Language

The DART site uses a mix of identity-first and person-first language to talk about autism.

While person-first language was long considered the most progressive way to talk about disability, in recent years in the autistic and the wider disabled community, identity-first language has become prominent. Many people have followed this same transition as part of a personal journey of acceptance – this blog post by Sonia Boué gives a lovely example of that process. There are powerful reasons to use identity-first constructions, such as “autistic person”. There’s more about this language choice at this link. 

However, the quotes below illustrate the fact that not everyone feels this way –  different people on the autism spectrum have widely differing opinions on autism and on the language used to describe it.

“Personally, I don’t have a huge affiliation with my diagnosis. I prefer person first language and don’t see my autism as an identity. It merely describes some of my characteristics.” – woman with autism

“As autistic people, we see our neurology as an integral part of who we are – not a separate or negative add-on.” – Identity First Autistic campaign

We utterly respect the right of everyone to choose the language that suits them. As a group which is not autistic-led, we have to find a way to navigate the language around autism which is respectful to everyone. Our solution is to use largely identity-first with some person-first language. Here are four key reasons for that decision:

1. While language shapes attitudes, it also reflects existing identities. In the research evidence and in any informal poll, there is always a group of people with autism who prefer person-first language.  We feel they have a right to be represented on this site, which aims to be relevant to and supportive of all people on the autism spectrum
2. When we are recruiting to studies or sharing our findings, we want to reach people with autism, and autistic people.  We want to work with parents and professionals and other autism allies. Using a single form of language risks excluding some of the people we want to reach. This could mean our research fails to be representative of the diversity within the autistic and autism communities, which would limit its relevance in the real world.
3. As pointed out in this excellent editorial on language and autism, the person-first language movement was led by people with disabilities. One key problem with the implementation of that movement has been the use of different language forms when describing people with and without a specific diagnosis or condition. Therefore we aim to be consistent across groups in the forms of language we use.  e.g. “children with and without autism” or “autistic and non-autistic children”
4. We believe that a respectful, accepting attitude is essential. While some may feel that our choice to use multiple language forms on this website is disrespectful, we hope this language statement makes it clear that we have carefully considered our position. We will never use language like “suffers from” or “living with” autism which clearly disrespect autistic people.

Our language policy is under constant review and we welcome commentary from the community on this statement.

Finally, we should note that some of the outputs shared on this website were published using forms of language (e.g. “high-functioning”) that we now reject.  We apologise for their presence on our site and pledge to do better in the future.