The Difference Between “Person-First” and “Identity First” Language

Not all people with disabilities describe themselves in the some way. Some use “person-first language and describe themselves as a “person with a disability”, while others use “identity first”’ language and describe themselves as a “disabled person”.

Language around disability is constantly evolving and not everyone chooses to use it in the same way. Not everyone from the disability community likes being referred to as 'living with disability', despite that terminology?becoming common in wider society. There's no universally 'right'?or one-size-fits-all terminology that applies to everyone from the disability community.

Darren Cunningham was born with osteogenesis imperfecta, a genetic condition also known as brittle bone disease. The 51-year-old is a wheelchair user and estimates he has had somewhere between 80 to 100 bone fractures over the course of his life.

While some people may describe him as "living with disability", that's not how he sees himself.?He identifies as a "disabled person". The difference may sound subtle, but for Mr Cunningham and many others in the disability community, it's an important distinction.

Mr. Cunningham states that "It's a way of making a statement about the fact that society in many ways is not accessible for me and the people like me —?there are?a lot of barriers around employment, housing and social opportunities”.

Mr Cunningham said while he was a proud "disabled person" at the moment, that wasn't always his preferred terminology and it could change again in the years to come.

For Tricia Malowney, it's different.?She prefers to be known as a woman that "has a disability". The 68-year-old has post-polio syndrome following a polio diagnosis in 1954 and she uses a caliper and crutches?to aid her mobility.

Ms Malowney has spent decades as a disability advocate and received a Medal of the Order of Australia in 2018 for her work.

Ms. Malowney states "The reason I don't use 'disabled woman' is because I'm not broken, I'm actually quite powerful".

Ms Malowney's preference to be known as a person "that has a disability" is known as person-first language.

This phrasing resists overemphasis on the disability and aims to offset the dehumanisation of the disability community. Those who preferred “person first” language, prefer to be defined by their personhood, not their disability.

Damian Mellifont, a research fellow at the University of Sydney's Centre for Disability Research and Policy, said many people who chose identity-first language saw?their disability as a central part of who they were.

These people?don't see themselves as "living with disability" because it's not something they carry "with" them or can put down at the end of the day?like a bag or suitcase.

"It's key to their identity and not something to be hidden or ashamed of," Dr Mellifont?said.

Sydneysider Shamus Hart also prefers identity-first language and, as such, identifies as "autistic" rather than someone "that has autism".

Mr. Hart states "[Autism is]?something that I cannot change about myself. It's the same way that I can't change the colour of my skin …?it's basically wired into who I am,".

Person-first language has become common across wider society, but not necessarily within the disability community.

"Disabled", "disabled person", and other phrases previously used as slurs against the disability community are now being reclaimed by younger people, similar to how the LGBTQI+ community has taken back control of certain words.

"It's funny because we actually fought to stop being called 'disabled people' and now the tide has turned," Ms Malowney said of disability advocates from her generation.

The reasons people from the disability community use the language they do can come down to a range of factors.

Someone's preference can be affected by their relationship with their disability, the type of disability, when it was acquired and which country they live in.

According to a survey by US researchers of 519 people from 23 countries published this year, 49 per cent of respondents preferred identity-first language, 33 per cent favoured person-first language, and 18 per cent had no preference.

As such, there's no "right", one-size-fits-all terminology applicable to everyone.

So if you're unsure about a particular person's language preference, what do you do?

It's simple: Ask them.

"If someone freely chooses to use person-first language or identity-first language, that's their right to do so."

Mr Cunningham said it was important to respect people's language preferences —?"even if you're not comfortable with what they choose".

“It’s important that people with disabilities have ownership over their own journey”