LD Blog

Emma, who blogs as “WheelchairPrincess,” weighed in on the hot topic about the child named Ashley whose parents elected to have growth attenuation treatments to keep her (Ashley) physically undeveloped. Like other entries on WheelchairPrincess, this particular entry is a thoughtful and personal observation on the issues involved in the Ashley story. But, it includes a choice of words that perpetuates the idea that Learning Disabilities is a generic term, not the specific disability identified in US (and other countries’) laws. WheelchairPrincess wrote, “The short version is that Ashley X is 9 years old and has profound physical and learning disabilities.”

Now, it appears to me that WheelchairPrincess is writing from the perspective of someone in the United Kingdom (UK), so this issue gets another round of spin on it. As discussed over on I Speak of Dreams, in the UK “learning disabilities” refers to what is known in the US as “mental retardation.” (In an earlier post here on LD Blog, I noted that “learning disabilities” can be misused even in the context of someone writing in the UK. I’ve also commented on this at caelesti’s Roots, Leaves and Threads.) So, we have to cut WheelchairPrincess some slack in her use of the term.

Still, I think it is important to remind everyone of these differences in language. In the face of movements to eliminate Learning Disabilities—and I do not mean “eliminate” as in “cure” but as in “decertify”— it is important to promote clear referents in use of the term. “Learning disabilities” may be a generic term to lay people, but it refers to a specific category of disability in US (and other countries’) laws, and professionals should use the term accurately and carefully.

Now, let me recommend WheelchairPrincess for helping readers obtain a view from a chair.