Should We Say 'Person With Autism' or 'Autistic Person'? Here's Why It Matters

People often wonder if they should use the term "person with autism" or "autistic person" when talking about kids or adults on the spectrum. I get this question from my friends, family, and even the professionals who work with my son, a non-speaking 7-year-old on the spectrum.

It's good to examine this. The words we use matter. The language we use when talking about autism spectrum disorder (ASD) reflects how we think about it, our priorities in relation to it, and what we believe to be the truth of it. Many advocates are challenging the popularly held notion that "person-first" language is always the most appropriate, and reclaiming the title autistic as a core piece of identity. When considering our language choices, we must ask: What language serves the autistic community best?

Person-First Language ("Person With Autism")

At face value, person-first language, which is what many organizations and publications use when writing about ASD, makes sense. It puts the person before the condition. We don't say things like "my diabetic brother" or "my cancerous mother." Those are cringe-worthy constructions, indeed, and many people argue that saying "my autistic son" is in the same league.

The problem here, however, is both simple and complex. By using person-first language and saying "my son with autism" in conversation, I'm treating his autism like a disease like cancer or diabetes. Wrapped up in that is the notion that a disease needs a cure, that my child needs "fixing."

While my son needs help to overcome his communication and sensory challenges, he doesn't need fixing. Autism is his neurology. It's how his brain is wired and an integral part of how he experiences the world. You can't cure neurology, and I think the implications of trying to are unsettling.

Identity-First Language ("Autistic Person")

With the mindset that autism is not a problem to fix but an intrinsic part of a person's identity, many people on the spectrum refer to themselves as autistic. In an article on the subject, the Autism Self-Advocacy Network (ASAN) describes a moment from an internal committee meeting in which an adult self-advocate stated, “I’m not a person with autism; I am Autistic." The author of the article who represents ASAN expanded on this thinking:

"When we say 'person with autism,' we say that it is unfortunate and an accident that a person is autistic…In fact, we are saying that autism is detrimental to value and worth as a person, which is why we separate the condition with the word 'with' or 'has.' Ultimately, what we are saying when we say 'person with autism' is that the person would be better off if not autistic."

"Yet, when we say 'autistic person,' we recognize, affirm, and validate an individual's identity as an autistic person…Ultimately, we are accepting that the individual is different from non-autistic people—and that that's not a tragedy, and we are showing that we are not afraid or ashamed to recognize that difference."

Allowing People To Choose for Themselves

So where does that leave us in the "person with autism" vs. "autistic person" language debate? Well, some organizations aren't choosing a side. For example, clinicians at the Child Mind Institute in New York City use both terms to acknowledge the diversity of people's opinions on the subject. But if someone you love is autistic, consider asking them how they would like to be referred to. They may have more of an opinion on the subject than you realize. Honoring their wishes is always the right answer.

For now, I say "Liam" when talking to my son and about him. I tend to say "my autistic son" when telling people about him in more detail in my non-blogging life. But in time, I hope to ask my son what he prefers and I'll use that. For now, no matter which terms I use, I'll keep trying to spread a message of hope, acceptance, and inclusion whenever and however I speak about autism.