Ellen,

I am a great supporter of "people first" language; I use it when I write,
talk, do presentations, and, most importantly, I think it. And I deplore the
term handicapped, which, aside from its negative connotations, is totally
misused.

That said, the librarian in me thinks it that it is unrealistic for the
Library of Congress to use the term "People with Disabilities" as a subject
heading.  First of all, most library users seeking information about people
with disabilities are unlikely to think of "people..." as the first (or even
second or third) term to search.

In addition, imagine if other interest groups felt the same way. We'd have
hundreds of subject headings like "People of Color," "People of Italian
Descent," "People Who Are Women," "People Who Are Blind" (or "People with
Blindness"), and so on and so on and so on.

Our job as librarians is to make finding information easier.  As much as I
support people first language, I think its use in a catalog or similar
finding aid is not practical and will not help our patrons find information
easily.  I, too, do not like the terms "handicapped" and "disabled persons."
I don't know what the right answer is (if indeed there is one), but I
certainly think its impact on library users warrants some more
consideration.  Neither we nor the Library of Congress should jump into this
kind of change without considerable discussion among both librarians and
people with disabilities.

Julie Klauber
Suffolk Cooperative Library System / Talking Books Plus
http://www.suffolk.lib.ny.us/tbp
Disability Resources, inc.
http://www.disabilityresources.org


----- Original Message -----
From: Ellen Perlow <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2001 8:08 PM
Subject: Another call for positive language


> Dear Accessibility Advocates:
>
> 1. Item: The Library of Congress Cataloging Policy and Support Office
[CPSO]
> has decided to change THIS SUMMER the LC Subject Heading "Handicapped"
(bad) to
> "Disabled persons" (much worse) - unless we successfully advocate NOW for
> people-first language.  What was LC CPSO's authority? LC CPSO based its
> decision on the reading of an American Heritage Dictionary (Houghton
Mifflin,
> 2000) usage note  - rather than the reading of the people-first language
that
> the U.S. Congress, the agency that LC serves, has enacted into U.S.
law-The
> ADA, etc.) or checking with members of the community in question.
>
> Write NOW to advocate for people-first language ("People with disabilities
or
> Individuals with disabilities" - the standard descriptors in the A.D.A.
and
> other U.S. post-A.D.A. legislation/amendments) to:
>
> Mr. Paul Weiss
> Cataloging Policy and Support Office
> Library of Congress
> 101 Independence Avenue S.E.
> Washington, D.C. 20540
>