Is the word "handicapped" offensive?

[littleowl33]

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

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.

[littleowl33]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Am I the only one who doesn't understand how handicap and disability have different connotations?

Nope.

[APhiAnna]

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

the public seized to see disability as curses and punishments but as another type of phenotype.

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

[littleowl33]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

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

Hey now, most of us are!

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by littleowl33

Hey now, most of us are!

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...

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.

[littleowl33]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

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.

[Psi U MC Vito]

Originally Posted by littleowl33

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

[dreamseeker]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

Am I the only one who doesn't understand how handicap and disability have different connotations?

Originally Posted by littleowl33

Nope.

same here.

[ASTalumna06]

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.

[VandalSquirrel]

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.

[AlwaysSAI]

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.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by AlwaysSAI

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.

[christiangirl]

Originally Posted by Psi U MC Vito

I think it is just a case of overly PCness.

This.