Use of words like “angels”, “in need” and “miskina” (poor thing) to refer to persons with disability will be discouraged under revised guidelines being drawn up by the National Commission Persons with Disability.

Pitying language perpetuates negative stereotypes, the commission argues.

The new guidelines, to be produced after a number of seminars, will be aimed at the media, government entities, academics and other people involved in the formation of opinion in society.

The goal is to gradually change the way society perceives persons with disability, with the first step being the use of appropriate language in the public domain, the commission’s assistant projects manager, Rhoda Garland, said.

Media representatives argued during a recent seminar that pitying language was sometimes justified for the greater good because if not used in fund-raising programmes like L-Istrina, less money would be attracted towards the cause. This, she said, was an issue that needed further debate.

The seminar brought together the media, NGOs, disabled people, employment and education entities, academics and parents.

A change in mentality should be led by a change in terminology

“There was some discussion about whether terminologies were the first thing that should be tackled in the disability arena, with some arguing that it is better to try to change mentalities towards disability, with terminologies following on after the change in attitude,” Ms Garland said.

“Others felt that a change in mentality should be led by a change in terminology, which would assist in bringing about the change in attitude.”

The KNPD believes that both print and TV media are very influential in the way persons with disability are perceived by the public.

For many, the portrayal of these persons in the media may be their only exposure to attitudes towards disability, which means that stereotypes of being pitiful and needy or courageous may have an undue influence.

“If a person with disability climbs Mount Everest they may well be described as courageous, but they are often portrayed as courageous simply for living their lives with the impairment they have, which is simply living, not courageous at all.”

The knock-on effects of being portrayed as needy and incapable, Ms Garland continued, meant that employers were less likely to want to employ a person with a disability. This meant that these people were unable to earn a salary to finance a more independent life rather than relying on allowances and benefits and the care of their families – perpetuating the perception of incapacity.

Such a portrayal may also have an impact on the way teachers see their students, which at times creates a self-fullfiling prophecy in terms of their attainment levels at school.

The use of the correct terminology was also important for the person’s sense of self-worth and self-confidence, she said.

Appropriate and inappropriate terminology