- Person-first or Identity-first Language
A point of consideration when writing about accessibility is between person-first language and identity-first language. Person-first language would take the form of ‘person with disability’, while identity-first language takes the form of ‘disabled person’. There are reasonable arguments in each direction, and different people have different preferences.
If referring to a specific person and they have a preference, then that preference should be respected – much like one would respect a person’s preferred pronouns. Age, gender, culture, language, level of education, and type of condition have all been found to influence people’s preferences.
However, that leaves the question of what language should be used for general writing and discussion or when speaking about people whose preferences you don’t know. I personally choose to use person-first language in these cases, as I think it is the most appropriate default. It emphasises the person over their disability.
The Australian Government Style Manual advises person-first language. The study Person-first and identity-first disability language: Informing client centred care (Lisa B Grech, Donna Koller, Amanda Olley) indicates that ‘it appears there is greater acceptance for person-first language rather than identity-first language when referring to others’.
While there are solid arguments to be made either way, there is unfortunately no universal consensus. The main point is that people should be addressed respectfully as people, not reduced to their disabilities.