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]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|