AIBU to find the wording of this question offensive?

It's not offensive at all.

At most it has slightly clumsy wording.

Just tick prefer not to say or just don't take the survey instead of getting yourself all riled up about it.

Of course it's not offensive. If you don't want to answer the question tick prefer not to say. I would imagine the whole point of the question would be to design their products with disabled people in mind. Which can only be a good thing surely.

I don't find it offensive, but also don't understand what they are planning on doing with the information. What is the point of collecting it if they won't use it to improve services? A person answering yes could have a wide range of needs eg autism and dyslexic are very different. Why aren't they asking what the person's access needs are instead?

Fine wiyh the "identify" part, as people with the same condition will feel differently about it and will often be affected differently too.

However they phrase it, someone will think they've got it wrong. I think it's fine in this example because as a PP says, two people can have the same condition, one considers it a disability and another doesn't. Someone could feel they have anxiety or depression without it having been formally diagnosed - I held off going to the doctor throughout my 20s but I definitely knew I had it.

Disabled people are not a monolith. Some won’t like that wording, some will, I suspect most don’t care one way or the other. As a disabled person I can say it would even enter my mind to think about it. I’ve bought lots of products from Argos so must have filled one of these in at some point but I don’t ever remember it, so that’s how much I didn’t even think about it!

What's their reason for wanting to know?

I do have disabilities and they are real - I don’t “identify” as having them and agree the wording is objectional.

That said my bigger issue here would be why are Argos wanting to capture information about my disabilities after the service /item has been delivered? Its none of their business and they should not be asking for this.

The only point at which it might be relevant is in advance of the service/delivery where it would be reasonable to ask “do you have any specific needs we should accommodate when delivering”.

Looks like you may have done https://www.gov.uk/definition-of-disability-under-equality-act-2010

This is a typical way to ask a poll or survey question.

Impairment is used as some people feel disabled and some don’t by the impairment. So a hearing impairment may mean person A feels disabled and Person B isn’t because under the social model it’s the way society is set up. It’s allowing people to have some sense of ownership rather than being labelled just because of a condition and seen through a medical lens.

its clumsily worded, I think they’ve mixed a few concepts up.

What’s wrong with impairment? Visually impaired is a perfectly standard term.

it’s not about identifying ‘with’ your disability, but identify as ‘having’ a disability.

I don’t see anything wrong with it personally.

"Impairment"? Did I miss something in the Equality Act? I definitely don't "identify" with my disability - my disability is not me, it is an aspect of me.

Are you normally easily offended? Congratulations on your new appliance.

…and why would Argos want to ‘pander’ to people? What possible motivation do they have for that?

I know quite a few people who are sure they have autism but have never gone for diagnosis.

So would it be correct to say they identify has having autism?

That's if it's the 'identify' bit that you find offensive OP.

Difficult to say as you haven't told us.

I suspect they ask it that way because many people with disabilities are averse to using the word ‘disabled’. It’s like they don’t think they can say they are disabled until someone allows them too. Asking ‘do you identify as’ means more people will consider the question.
I didn’t consider myself disabled even after I’d bought a wheelchair because my
mobility was so impacted by my condition. 😂

Now I have a very visible and very obvious disability, but back then because I could walk a bit and no one had prescribed me the wheelchair I still didn’t think I deserved to use that word for myself.

so, I don’t feel there is anything offensive about this wording.

Some d/Deaf people consider that they have a disability.

Some consider that they are not disabled but different. They would probably find the term Impairment quite offensive.

Some have lost their hearing with age and would just see themselves as people who sometimes use hearing aids.

All of these people could have the same level of hearing loss but not all would identify as disabled.

I dunno I kinda see what they’re getting at. In Covid I was classed as clinically vulnerable which I take great offence to and I don’t identify as vulnerable in any sense of the word.

you might have a visual impairment that’s real to you but not medically diagnosed.

It will also be to cater and pander to all the self-diagnosers who ‘identify’ as neurodiverse but have absolutely no intention of going for an actual assessment.

They’ll both have the condition, whatever they feel about it 🙄

What are you offended about? You do you, but I can’t see what the issue is myself, I just wouldn’t answer it if I didnt want to.

Identify?? How lovely it would be identify as someone who was not disabled!

Thing is, two people can have the same thing, and one considers it a disability and the other doesn't.
Only one will identify as being disabled.

It's not just something you are told you are, as a fact

I think the use of the word “identify” here is inappropriate.