Disability or Disabled? Which Term Is Right to Use Today

Author: Ian C. Langtree - View Credentials
Published: 1 Sep 2011 - Updated: 5 Nov 2026
Publication Type: Informative

Table of Contents:
Synopsis - Definition - Overview - FAQs - Insights, Updates - Related Content

Synopsis

This information looks at the words used to describe disability and disabled people, and why the right term is still debated. It traces how disabled once meant simply unable to work in benefit programs, how the disability rights movement of the 1970s and 1980s rejected handicapped and chose disabled instead, and how person-first language such as people with disabilities was later promoted in the United States while identity-first language such as disabled people remains preferred in the United Kingdom and by many activists. It also discusses newer terms such as diversability and neurodiverse, and lists words that are now widely rejected. The guide is useful for writers, teachers, employers and anyone who wants to speak about disability accurately and respectfully.

At a Glance

• 1 - The movement is called disability rights, not disabled rights or handicapped rights.
• 2 - Some people use terms such as aspie, autie and crip about themselves within their own communities.
• 3 - The culturally Deaf community and the autistic rights community have long preferred identity-first terms.
• 4 - The idea that handicapped comes from cap in hand is a myth, as the term comes from sport, where a handicap is an extra burden or weight.

Topic Definition

Identity-First Language

Identity-first language is a way of describing people that puts the disability or condition first, as in disabled person, autistic person or Deaf person, treating it as an inseparable part of who someone is rather than something they simply have. It contrasts with person-first language, such as person with a disability, which places the person before the condition. Identity-first language is preferred in the United Kingdom and by many disability rights and neurodiversity advocates.

Overview

Disabled and Disability

A disability is broadly defined as a condition or function judged to be significantly impaired relative to the usual standard of an individual or group. The term is used to refer to individual functioning, including physical impairment, sensory impairment, cognitive impairment, intellectual impairment, mental illness, and various types of chronic disease.

Different laws and countries define disability differently. Conventional definitions of "disabled" and "disability" stem from social service programs and benefits programs, such as Social Security. These definitions, dating back many years (See Deborah Stone's book "The Disabled State") uniformly used the term "disabled" or "disability" to mean "unable" - to work, to handle gainful employment, etc. If you look up definitions of "disabled" you'll find these kinds of definitions.

"Disability" and "Disabled" are terms that are undergoing change due to the disability rights movement both in the U.S. and U.K. To a lesser extent this is occurring worldwide. To most people today, the term "disabled" still means just that, and, more broadly, means "unable to perform" this or that physical or mental function. Even more broadly, a large group of physical or mental conditions are considered to be "disabilities" - things people have also called "afflictions" or "impairments" or "injuries" or "diseases."

Beginning in the 1970s, people labeled as "disabled" (Either because they fell under the Social Security definition or because they had some sort of injury or condition considered a "disability") began seeking changes in society that would allow them to have a better life. Since the 1980s, this effort has generally been termed "disability rights" advocacy or "disability rights activism." The term is "disability rights" - not "disabled rights" or "handicapped rights" simply because historically and politically that's the term that the activists themselves have come to call it. So, the correct term is "Disability Rights."

Many people still use "handicapped" or "crippled" or "afflicted." None of these terms is looked upon with favor by anyone in the organized U.S. or U.K. disability rights movement. "Handicapped" is truly detested in U.K. circles. Handicapped is offensive - it's a limiting term.

Dancing Around the Term "Disability"

The term "challenged" is just sugar coating, as is impaired, diversability, Diffability (Differbility) a word combination of "different" and "ability", neurodiverse, or any other "flavor of the day" word that attempts to "dance around" or merely "paper shuffling" by incessant arguing between the Politically Correct (PC) crowd as to which word(s) are in fashion today or, according to them, should be used, instead of concentrating all that pointless emotional energy - the feeling sensation and physiological reaction that makes a specific emotion positive or negative - on the many very real issues that people with a disability actually REALLY need changing! In fact, the use of person-first language in scholarly writing may actually accentuate stigma - (WILEY).

Disabled

Calling a person disabled - not THE disabled, but a disabled person - is almost always considered correct. This is the primary term used in the UK and among academics and activists in the United States.

The phrase "disabled people" is an example of identity-first language (in contrast to people-first language). It is the preferred terminology in Great Britain and by a growing number of U.S. disability activists. Syracuse University's Disability Cultural Center says, "The basic reason behind members of (some disability) groups' dislike for the application of people-first language to themselves is that they consider their disabilities to be inseparable parts of who they are." For example, they prefer to be referred to as "autistic," "blind" or "disabled." Several U.S. disability groups have always used identity-first terms, specifically the culturally Deaf community and the autistic rights community."

A term that grew in popularity during the first part of the 20th Century was "handicapped." The conventional wisdom has it that this was a term first used by the social service field; its intent was to focus on social conditions: to say that an individual was "handicapped" by such and such - by paralysis, by being kept out of buildings, whatever. (It is not true, as some have said, that the term comes from "cap in hand", see Snopes for a discussion of this). The term comes from sports: handicapping means assigning some extra burden, or weight.

Back to the birth of today's disability rights movement: budding activists disliked having been "defined" by the social service system basically rebelled against the term "handicapped" SIMPLY BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN ASSIGNED TO THEM BY OTHERS - and, in choosing a new term, chose "disabled." Anecdote has it that Judy Heumann led the change, arguing that "others handicap us, but we are disabled people" - this is not in any way an exact quote, but it carries the flavor of Heumann's thinking. So, activists in the U.S. began using "disabled" - As in "disabled person."

Disability

Then a movement came along to change the wording to "people first language" - so, it was argued, use the term "people with disabilities." Britain's disability rights theorists and disability studies leaders reject that, and stick with "disabled person." Currently, in the U.S.A. activists seem divided. We must keep in mind that the disability rights movement and its thinking is almost unknown outside the movement itself! - People First Language: An Oppositional Viewpoint.

Terminology

• A physically disabled person is physically disabled. In this context, it is appropriate to use mobility impaired to signify the person's limitations.
• Some people who are autistic, blind, deaf, and a few other disabilities embrace their disability as a minority identity.
• A person with autism is either neurodiverse, autistic, or an "autie" within the autism community.
• A person with Asperger's is either neurodiverse, autistic, or an "aspie" within the autism/Asperger's community.

They are not dismissing the fact that they are disabled - but they are dismissing it as a negative experience. I am autistic. I am an aspie. I am deaf. I am blind. I am disabled.

What is Diversability?

The term Diversability is currently yet another movement as the preferred term to replace the word "disability and disabilities".

The word "disabilities" is said to be associated with the past and people's negative experiences with institutions. The term Diversability however embraces the uniqueness and potential in every human being, disabled or non-disabled.

However, just like the term neurodiversity, and the opposition to people first language movement, not everyone agrees with the definition and use of the word "diversability". The word diversability is still seen by many, as well as people with disabilities, as a defining label to describe people with physical, emotional, and cognitive challenges.

The Bad Words

There are some words that have been rejected nearly universally:

• Retardation and any derivative like retard, tard, retarded; spastic and spaz;
• Cripple and crip. Just like the N word is used between peers - spaz and crip are used between close friends.

Retard is not used by anyone to describe themselves.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is it okay to say disabled person?

Yes. Disabled person is widely accepted and is the preferred term in the UK and among many U.S. activists, though some people prefer person with a disability.

What does the ADA say disability means?

The ADA defines disability as a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, a record of such an impairment, or being regarded as having one.

Is special needs an acceptable term?

Many disabled people and advocates dislike special needs because it suggests their needs are extra or unusual rather than ordinary needs that require access.

Should I say wheelchair user or wheelchair bound?

Say wheelchair user. Wheelchair bound and confined to a wheelchair are considered inaccurate, because a wheelchair gives freedom of movement.

What is the social model of disability?

The social model holds that people are disabled mainly by barriers in society, such as inaccessible buildings and attitudes, rather than by their impairments alone.

How do I know which term someone prefers?

The simplest way is to listen to how they describe themselves, or to ask politely if it is relevant to the conversation.

Is differently abled a respectful term?

Most disability groups reject differently abled as a euphemism that avoids the word disabled and can sound patronizing.

What does the CRPD say about disability?

The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities says disability results from the interaction between people with impairments and barriers that hinder their full and equal participation in society.

Insights, Analysis, and Developments

Editorial Note: There is no single correct term that every disabled person agrees on, so the most respectful approach is to follow the preference of the person or community being described. Many U.S. government agencies, style guides and organizations still use person-first language, while the UK social model of disability, and a growing number of autistic, Deaf and blind advocates, favor identity-first terms such as disabled person. Avoiding euphemisms such as differently abled and special needs, and words that describe a person as suffering or confined, keeps the focus on access, rights and equal treatment rather than on pity.

Author Credentials: Ian C. Langtree is a writer, editor, and the founder and Editor-in-Chief of Disabled World, which he established in 2004 as one of the longest-running independent resources for disability news and information. Over more than two decades, he has written and edited thousands of articles on disability rights, health, accessibility, and assistive technology. Drawing on a global perspective shaped by extensive travel and lived experience, Ian is a committed advocate of the Social Model of Disability, the framework developed by disabled activists in the 1970s that focuses on removing societal barriers rather than on individual impairments. His writing is grounded in that framework and in a lasting commitment to disability rights, accessibility, and social inclusion. To learn more about Ian's background, expertise, and accomplishments, visit his full biography.