"Identify as having a disability"

[vivariumvivariumsvivaria]

Doing a form filling for a visa.

"Do you identify as having a disability?"

Surely disability is a measurable, quantifiable factor in someone's life? You either have a disability, or you do not. What does "indentify as" mean?

Most of us are saying that under the legal definition we have a disability but that we don't identify as disabled

I have said that myself many times on this thread: I am disabled by law but I don't identify as disabled. Because it's not a self-identity. Not sure how we've come to believe that we are in disagreement.

and yet you're berating us and telling us that we should be proud of our disabilities etc.

I didn't say that, I said we shouldn't be ashamed. The absence of shame does not equate to the presence of pride.

It really isn't for you to tell others how to describe their own conditions.

And I am not. I am complaining about the OP's form that requires me to declare that I "identify as" something that I don't "identify as" but simply am. I have already said that I respect the right of disabled people not to disclose.

I don't understand why they can't come up with a better way to ask 'are you disabled'. I'd actually find 'are you disabled' less offensive.

Completely agree with you, bd67th. I don't identify as disabled, I am disabled. I have neither pride nor shame in that fact. "Identifying as" feels like a trivialisation of something which has completely wrecked my life through no fault of my own; my preferences were neither requested nor considered and I can't identify out of it. Nevertheless, I DO NOT IDENTIFY AS DISABLED, I simply AM.

Asking me if I identify as disabled is as insulting as the way I was treated when applying for UC, and underlines the contempt that society has for me as a disabled person, and their starting point that I am a scammer. I don't know how many times I've been sized up and then told "you don't look disabled to me".

Oh dear, I've become a trifle irate. I'll leave it there.

@Jux ah yes, “you don’t look blind!”

Fuck right off and when you get there fuck off some more!

I have a disability but hate to admit it. It is a degenerative condition so as I age I am more and more aware of it. However, I still only tick the box for disability on forms when it has a material effect. Lots of posts here really chime with me.

The language "identify as" privileges those who can choose to opt in or out of something.
There are those who don't have this choice. They do not benefit from this language.

And that's why framing the question around identity and not material reality will result in poor recording and recognition of disability in society.

Spot on. The evidence is here that many people with disabilities don't like to think of themselves or describe themselves as disabled, for many reasons.

I wholly get that. However if I'm going to do a piece of work with an unfamiliar team in an unfamiliar place, unfortunately I have to start some conversations with 'I'm disabled' to prevent turning up to a site I can't access and thereby causing havoc for me and everyone else. It's a practical and necessary statement of fact, rather than a statement of self identity. A statement at which some may feel judgement about my decision to accept or not accept that label as part of my self definition. Identity vs material reality.

The language "identify as" privileges those who can choose to opt in or out of something.
There are those who don't have this choice. They do not benefit from this language.

Well.i wish I had the opportunity to opt in and out, I certainly don't feel privileged and yet I still don't consider myself as disabled. Which, I think, is my right. I choose how I label myself, not anyone else.

That question is worded like that to allow people to identify out of a category they might be in, depending on context, not for non disabled people to identify into.
^^ Yes this
Although I prefer "consider" rather than "identify".
It is not possible for someone to self-id as disabled and receive any benefit as a result without providing proof.
We have to provide proof of having a disability all the time.

Well the phrase is wrong. I don't identify as having MS. I have MS.
That's not the same thing though. You have MS, that is a fact. Whether you consider that condition to make you disabled is a matter of opinion. Almost all diagnosable conditions have a wide range of severity which may or may not meet the definition of disability and that's before you even consider the person's own opinion about how that condition affects them.

We'll probably end up with everyone with an actual disability saying that they don't, because people with actual disabilities just want to get on with their lives, not be treated as perma victims.

Do you have any idea how offensive that is, you can both have a disability and get on with your life. You may or may not need accommodations but if you do need them it doesn't mean you want to be treated as a victim.

What about "do you consider yourself to have a disability which you would like to disclose?"

The identify thing is an interesting one. I would never have said I identified as disabled. I always said I had a long term health condition. But I met a woman in my last job who said it was important to be v proud to be disabled. That identifying as disabled shouldn't be viewed as belittling those with greater struggles than me, because opening people's eyes to all the different things disabilities could be was valuable to society. That I shouldn't feel embarrassed that I wasn't "disabled enough" but instead proud of the difficulties i had overcome to get that far.

In fact, 6 years after I got started suffering, the severity of my decision has decreased enough that I would no longer class myself as disabled by it, and it's well enough controlled that I don't know if I would meet the legal requirements. But j never know when I'll get ill again. This means I don't describe myself as disabled any more, but I am still grateful to my friend and colleague for her introduction of me to this concept .

That I shouldn't feel embarrassed that I wasn't "disabled enough"

That's actually really important and really resonates with me. An intermittent condition like

Can we please just be treated like grownups in this area at least.

Do you have a disability?
If yes, please give relevant info:

Do you have a disability?
If yes, please give relevant info:

Then I would want to know why they want that information, why is it relevant in this situation? Plus, having a condition that qualifies under the EA is not the same as having a disability - see the poster above who has cancer.

It just isn't that straightforward. I don't, for example, see why I would need to disclose my medical information if it's going to make zero difference. We do an anonymous staff questionnaire at work every year and on that they ask your sexual orientation and whether you consider that you have a disability - why? Why should I give that information? They aren't going to use it to make my life easier so why should I have to disclose it?

I have seen some forms ask the question along the lines of

Do you have a medical condition that we need to take into consideration?
Please give relevant info:

This allows people to disclose conditions that people need to make adjustments for or keep those that aren't relevant to themselves.

Though I appreciate some wouldn't like the term medical condition so perhaps there's a better phrase?

Identifying as disabled often means undiagnosed or semi-diagnosed conditions too. For example many people know they are dyslexic / have ADHD and have been told so (and received treatment) from professionals but can’t afford the £500-1000 it takes for a formal diagnosis.

We'll probably end up with everyone with an actual disability saying that they don't, because people with actual disabilities just want to get on with their lives, not be treated as perma victims.
I am disabled and I get on with my life - as most disabled people do.
I am not a victim, nor do I wish to be treated like a victim.

Do you have a disability?
If yes, please give relevant info:
That is taking my choice away to not wish to answer without lying.
It's not explaining why they are asking, how much information should be given and how it will be used.

Identifying as disabled often means undiagnosed or semi-diagnosed conditions too. For example many people know they are dyslexic / have ADHD and have been told so (and received treatment) from professionals but can’t afford the £500-1000 it takes for a formal diagnosis.
It would be extremely rare for dyslexia (without other conditions) to meet the definition of disabled.
You don't need a diagnosis to be considered disabled, you need evidence of your needs. It wouldn't be right to say you have ADHD unless you have had a formal assessment and diagnosis but it would be fine to say that you are disabled due to attention difficulties, forgetfulness etc. You don't need to go private for a proper assessment, you can ask for a referral from your GP. Look up the NICE guidelines for more information.

hearhooves in those circumstances i would simply not answer, or write "why?" or ask the person who gave me the form what relevance that question had. I have done all those things, btw.

"If you have a disability as defined under the Equality Act 2010 Part 2 Chapter 1 Section 6 (statutory guidance if you're not sure), then please let us know what adjustments we need to make to enable you to do thing, e.g. use our services, attend for a job interview, etc."

⬆⬆⬆ What they are asking for, why they need to ask, and how they are going to use it are covered, and you don't need to say whether you "feel disabled" or "identify as disabled" because the criteria for that declaration are objective and the question asks for the adjustments you need, not the diagnosis/condition anyway.