The Terminology Debate: Identity-First Vs. Person-First Language

When talking about disabilities, there are a lot of factors to keep in mind in order to have a respectful and productive discussion. It’s important to be aware of what language you are using, and to use the appropriate terminology for the situation. But the question of which words to use isn’t always black and white.

In general, there are two ways to refer to a person with a disability: identity-first and person-first. Identity-first puts the disability at the beginning of the descriptor, using it as an adjective. Person-first is the opposite, with the disability coming second. Calling someone an “autistic person” would be an example of using identity-first language, while calling someone a “person with autism” is an example of person-first language.

When it comes to autism, people in the community have made compelling arguments for both terms. Person-first language is often considered more respectful because it doesn’t define people by their diagnosis, but many people who have autism prefer identity-first language, because while autism doesn’t define a person, it does inform a lot about who they are and how they experience the world. It’s not necessary to distance yourself from your diagnosis because a diagnosis isn’t something to be ashamed of.

There is no official standard for when to use what term. Language is constantly evolving along with our understanding of disabilities. Ultimately, what’s most important is that you ask the person you’re talking to what they would prefer, rather than assuming you know what’s best.