Re: PC Terminology
Anderson Harold R.
Description
Collection
Title:
Re: PC Terminology
Creator:
Anderson Harold R.
Date:
5/11/1999
Text:
Great points, Richard. I was hoping, too, that this would blow over
but maybe it is good to discuss if terminology is causing problems for the
patients/clients that we see. So, I'll jump in:-)
When I was inducted into the (U.S.) army, a DI overheard me talking
about the boys in our unit. I was severely criticized because we only
have 'men' in our unit. Yet we still read about WW1 and WW2 accounts with
references to the boys. One of my first encounters with my wife had me
referring to a young woman as a girl. Again, I was criticized for
demeaning this young woman. I remember terms for different ethnic groups
changing over the years. What was once acceptable is no longer. People
become more aware of different ways of interpreting a term. Some
interpretations are insulting or demeaning to some.
I'm frankly astounded that crip is or ever could be an acceptable
term for anyone with a disability. But maybe that's the coming thing. I,
frankly, won't propogate it as I am certain to insult someone. Then there's
the term, disability. Some find that offensive. When I worked with the
deaf and blind, they were trying to promote a different way of saying
disabled as differently abled. That's more difficult to say and I don't
believe it went anywhere. But it is a good point. Many disabled people
do have wonderful abilities.
As an orthotist, I've learned (from school and peers) to refer to
those I work with as patients. I've never thought of it as demeaning or
restricting. I'm very uncomfortable with referring to them as clients. We
have a hard enough time getting providers to see us as separate from DME.
But I am also uncomfortable referring to my patient. It is easier for me
to say, and I do, but I always look on my patient as the patient referred
to me.
One of my pet peeves is referring to foot orthoses as orthotics.
It really grates on me. I suspect that's similar to the reaction some are
getting from our(or prosthetists?) use of the word patient. I know my
discomfort with the term will have no effect on it's use and orthotic may
actually be made a noun one day. I suspect that patient will continue to
be used by orthotists and prosthetists despite the objections of some who
are offended. But we should listen to them. Maybe a better alternative
does exist. We should keep an open mind.
Harold Anderson, CO
> That is not the
> brave new world of political correctness that I envision.
> Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. I know I asked
> for
> it up front,
> but I aimed to clarify, not to tear down. Please don't attack my
> sincerity.
>
>
> Richard Miller, CO
but maybe it is good to discuss if terminology is causing problems for the
patients/clients that we see. So, I'll jump in:-)
When I was inducted into the (U.S.) army, a DI overheard me talking
about the boys in our unit. I was severely criticized because we only
have 'men' in our unit. Yet we still read about WW1 and WW2 accounts with
references to the boys. One of my first encounters with my wife had me
referring to a young woman as a girl. Again, I was criticized for
demeaning this young woman. I remember terms for different ethnic groups
changing over the years. What was once acceptable is no longer. People
become more aware of different ways of interpreting a term. Some
interpretations are insulting or demeaning to some.
I'm frankly astounded that crip is or ever could be an acceptable
term for anyone with a disability. But maybe that's the coming thing. I,
frankly, won't propogate it as I am certain to insult someone. Then there's
the term, disability. Some find that offensive. When I worked with the
deaf and blind, they were trying to promote a different way of saying
disabled as differently abled. That's more difficult to say and I don't
believe it went anywhere. But it is a good point. Many disabled people
do have wonderful abilities.
As an orthotist, I've learned (from school and peers) to refer to
those I work with as patients. I've never thought of it as demeaning or
restricting. I'm very uncomfortable with referring to them as clients. We
have a hard enough time getting providers to see us as separate from DME.
But I am also uncomfortable referring to my patient. It is easier for me
to say, and I do, but I always look on my patient as the patient referred
to me.
One of my pet peeves is referring to foot orthoses as orthotics.
It really grates on me. I suspect that's similar to the reaction some are
getting from our(or prosthetists?) use of the word patient. I know my
discomfort with the term will have no effect on it's use and orthotic may
actually be made a noun one day. I suspect that patient will continue to
be used by orthotists and prosthetists despite the objections of some who
are offended. But we should listen to them. Maybe a better alternative
does exist. We should keep an open mind.
Harold Anderson, CO
> That is not the
> brave new world of political correctness that I envision.
> Be careful what you ask for, you just might get it. I know I asked
> for
> it up front,
> but I aimed to clarify, not to tear down. Please don't attack my
> sincerity.
>
>
> Richard Miller, CO
Citation
Anderson Harold R., “Re: PC Terminology,” Digital Resource Foundation for Orthotics and Prosthetics, accessed November 7, 2024, https://library.drfop.org/items/show/211831.
