Posted on April 20, 2026

By Angela Rapp Kennedy, CQL Quality Enhancement Specialist

There is an incredible amount of power that comes from how we communicate. It can influence the way people understand, engage, and react to the world around them. Respectful communication is particularly important in the disability services sector, as people with disabilities have experienced a long history of language that is derogatory, discriminatory, and outright hateful. We detailed some of this in the March 2026 edition of Capstone, Promote A Positive Culture Through Respectful Communication: Part One.

In this follow-up edition of Capstone, we’re digging a little deeper into the topic. First, our Director of Research Carli Friedman explores different examples of problematic language that can be ableist, demeaning, or harmful – even if it’s being used without bad intentions. Then, we chat with CQL’s Vice President of Training and Special Projects, Courtney Kelly Chapman, to gain a better understanding of respectful communication. And finally, we’re sharing numerous resources to aid you on this respectful communication journey. 

A Research Perspective On (Dis)Respectful Language

By Carli Friedman, CQL Director of Research

While person-first and identity-first language are very important, there is so much more to respectful disability language than just using these terms. I’m not just talking about slurs, although those are certainly harmful, but also the words we use and hear in our everyday language, which has a profound impact on how we understand things, that can go on to influence our behavior. A common problem with the words that are used to talk about disability is they often imply that disability is bad, sad, and tragic, that people have something wrong with them, or that they need fixing. 

Examples of Problematic Language

For example, 36% of people working in the disability field say they commonly use the term ‘struggling with mental illness’ (Friedman & Gordon, 2023). This type of language implies that there is something wrong with people with psychiatric disabilities, that they are in terrible anguish all the time, etc. ‘Wheelchair-bound’ is another common example; it frames people as dependent and needing a mobility device as tragic and sad. But wheelchairs are liberatory! They expand access and independence, and can completely transform people’s lives for the better. 

There are other types of disability language, which are often believed to be “positive” that are often still problematic. For example, many people working in the disability field use terms like ‘special needs,’ ‘people with abilities,’ and ‘differently abled’ (Friedman & Gordon, 2023). I believe this language was probably created because well-intended human service providers were trying to move away from what they believed was stigmatizing and hurtful language. But this type of language is used to avoid saying disability, because of a belief that disability is a bad thing, so bad that it shouldn’t be mentioned.

More recently it’s also become more common to use terms like ‘self-advocates’ to avoid saying disability; let me be clear, there is nothing wrong with the term self-advocates or being a self-advocate. However, using this to refer to everyone with disabilities, when not everyone is actually a self-advocate, is often done to avoid disability. The word ‘individual’ is similar and can be used in a way that is stigmatizing, even if that’s not intended. Yes, every person is an individual and all supports should be person-centered. But if you’re using ‘individual’ or ‘individuals’ to avoid saying disability, that’s a problem. 

At the same time, some of these terms don’t even make sense – all people are people with abilities, all people have unique ‘special’ needs and talents, all people are individuals, etc. So in this way, not only does it frame disability as bad, but it tries to erase disability in a way that ignores that disability is an identity and community, that it exists and it matters. 

Changing Problematic Language

In addition to being harmful, one thing that makes problematic disability language tricky is that it’s so common and people often don’t realize they are implying bad things about disability. For example, in our study, 96% of people in the disability field who used the term ‘people struggling with mental illness’ didn’t actually know it’s problematic (Friedman & Gordon, 2023).

So if it’s hard to recognize, how do you start changing your language? Well, start by thinking about the language you use, maybe even without realizing it, since a lot of these words are pretty common in our society. Do a deeper dive to learn more about this language but also just try to be more conscious of what the words you’re using express. 

For example, if you’re calling something stupid, lame, or crazy, what are the ideas you’re expressing when doing so? Once you practice catching yourself using these terms, it’ll be easier to replace them with an alternative. You’ll probably mess up a lot at first and that’s okay, it’s a process and it takes time to break a habit and make a new one.

If you hear others using problematic language, explain to them why those words can be problematic and hurtful. It’s not about calling someone out, but instead frame it as an education opportunity, like ‘hey did you know?’ These usually aren’t common conversations we have about disability in our society, so most people don’t realize that many of these terms are problematic. By explaining the background, hopefully someone will reconsider their use going forward. Also, modeling anti-ableist language use yourself can be helpful.

While learning more about language is important, as seen in our study about language in the disability field, educating about language alone is not enough. In fact, a lot of the disability professionals in the study who used ableist language also said they knew some of the terms they used were problematic but continued using them anyways.

For this reason, in addition to education about language, it’s also important to learn more about disability more broadly from the disability community. Make sure you’re not just thinking about disability as bad or sad or inability, but about identity, environments, and social factors that contribute as well!

A Quick Conversation About Respectful Communication

By Angela Rapp Kennedy, CQL Quality Enhancement Specialist

Courtney Kelly Chapman, CQL’s Vice President of Training and Special Projects and an NADSP Board Member, recently wrote an article, The Power of Words: Why Language Matters in Supporting People with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities. This article was the March 2026 edition of The International Journal for Direct Support Professionals, which is published through a partnership between Vita Community Living Services and NADSP. I took the opportunity to chat with Courtney for a few of her thoughts on respectful communication

How do you see people’s mindsets impacting our language?

It is important to recognize that language reflects mindset, our values, and our way of thinking about people. If we truly see someone as a full human being—with preferences, strengths, quirks, and rights—our language naturally begins to change.

Can you explain what you mean, when you refer to “talking about people” vs “talking with people”?

Many of us have developed habits over time and they are not all ones we want to maintain. In this case, it might be things like talking over someone, around them, or about them while we are right in front of them. Talking about someone as if they are not there can come across as dismissive and disempowering. It’s best to take every opportunity to include the person directly. Maybe instead of speaking for the person and saying something like “She doesn’t like that cereal,” you could simply turn to her and ask which cereal she’d prefer.

In the article you stated that “Respect is personal. What feels respectful to one person may not feel respectful to another.” Can you expand upon that?

Living out the value of person-centered language in day-to-day interactions means learning each person’s preferences and adjusting accordingly. Some people prefer formal titles; others prefer first names. Some want lots of verbal encouragement; others prefer quiet support.

Resources For Respectful Communication

We encourage you to explore the vast wealth of information, research, and tools available on the CQL website. While there are a few resources that have a cost associated, like hosted trainings, the overwhelming majority are free, and you are encouraged to take advantage of them all. For each organization referenced in the myriad resources, please know that we have found them most willing to dialogue and share their experiences, so don’t hesitate to reach out.

Here are a few links to other helpful resources:

• National Disability Rights Network
• Canadian Accessibility Resource Centre
• National Disability Authority in Ireland

Communication First is an organization whose mission is, “To protect and advance the rights, autonomy, opportunity, and dignity of people with speech-related disabilities through public engagement, policy and practice change, and systemic advocacy.” On their website you will find The Words We Use Style Guide. A quote from their materials strikes a chord regarding our discussion, “Language can empower or dehumanize. It can raise or lower expectations. It can change perceptions.”

The APA Style guide is a valuable resource when striving for bias-free writing. They share that, “the language to use where disability is concerned is evolving. The overall principle for using disability language is to maintain the integrity (worth and dignity) of all individuals as human beings. Authors who write about disability are encouraged to use terms and descriptions that both honor and explain person-first and identity-first perspectives. Language should be selected with the understanding that the expressed preference of people with disabilities regarding identification supersedes matters of style.”

What Type Of World Do You Want?

The March 2026 Capstone started out with the quote from Abraham Joshua Heschel, “Words create worlds.” It feels like a fitting way to wrap up this edition of Capstone. As you better understand the impact of communication – what we communicate, how it comes across, and the impact it all makes – it’s important to keep in mind that words do in fact create worlds. So, what type of world do you want? For CQL, it’s one captured by our organizational vision, “a world of dignity, opportunity, and community for all people.”