Happy Friday, readers, and welcome back to Shelf Life’s series on respectful writing. I’m grateful that you’re back to read for the third time this week. Thank you for seeing this through.
Today’s article is about writing respectfully using person-first language when you are discussing people and the circumstances of their lives, including physical and mental illness, disability, and survivorship. You’d have to be a medical doctor, a sociologist, or a criminologist to understand the specifics of all the different circumstances described herein (and the many that I don’t specifically mention). Not to worry! You only have to remember the rules for talking and writing about these types of things and you’ll be all set. It’s never okay to use language in a way that reduces your fellow humans to the circumstances of their lives. For guidance, here’s a Shelf Life.
Herewith, then, the third and final part of your Shelf Life Guide to Respectful Writing:
Writing Respectfully With Person-First Language
Please note: Terms appear in italics while phrases appear in “quotation marks.”
Content Warning: This article discusses the language used around several sensitive topics including suicide, sexual assault, and child sexual abuse. The heading structure of this article is intended to clearly indicate the presence of these subjects so that readers may choose whether or not to read each section.
What People Are, What People Are Not
I’m going to put the summary for this article first instead of at the end because it’s so critical and so important to understanding how to write about people that I want you to be thinking about it while you read the rest. (And also whenever you are writing or speaking about your fellow humans.)
People are not their medical diagnoses;
People are not their circumstances; and
People are never the crimes that have been committed against them.
These things happen to people. These are the circumstances of peoples’ lives. They never identify people.
The key factor in person-first writing is placing the person before their circumstance. Literally you just write “person” before the rest of whatever you have to say. It’s so easy. There’s never a reason not to do this.
Here we go.
Physical Health and Diagnoses
Generally speaking, in the case of medical illness and medical events, people should not be expressed with their medical situation placed first. For instance, people are not “cancer patients” and they are never “cancer cases.” The respectful way to describe people who have received a diagnosis of cancer is “people with cancer” or “patients with cancer.” While doctors may research illness and study it, they do not treat illnesses. They treat “patients” or “people.”
Those with terminal diagnoses should never be described as “dying from” their illness; instead they should be characterized as “living with” their illness. It is okay to say that a deceased person has “died from” their illness, but do not use “dying” to describe a living person.
Don’t portray people as victims of their illness or of a medical event. While a person can “experience a stroke,” no one should be described as a “stroke victim.” Diseases affect people but they do not victimize (only people may do that). Likewise, people should not be described as “suffering from” an illness or having “suffered” a medical event. The term experiencing is preferred.
Body Size and Shape
As with other conditions related to personal physical health, it is respectful to use person-first language when referring to individuals with obesity. The terms overweight and obese, as they are defined by the NIH and other medical societies, generally refer to body-mass index and have specific, medical meanings. The term morbid obesity or the construction morbidly obese should be avoided, as those are being replaced by, for example, severe obesity. In any case, all of these terms relate to specific and well-defined criteria. You should not arbitrarily assign these terms to people, real or fictional, when you mean “an individual who is fat.”
The term fat should not be used in a derogatory or pejorative way. Overweight and obesity advocacy groups are working toward returning this term to a value-neutral description of body size. While some people may identify themselves as plus-size, that term refers to the range of clothing sizes made for larger people and should primarily be reserved for identifying fashion and not humans. The opposite plus-size is straight-size—not “normal-size” or “average-size.”
Mental Health
Generally speaking, do not use mental illness to describe people or their behavior if they are not actually experiencing mental illness. Unless you have specific information about someone’s diagnosis, then consider that:
A person with a super clean house is not “OCD.”
A person exhibiting mood swings is not “bipolar.”
A person whose behavior is challenging for you to understand is not “schizo” or “psycho.”
Corollary: Depression can describe the diagnosable mood disorder or it can describe an experience of feeling unhappiness or despondence. Not every person who feels depressed is experiencing the mood disorder. It’s okay to use the term depression in both ways.
As with physical illness, people can “experience” mental illness, may be “treated for” their mental illness, and are “living with” mental illness. They should not be identified by their mental illness: for example, a person is not “a schizophrenic” but may be “living with schizophrenia.”
People may be living with a substance use problem (note: express as “use” and never “abuse”); or a drug or alcohol problem; or an addiction disorder. They should not be called “alcohol abusers,” “drug addicts,” or “junkies.”
Specifically Regarding Suicide
No one should be described as having “committed” suicide. Suicide is a public health concern, not a crime. Further, an act of suicide should never be described as having “succeeded” (resulting in a person’s death) or “failed” (resulting in a person’s survival). A person who has taken their own life has “died from suicide”; “died by suicide”; “killed themself”; or “taken their own life.”
A person who has tried to take their own life, and who did not die, has “survived suicide” and their attempt “did not complete.” (The act of suicide itself, for statistical purposes, is considered to have either “completed” or “not completed.”) No one who has died from suicide should ever be described as “a suicide.” A person should not be described as “suicidal” but instead as a person “experiencing suicidal ideation.”
Ability and Disability
A person with a disability may “use a wheelchair,” but is not “confined to” a wheelchair and is never “wheelchair-bound.” A person with a disability is exactly that—“a person with a disability”—and should not be described as a “disabled person.” The community of people with disabilities in the United States should never be referred to in monolithic terms like the disabled or the blind. The term handicapped is obsolete and should not be used to describe individuals, groups, or facilities.
You might say that a person “has a seizure disorder” or is “a person with epilepsy,” but they should not be described as “an epileptic.” Categorically, you should never state that a person is stricken with, is afflicted by, or suffers from a disability, or that a person is a disability victim. Further, people with disabilities should also not be described as having overcome their disabilities if what you mean to say is that they are successful, competent, or productive.
People with physical disabilities should never be described as crippled, lame, or deformed. A person who cannot speak should be described that way—as “a person who is unable to speak” or “a person who uses speaking assistive technology”—and not as a person who is dumb or mute and certainly never as a mute.
A person with one of the many medical conditions that fall under the umbrella of dwarfism may respectfully be described as a little person (also: LP), a person of short stature, or a dwarf. The term midget is pejorative and should never be used. A little person may or may not identify as a person with a disability or consider themself a part of the disability community. If you are writing about a little person, you should not automatically describe them as a person with a disability.
Identity-First Language
Some individuals within the disability community may prefer to use identity-first language for themselves and their community, rather than person-first language. Examples of this preference can often be seen in the Deaf and Hard of Hearing community. Many individuals therein prefer to be called “Deaf” or “hard of hearing” rather than “a person with deafness.” Note that when referencing a Deaf person or the Deaf community, Deaf is always capitalized.
Neurodiversity
The term neurodiversity refers to normal variation within the human brain and the differences in neurological function from human to human. The term neurodiverse community generally refers to those individuals who experience neurodevelopmental conditions (eg, ADHD, dyslexia, or intellectual disability), individuals who experience certain mental health conditions (including bipolar disorder and schizophrenia), and individuals on the autism spectrum.
The diagnostic label for people who are on the autism spectrum is autism spectrum disorder. A number of individual disorders were formerly diagnosed separately; those disorders are now defunct, so you should not refer to people as having, for instance, autism disorder or Asperger’s syndrome. Those people are on the autism spectrum and overwhelmingly prefer identity-first language, that is, to be called autistic people.
A person who is not a member of the neurodiverse community should be described as neurotypical and never as, for instance, “normal.”
An individual should not be described as neurodiverse, as the term diversity requires more than one person. The term neurodivergent is used and embraced by some members of the community to describe a single person. Others within the community prefer to avoid the term due to negative connotations associated with the term divergent. “Member of the neurodiverse community” is unwieldy but is nearly always respectful when you do not know how someone specifically prefers to identify. It is also respectful to say that someone has, or is living with, or experiences a learning, language, or developmental disability or a mental health condition.
Other Circumstances
Briefly, don’t identify people by their life circumstances, whether those are temporary, episodic, or chronic. For instance:
NO: Bob can’t vote because he’s a convicted felon.
YES: Bob is a person experiencing disenfranchisement due to a prior felony conviction.
And also:
NO: Jill is homeless right now.
YES: Jill is experiencing homelessness.
Victims of Crime
While you shouldn’t describe people as victims of illness or circumstance, it is acceptable to refer to someone’s victimization by another person or group. It’s not wrong to say that someone is a victim of a crime. However, you should take special care when describing people who have had a crime perpetrated against their person, as opposed to people who have experienced a property or financial crime.
Trafficking and Enslavement
When you are discussing the systematic kidnapping, forced migration (trafficking), and enslavement of individuals and populations for the purpose of forced, unpaid labor, you must never:
Refer to these individuals as workers, laborers, or servants.
Describe a trafficked person as someone who has immigrated.
Use the term slave as a noun; instead use the word enslaved as an adjective, as in, an “enslaved person.”
Euphemize or romanticize the perpetrators of the atrocity, as in, “mistress,” “master,” or “owner.” “Kidnapper,” “trafficker,” and “enslaver” are more accurate.
Sexual Violence
Sexual assault is a type of sexual violence, and is an umbrella term that describes any act in which the perpetrator coerces or forces another person to engage in a sexual act against their will. Rape, child sexual abuse, and drug-facilitated sexual assault (DFSA) are all types of sexual assault with different and specific meanings.
The term sexual abuse refers to any unwanted sexual contact between two (or more) adults; between two (or more) minors; or any contact (wanted or unwanted) between an adult and a minor. Not all instances of sexual abuse are sexual assault.
When referring to sexual violence, take care to use correct terminology. Not all victims of sexual assault, for instance, have been raped. If you are referring to a person who has been raped, you should refer to that person as a “victim of rape” and never as a “rape victim.”
Note that sexual assault and other crimes of sexual nature should never be expressed as sex assault (and never child sex abuse). There is a finicky but important semantic difference. The assault is one of a sexual nature. It is not an assault on sex.
Do not conflate the term sex crimes with sexual violence or any of the other terms that fall under the sexual violence umbrella. While sex crimes does include most sexual violence and sexual abuse, it also includes any sexual act that is unlawful—things like public urination, streaking, and, under the laws of some cultures and even some jurisdictions within the United States to this day, extramarital sex between consenting adults. Looking at you, Alabama.
Notes on Minor Children
There is no such thing as a “child sex worker” or an “underage prostitute.” These individuals are victims of child sexual abuse and exploitation and should be described that way. Further, there is no such thing as an “underage woman”; that is “a girl” or “a child.” Any incidence of sexual contact between an adult and a minor should be described as sexual assault or child sexual abuse. Children cannot consent to these acts under any circumstances. They should never be described in the same language that would be used to describe consensual acts.
Domestic Violence
The term domestic violence (also domestic abuse or family violence) specifically refers to abuse or violence that occurs within a domestic setting. This can include many types of sexual violence as outlined above, including rape and child sexual abuse; as well as many other types of abuse that can occur within a domestic setting such as physical, verbal, emotional, economic, religious, and reproductive abuse and coercion.
Any type of domestic violence between current or former spouses or partners is specifically characterized as intimate partner violence (IPV); domestic violence and intimate partner violence are not synonymous and should not be used as though they are.
Identifying as a Survivor
An exception to every single rule above. Generally, you should never identify someone as their circumstance, but there is a special case for the word survivor. Many people identify as survivors of illness, suicide, or crimes committed against them. It is respectful to refer to someone as a survivor unless they have asked that you do not.
A Few Final Words
Thanks so much for reading this series on respectful writing. Words mean things. The words you choose when you talk and write about people matter. I would encourage you to consider whether it costs you anything to err on the side of being respectful, inclusive, and kind in your writing and editing. And if it costs you nothing to be more respectful, inclusive, and kind, then why would you ever not do that?
The way you think influences the words you use. Everybody already knows that. But the words you use influence the way you think, too. It’s a two-way street. Anyone who has ever stayed up till 4AM studying for their French final and then had a dream in French can attest to this. Just like you think in the language you use most, you think with the words you use most. If you make an effort to choose respectful language more often, you’ll find yourself becoming more respectful and inclusive in your thinking as well.
Thinking, speaking, writing, and acting respectfully isn’t a yes/no condition. It’s not even a place you fall on a spectrum. It’s a highway that everybody is on. The destination is the same but people are starting from different places and people are moving at different speeds. I think the vast majority of us on the road are at least going in the right direction. You don’t want to be the person going the wrong way on the highway. Try to never be that person.
Someone I love said to me the other day:
"You know, I don't completely understand transgender people but I can be respectful and kind now and learn the rest later."
She’s really smart. We should all do that.
Acknowledgment
Thanks to the people who previewed this series, suggested additions, tipped me off to resources, and gave me valuable feedback. They helped me fill some gaps I didn’t realize I had and gave me the opportunity to consider some things I had not. Their input made this series better in every way. If any mistakes remain, if anything was omitted, those mistakes or omissions are solely my own. Thanks especially to my dear friends Cassandra, Alf, and Jess; my colleague Emilie; my Neighbor Friday; and H (naturally).
Shelf Life will be back on the regular Tuesday/Thursday schedule next week, and I’m going to tell you a little story about the sneakiest feedback I ever received on my writing. It was so subtle I almost missed it, but it ended up being hands down the most important feedback I ever got. Make sure you stay tuned so you don’t find yourself in the same predicament! I’ll show you how to interpret the sneaky critique-y commentary you can expect to encounter when you let your writing out the door.
PS—The Shelf Life homepage has just launched and I’d love for you to check it out and let me know what you think. All the Shelf Life resources you could ever want, all in one place.
If you have questions that you'd like to see answered in Shelf Life, ideas for topics that you'd like to explore, or feedback on the newsletter, please feel free to contact me. I would love to hear from you.
For more information about who I am, what I do, and, most important, what my dog looks like, please visit my website.
After you have read a few posts, if you find that you're enjoying Shelf Life, please recommend it to your word-oriented friends.