Is using the term 'special needs' offensive now?

[STOPSCRATCHINGTHECRADLECAP]

I've just witnessed a FB conversation in which a mother with children with special needs says that 'special needs' is offensive and it's now 'special educational needs'.

This is new to me, I've not heard of this.

How long has this been the case?

This is a really interesting sociological phenomenon. It’s been coined as the “euphemism treadmill” and basically means that whatever word we use now will inevitably become outdated and offensive later on.

Retard is the primary example—it was once a neutral term used to describe “slow” people (that’s literally from the Latin; linguistic jokes abound of French people apologising for being “retarded” when they actually mean late) and replaced offensive words like moron/idiot/mongoloid.

Now it’s extremely offensive, obviously. Special needs/challenged are creeping into this territory now, you’ll sometimes hear insults about someone having “special needs” or being a bit “challenged”.

I have two children with different special needs, I don't see how it is offensive. I often use the term myself for them. Or additional needs maybe.

'Special' is also used as a get out clause by some parents.

'Mary is 'special' (heavily emphasised) Mary is a 'special' child and Mary has to have 'special' rules just for her.'
Which actually meant Mary can swear at teachers and bash other children as much as she likes. In the long run, as anyone can see, this does Mary no favours . And yes, that was actually said to me, her carer. Name changed of course.
So I think additional needs is more helpful, and I like the suggestion of specific needs.

As long as people think it is OK/funny/whatever to put people down because they are less able in some area, any term used will in my view move to be an insult. You can say he's a bit specific with a knowing nod just as easily as you can say 'he's a bit special or he's remedial^. The words don't matter it is the tone used.

My DDs come under the SEN umbrella at school. I couldn't really give a toss what it is called as long as they get the support they need.

The one I really hate, and I've heard a few times used by education professionals who should know better, is "the special needs kids." That one is both a red rag to a bull to me, and a very useful screening tool to find out how school management view children with any potential issues that may need accommodating within their school. That is the one that really fucks me off - can't get myself bothered about it being SN/AN/SEN/SEND or QWERTY to be fair. I also have a fair battle challenging low expectations the second teachers find out that my own child is on the school's SEND register - actually a very intelligent child (to be able to read well using phonics despite having speech and language issues meaning you can't articulate half the sounds you're learning takes some bloody brainpower and resilience!)

(I've got a daughter with sensory processing difficulties, some features of inattentive ADHD, dyspraxia and verbal dyspraxia so I'm not just talking out of my hypotheticals on that one)

I've got two on the spectrum and have no problem with it, but sometimes these things get corrupted. I'd have more problems with someone calling them 'special'.

About 5 years ago we were advised to say additional needs 🤷🏻‍♀️

As a PP said, I'd just like my kids to be treated as individuals, without labels, and just get help for the things they have problems with. If you look at all kids with special needs, they are actually a really diverse bunch (just like the ones without special needs!) and need very different approaches to feel happy and to learn.

I think something to bear in mind is one day the terms that people are finding acceptable now will at some point become offensive and be replaced by other terms. This does not automatically make someone who uses the old terms a bigot. As many of you will find out when you get older it can be hard to suddenly start calling things by different names. People are not aways being deliberately offensive when they use old terminology.

Language evolves, staff working in the education and health industries have a duty to keep up to date with what is currently acceptable by the people who live with their 'condition' be that 'service users' 'clients' 'patients' 'residents' or 'customers'. Personally I think it's best to avoid labels and ask the person/ person closest to them what their preference is & take note

I honestly find it nerve-wracking. My DS is autistic and I get nervous every time I have to speak about it in real life, in case I am using the wrong terminology, out-dated terminology or just fucking up in some way about how I should properly refer to my own child.

My niece has Downs Syndrome and my SIL gets just a stressed about it.

The accusations of 'ablist' stuff scare me too. Apparently, I can't understand the issues of other people with a disability / additional needs / special needs / because I am able - or I look able.

Adults with disabilities find the term special needs quite offensive

As an adult with two disabilities I do not consider myself to be special needs and would give anyone who had the audacity to refer to me as having special needs extremely short shrift.

My needs are not special. I'm not special. Stop othering me.

Nor is this conversation particularly new, I was having this conversation with adults with a wide range of disabilities as long ago as 13 years ago.

SN is a term applicable in and only in educational settings and I would argue even the language there needs to alter.

Telling children with disabilities that they have that disability because they are "special" is sometimesseen as a positive but it's not a good message for any child to receive regardless of need IMHO.

When words become too loaded, they morph into a new, fresher term; some words move faster than others. The euphemism treadmill spins like crazy when it comes to disability.

'Additional needs' seems safe at the moment.

I'd love to know who it is who is offended by these terms.

Happy to help, that would be me, an actual disabled person.

personally I prefer

That's nice but as respectfully as I can muster it isn't you who has to endure the label.

Anyway none of you need @ me, contradict me, argue with me, "attempt to engage with me" because the ignorance and whatabouttery and othering that has been displayed on this thread has riled me in the extreme and I'll be hiding this thread as of now.

I can’t get my head around the constant changes. I don’t believe many people use these terms to put people down. If so it’s only a small minority of people. Overall these terms are used to help each other. Someone is deaf because they can’t hear. Is that offensive to say they are deaf. Do we need to say “has deafness”?
Also it’s now offensive to say if a kid acts out and disrupts everyone else to say they are disruptive. Why? Disruptive is a great description of someones behaviour. I suppose we have to describe the behaviour now and not name it. So disruptive = talking when someone else (the teacher) is talking, not listening, not following instructions.
Idk, it gets out of hand when the use of practical terms become offensive.

School would obviously be focused on education, so in schools it's SEN, or in some cases SEND (some schools add a D for difficulties).

But there are a host of other needs outside those relating to education! People have sensory needs, personal care needs, mobility needs, etc. And people over the age of education certainly don't stop having needs when they leave the education system.

I suppose I do hear the term "Additional Needs" now more than special, but to say it's offensive seems a bit much.

And those people upset at “labels”. Those labels and diagnoses suport the case to get help, support even funding. If that’s the case then I don’t see a problem with it. We can not describe every behaviour, every difference to talk about a person with needs. It clearer to give a label (Diagnoses) of dyspraxia than anything else. Generally people know what this means. It’s like the DSM V there are names of mental disorders. It categorizes the different types. It could not be just a book of problems with no names to disorders and just the symptoms. It helps a group of people (professionals) to understand a person. It’s not so easy or clever to generalize all these terms and drop the names, labels. Same thing in SEN you can’t describe behaviours just out of fear of saying a “name” or label that could offend someone.

A child with ASN (Additional Support Needs) is what I would use and see written down a lot.

DD has SN.
She does not have SEN, she requires no educational support.
She does does not have additional needs. She has different needs to me but they are not additional, makes her sound like she is a problem which she is not.
Hate the term additional needs way more than special needs but there'll always be someone annoyed, in this case its me.
SN is just fine for DD.

I’ve already been criticised in the online ASD community for describing my sons as disabled. They are disabled, but I appreciate that not everyone with autism is disabled. One receives Disability Living Allowance, and my days are filled with appointments and therapies - they need significantly more care than other children the same age, can’t speak, can’t understand words, need spoon feeding. But apparently I can’t refer to them as disabled? Bollocks to that.

I tend to use additional needs now because my son requires support for needs not related to education or his diagnosed condition - ASD,

I wouldnt however be offended by either SN, or SEN. As he gets older and his educational needs become less acute, they just don't describe him I suppose, but he will still have the other stuff.

Surely the variety of language explains the variety in the people we are talking aboutmedocally my son has "complex needs" due to wonky chromosomes, an unusual heart / circulation and being on o2.
He has SEN as he's slightly behind expectations and has significant language delay
He has additional needs for to bring on o2 in that he needs more assistance than if he wasn't on it (ie 121)
He is disabled but I only consider him so when I'm filling in the damn DLA form each year.

Some of those "labels" won't be relevant forever.

It would depend on where we are and who were talking to but tone, inflection etc are just as important. It's possible to ask if a child has special needs and it be a helpful, relevant and kind question, or to ask it and be utterly rude and offensive.

My son has special needs and I'm not offended by the term at all as long as it's has rather than is special needs, as several others have already said. His special needs extend beyond education, so the term special needs fits better for him than just special educational needs.

I use severely disabled usually, additional needs doesn't really convenient the severity of my sons needs