The Social Security Administration wants to start using the term “intellectual disability/mental retardation” in lieu of “mental retardation,” following a similar switch at other state and federal agencies across the country.
In a notice posted last month in the Federal Register, the Social Security Administration indicated that it wants to make the language change amid a series of updates to the agency’s eligibility criteria for those with mental disorders.
“The term ‘mental retardation’ has taken on negative connotations over the years, is offensive to many persons and results in misunderstandings about the nature of the disorder and the persons who have it. The term ‘intellectual disability’ is now widely used internationally and is gradually replacing ‘mental retardation’ in the United States,” the notice indicates as reason for making the change.
While several government entities have completely replaced the term “mental retardation” with “intellectual disability,” Social Security would use both terms jointly under the proposed rule. The reason is that the older term is still widely used in many government programs, is included in the current version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, or DSM, and elsewhere.
Members of the public can comment on the proposed changes until Nov. 17. Once public comments are reviewed, changes will only become effective after final rules are published in the Federal Register.
The move toward updated language at the Social Security Administration comes as a bill is making its way through Congress that would replace “mental retardation” with “intellectual disability” in federal health, education and labor policy. The Senate unanimously approved the legislation known as Rosa’s Law in August. A similar bill called the Elizabeth A. Connelly Act is awaiting consideration in the House of Representatives.
As a special education teacher, I am thrilled about this change. The stigma of the r word hurts students and is one of the worst names students call each other.
I think this is a great opportunity to educate the public. I think that only students who are studying to become teachers and teachers are aware of how damaging and hurtful the word “retarded” is. I think the public uses the word to freely never giving a second thought to how hurtful the word is.
As a student studying special education I am happy to hear that news. I’ve worked with kids with certain disabilities before and I have noticed how it does affect each one of them when they hear certain words being used to explain their disabilities. Im glad people are finally giving certain words a second thought.
I think it’s great that the Social Security Administration is being so proactive in recognizing how offensive some of their terminology is and correcting it. The “r” word does have a negative connotation, can be misleading and often hurtful. I think it’s great that this change is being made “amid a series of updates to the agency’s eligibility criteria for those with mental disorders”. Not only that, but the phrase “intellectual disability” sounds better too. Intellect is defined in the dictionary as having the “capacity for thinking and acquiring knowledge”. So when you coin the word intellect with disability it gives the impression that someone has a problem with attaining knowledge or just has a lower capacity at retaining it. Whereas the word mental is often linked with thoughts of psychosis and retardation with ineptitude. Again making the person with the disorder out to be monstrous and as if an outcast. It is therefore vital that such corrections be made so that those with disabilities aren’t shunned or hurt by society as a whole. However, as much as I believe in this change and do think that “intellectual disability” sounds better I am in fact impartial to the phrase itself. Yes it does sound better however, can also have a negative connotation and also be misleading. Intellect although its definition means one thing, is often thought of intelligence quite simply. So to therefore claim one is intellectually disabled; it almost gives the impression that someone is not smart, very misleading indeed.
I think it is great that there is a change people from using the “r” word. It is going to take a lot of time for people to get away from using that phrase and start using the phrase “intellectual disability” because everyone has been using it for year. Once this change occurs everywhere I think everyone will be more accepting of these individuals than they are now.
I think it’s completely true that the term “mental retardation” is misunderstood. For most of us when we hear those words we associate them with craziness or stupidity which is not what they mean at all. It is important that when referring to these people we give them the respect they need by “labeling” them with the correct term.
the words mental and retardation together have a negative connotation, replacing the word to intellectual disabilty would be a great thing to do. i think that the public should issue an article in newspapers stating that the word will be replaced. after this issue the word should be eliminated from the public completely because the r- word brings alot of hurt to children as well as adults. Using metal retardation and intellectual disabilty should not happen because by doing this your basically telling society that it is still acceptable to use the older terminlology. for example: it sort of reminds me of the n-word and black . the n-word has a negative connotation and brings alot of issues when used. the word black has a positive connotation and this is why it is acceptable today,
I agree with most of the other comments, it is great that the government is ending its use of the r word. It does have such a negative connotation. Hopefully if the government changes its vocabulary, people will start changing their use of the word aswell.
I think this is a positive change that is being made. The “r” word should not be used and it is great that it is somewhat being acknowledged how negative it truly is in an official government documentation. Hopefully this change will make the public aware about the terminology they use and what is correct and respectful.
I think that using both terms jointly is a step up from just using “mental retardation” and if that’s all that we can do right now then that is okay. But i also do think that this is a great opportunity to educate the public especially those that do not interact with person who have disabilities on a daily basis. I am totally for using the new term.
i am a student in progress of bcoming a specal education teacher but with all my years of work with children with special needs i think that it is a great change that needs to be done. Personally i have not used the r word since i was about 12 i was brought up that it was equal to a curse word. One of my cousins have down syndrome and another is severly autistic so the r word has never been in my familys vocabulary. I actually made a presentation my senior year on the r word and how it should be ban from schools. Also there is a website rword.org where you can pledge to not use the word. I got so mnay kids from my school to pledge.
This is definitely a positive change in the disability community. I know that people with disabilities do listen to the words that others use. In particular, the “r” word does effect people with disabilities. The “r” word does have a negative connotation because that is the way it is presented. It’s a great improvement that people will start taking the disabled in consideration when they speak.
I think that making the switch is a great idea. It is about time that someone realized how offensive this terminology can be. Often times the term is very offensive. Although there will be a switch it will take the public a long time to get accommodated to using the phrase ” intellectual disability” due to the fact that they have been using the previous term for years, and did not understand the full meaning or how offensive it may be. This is a positive change and is finally giving the people with the disability the respect they need and deserve.
I think that they should have changed the classification of what to call someone with a disability. When someone is called mentally retarded it sounds extremely negative and does not explain to other people what procisely is wrong with those individuals. I wish they decided to change the classification sooner so people could better understand these people.
I think that the change in termonology from “mental retardation” to intellectual disability” is a very positive change and reflects the way that our society views those who are mentally challeneged. Mental retardation can be very categorical and can make people assume the wrong things about a person with this disability. The way we say things really does say and mean so many things. Being politically correct with the way we speak can only bring about positive change.
As a professional that has worked in this field for several years and multiple countries, its sad to read about advocates within the disability community focusing such time and energy on something as trivial as a lable, especially considering in 10yrs intellectual disability will become the new taboo label. Given the financial constraints facing families, schools and agencies it doesn’t really matter what one names the disability–changing the label will not change how person with ID are viewed by the world, how programs are funded, or erase the disability it self. This movement was started by parents many of whom were ashamed of the lable. Much like mongoloid (Down’s Syndrome, autism (PDD nos)…such lables may change…but they don’t reverse what nature created.