"I'm ASD" "My son is SEN"

[ArtTheClownIsNotAMime]

This is everywhere on MN and irritates me so much. You're autism spectrum disorder are you? And your son is special educational needs?

When did "have/has" go out of fashion?

I know it’s annoying. Same as people saying ‘I’m NHS’.

I agree - very annoying.

The social model of disability means that you don’t use have/has. So someone is autistic, or diabetic, or dyslexic. I use is SEND to describe my autistic daughter so that it fits with that model of identity, but I don’t always want to say she’s autistic.

Disabled people have been pushing for this for years, but only just happening. Does it make some grammar a bit jilted- yes. But it’s much better for the identity of the disabled person so I think it’s fine.

"I'm autistic" is fine. "I'm ASD" is nonsensical.

In my experience many disabled people have been pushing for years not to be seen as an actual disability, because they are a person with a disability.

I completely agree OP.

It's both jarring and de-humanising.

What about I'm an autistic which I would use (I am an autistic)

What FoxRedPuppy said. I'm Autistic or I'm Deaf are ways of saying that you don't think of autism or deafness as a flaw but as ways of being human (entirely compatible with thinking of then as disabilities, or not-disabilities).

You wouldn't, after all, say I have Frenchness, or I have Buddhism, or I have femaleness.

No! Google the social model of disability. I’m disabled and have worked with disabled people for years. We are not with a disability, we are disabled. It is society that disables us, not our impairments!

Nor would you say I'm France, I'm Buddhism, or I'm woman.

You have a disability therefore you are disabled.

You are not an actual disability because no-one is.

The social model of disability is a bunch of bullshit IMO. It also says stupid things like 'disability is created by society'. To a very literal person with ASD this already makes zero sense as ASD is 'created' by genetics, Are you really going to tell a mother that her violent young adult son who hates wearing clothes and smears his shit up walls that his disability is created by society - it's fucking offensive.

DS is much more than his ASD and would never say I'm autistic - so who are this group of unidentified disabled people to say we shouldn't be using have/has anymore? It's definitely not better in DS's opinion to be considered 'as autistic' rather than as 'having autism' and it seriously pisses me off. Some people may have their whole identity made up by their disability/autism and see it as central to themselves but don't try and drag everyone else into that too.

No one would say I am Cerebral Palsy or I am Friedrich's ataxia or any other life long conditions and then try to pretend that they are only disabled by society, so why are autistic people expected to?

This. I put the thread in Pedants' Corner because it's a question of grammar, not ideology.

"I'm autistic" and "I have autism" are fine, grammatically, and it's up to the person to decide which they use. "I'm autism spectrum disorder" makes no sense at all.

That is false.

The majority of disabled people (see, disabled not people with disabilities) have been campaigning for the use of person-first language rather than identity-first language since the 1970s.

Some disabled people prefer to reference their conditions using identity-first language due to the nature of the disability itself. The primary example of this being Down Syndrome, where the majority opinion is to say “person with Down Syndrome” rather than adding a possessive apostrophe after Down which could make it an identity.

Every individual person is different but you absolutely cannot argue that the Social Model of Disability hasn’t been around and come into mainstream favour within disability politics and discourse since the 70s.

If this is what you think, then you need to actually read the literature on the social model of disability because that is not what it says at all. That is what people who haven’t actually read the theory water it down to.

I'm part of a community caring for people with downs syndrome. Our loved ones and fellow carers prefer person-first language so "Billy is a 32 year old man who has downs syndrome" not "Downs man Billy aged 32". He has downs, it is just part of who he is, he is not simply 'downs'.

The reason I think this is especially important in the context of downs syndrome is that historically there have been very fixed, infantalising stereotypes surrounding people with downs. They are often denied the full spectrum of human emotion with people expecting them to be permanently loving and happy and positive. Not wanting to be describes as a 'downs person's is often a way of saying "wait that's not all I am, I feel and do and contribute and experience all this other stuff to".

So it's difficult isn't it, different groups and individuals prefer different things. All we can do is use language in good faith and in a way that conveys dignity and respect.

I am SEN

I am ASD

Doesn't make sense no matter who is pushing for what.

Also ‘he’s got mental health’ when it should be poor mental health, etc.

A person with a handbag.

The handbag can be put down, left on the bus, stolen, destroyed, emptied etc.

Is autism an accessory, like a handbag is?

Would you call someone a “person with Catholicism”? Or “a Catholic person”?

The reason why many people prefer identity-first language is because they realise their life, needs and all else cannot be unlinked from who they are. They cannot pretend not to be disabled or stop being disabled.

I personally prefer using both whenever the occasion suits, just trying to offer an explanation as to why identity-first language is popular.

Have to agree with this, it doesn’t make sense because everyone has mental health.

It’s like saying “he’s got physical health”, which tends to have positive connotations.

But bloody hell, there are so many other things to pick on why pick on how disabled people describe themselves. Have they not got quite enough to deal with without you being nitpicky about how they refer to themselves?

'A person with a handbag'.

Exactly right.

'A person is a handbag'

Very wrong.

Would you call someone a “person with Catholicism”? Or “a Catholic person”?

Would you say "That person is Catholic"

Or would you say "That person is Catholicism"?

Because this is the difference I'm trying to get across to you.

This winds me up! I’ve often thought about making a post about it.

I am Autistic, or if you prefer, I have autism. You can’t be ASD or SEN. As an autistic person this really bugs me because it’s not grammatically correct.

I switch between saying I am autistic or I have autism depending on the context but I’d never say I am ASD

I think the point is being missed. I've noticed it often and thought it doesn't make sense:

'my son is autism spectrum disorder'
'my daughter is special educational needs'

It's not about how people refer to themselves, it's just the way the two sentences are phrased don't actually make sense.

Try explaining that to an autistic person and see how far you get.

They have a disability and cannot necessarily see things the 'proper' way. If an autistic person wants to describe themselves like that, then it's fine by me.