 |
 |
I'm very much in agreement with Susanna - a client recently was described by his doctor as "an epileptic". There is worse, though, I feel - I still come across blind people being described as "totals". At the risk of being considered flippant [me?] I would have to be called "a daft" - whilst I acknowledge I may be [a little], I don't think it describes me fully [or perhaps Dave Laycock may disagree...?]. Person first please. K Please may I have a holiday...? I obviously need one... Date sent: Fri, 30 Jul 1999 10:18:37 +0100 Organization: Middlesex University Priority: normal Subject: Re: Channel 4 programmes on Dyslexia From: Susanna Hancock <[log in to unmask]> To: [log in to unmask] Send reply to: [log in to unmask] I don't mean to be knit picking, could it might be better to say "dyslexic people" or "people with dyslexia",the latter of which I prefer, rather than calling people "dyslexics". Surely, we shouldn't define people by their impairment. Otherwise, I should have to call myself a "blind", which is a thing that hangs from your window, not a person. What do others think? Susanna. Susanna Hancock Equal Opportunities Officer QAAS ext: 6873 Email: [log in to unmask] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%