Disabilities Interviews with four individuals confirmed my hypothesis that there are a diversity of opinions and responses to disability issues. Of the four people interviewed, two had a close friend of family member who was physically or developmentally disabled. Their attitudes and responses to interview questions ironically did not seem to differ appreciably from the other two interview subjects. Three of the interview subjects did use the phrase "special needs" when describing children with disabilities. When confronted with Snow's (2007) proposition that "special needs is a loaded descriptor that has done nothing to improve perceptions and everything to reinforce negative images," the interview participants seemed surprised. Especially the two without close friends and family members who are disabled stated, "Well isn't that what we are supposed to say?" Or "I thought that was what we were supposed to call them; well, whatever." Language used to speak of disabilities can be a divisive issue.

When asked what it means to have a disability, one person responded that his mother has multiple sclerosis (MS). The disability "has a great impact on how my mother lives her life, in terms of how she goes about her daily routine," the person stated. Having a disability means she has to "being creative" in terms of finding alternative ways of doing things. He finally stated, "Look, we all have something. Some people have social anxiety and they cannot stand being...

Others have diabetes and have to give themselves a shot every single day. We don't call those people "disabled," but their conditions affect their lives. My mom is no different."
Another person without a disabled person close to them responded by saying, "Being disabled means you have something wrong with your body and cannot do things like normal people." When asked what "normal people" meant, the person said, "Someone without a disability." I laughed and pointed out their circular reasoning, but the person could not come up with a better response.

Responses like those highlighted the need to understand the essence of person-first language; or people-first language. People-first language starts with the basic fact that everyone is a human being: a person. Their condition does not define their identity any more than eye color, hair color, or the language that I speak. It is perfectly find to use a descriptor every now and then. For example, if I am talking about my Mexican neighbor, I will mention my Mexican neighbor. This clears up for my friend whether I am referring to my Polish neighbor or my Mexican neighbor. As Snow (n.d.) points out, someone who has cancer is not "cancerous." They are a person who happens to have cancer (and will hopefully be healed soon).

Two questions I chose to ask each interview subject were: If you had a disability, how would you like for people to refer to you? How do…