Language

What this means 

Sometimes, language can betray the low expectations for living fulfilled lives. There can be talk of ‘surviving’ and ‘coping’, which immediately sets a low bar. Conversely, when language is strength and rights-based, this creates higher expectations for what can be achieved. 

However, we need to be careful how language can be ‘hijacked’. An example discussed by the group was the phrase ‘personal outcome’. Outcomes can be conflated with need - these are not the same thing, and using them interchangeably undermines the shift towards positive, strength-based language. 

Can you explain what you mean when you say the language of outcomes has been hijacked?

Jenny Hurst talks about how the language of outcomes has been interpreted very narrowly by services, leading to a lack of choice for people drawing on care and support:

The research 

Language isn’t an end in itself – it’s an expression of thoughts and feelings. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein wrote that ‘The limits of my language mean the limits of my world’ (quoted in Martland, 1975, p.19) and this very much reflects the experiences of the Leading The Lives We Want To Live group – that only using limited, and negative, words to describe care and support needs diminishes people’s experiences. These discussions highlighted once again the core importance of the social model of disability. If professionals started from this perspective, it would help promote more positive language and higher expectations for people with care and support needs.  

Yet language can and does change, and it can be manipulated. Giri et al. (2021), in research looking specifically at people with a learning disability, found that the social model of disability had been somewhat co-opted, particularly by the Department for Work and Pensions, who ‘…seek to use the words once heralded as success for the Disability rights activists and proponents of the social model: such as inclusion, independence and citizenship’ (p.98). In other words, simply using the language of the social model of disability without the underlying belief in its principles isn’t progress. 

Botha et al. (2023), in a study specifically on language and autism, found that language used to describe autism ‘…has material consequences for autistic people - including stigmatisation, dehumanisation, and violence’ (p.870), giving the example of a 2007 American campaign by a charity that aimed to raise awareness of autism in children, but which caused substantial distress and stereotyping. Botha et al. (2023) go on to analyse how autistic people prefer to describe themselves - with ‘autistic’, ‘autistic person’, and ‘on the autism spectrum’ much preferred over ‘person with autism’. For autistic people, the ‘person with…’ formulation seemed to equate autism with medical conditions (‘person with cancer’, ‘person with COVID-19’, and so on) (Botha et al., 2023). 

People may use numerous, and changing, ways to describe themselves. Being alert to these, always asking the person about their preferred descriptors and understanding things in their own words, is a fundamental part of strengths-based working. As Guthrie and Blood (2019) put it; ‘The language which professionals use to describe the individuals they work with has an influence on how those individuals are perceived, and on how they perceive themselves.’ 

What you can do 

If you are in direct practice: Think about the language you use, or hear, as part of your everyday practice. Do you hear any of the following?  

• ‘at risk’ 
• ‘did not engage’
• ‘isolated’ 
• ‘suffers from’ 
• ‘coping well’ 
• ‘struggling’ 
• ‘demanding’. 

(You may also think of other negative words you commonly hear to add to this list.) 

How would it feel to hear these words about yourself? Are there other words or phrases you can use without minimising the difficulties people are facing? To help with this reflection, consider again the social model of disability – and think how a perspective that locates society as disabling might use language differently. 

For instance, think about the word ‘demanding’. Guthrie and Blood (2019) have suggested that this is often used to describe family members or carers. The social model of disability might, instead, consider those family members ‘fighting for the rights of their loved ones, and being determined to break down the barriers they face’. 

Further information 

Use

The Centre for Independent Living shares the language they use to talk about disability and disabled people.

The Alzheimer’s Society has a guide, Positive language, co-created with people living with dementia, on language to use when talking or writing of dementia.

The British Deaf Association has a factsheet on terminology used to describe or refer to Deaf and hard of hearing people.

Watch

Research in Practice has a webinar on Recording strengths-based conversations.