).

Honestly, I don't think the quest for PC-ness (made up word? Sorry!) will ever end. Somebody, somewhere will always be offended by pretty much everything. I think in cases like this, it's important to treat everyone, regardless of whether they are "handicapped" or not, with the same compassion and sensitivity they deserve. I agree with what many of you have already said: it's not always the word that is the problem, it's the way that word is used. In general, I feel like saying "handicapped entrance" is really not much different than saying "entrance for people with disabilities." However, I would be interested in hearing how others feel about this. If these words (or any words like them) make people feel marginalized or "put down," then it is probably time to reassess the kind of terms we are using.

So now I'm curious. Maybe some of the other GC-ers could help out: If society considers you "handicapped," is that how you see yourself? How do words like "handicapped" make you feel?

Co-sign on everything you said.

Honestly, just in a pure word dissection sense, I personally think disabled is more offensive than handicapped. "Dis" has negative connotations in any word it's attached to - that's a pretty basic thing that anyone picks up on, and I'm guessing someone just learning English would agree.

Or maybe we should be saying "differently abled" or "handi-capable." Those were around when my mom was still living and if anyone had actually used them on her, she would have probably said (paraphrasing) "I'm not differently abled, you idiot - I'm in a @#$%ing wheelchair."

I'm pretty sure this is my favorite quote for the day. Kudos to your mom, 33girl, sounds like she had a lot of spunk! :)

Not related to "handicapped" per se, but there is someone seeking to get a law passed to remove "mentally retarded" from the federal lexicon:

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/rosas-l...ory?id=9109319

JHU? Same school where students wack criminals with samurai swords?

Well hey...

^^^ LOL

My middle son attends a developmental preschool. One of the reasons that we (I) chose to enroll him there was because it was important to me for my kids to see other kids as just kids, no matter what the difference is- so I like the person-centric language.

And I have noticed that my son has become incredibly understanding about differences between kids without labeling or even passing judgement. I could actually learn allot from him (and he's only 4).

Anyway, his school is big on the person-centric language to the point that to hear it phrased other ways now just sounds odd to me.