By Melanie Bazile Anderson, Director of Innovation and Expansion
Have you ever played the game where the name of a famous person is written on a paper taped to your back and you ask questions of others to guess who it is? You are using well-known labels to identify them. No harm in that right?
Labels are generalizations that we use to identify things. We use them descriptively and to group like items, people, objects, relationships, societal groups. It is human nature to categorize objects, concepts and people.
On an average day, you might be shocked at how many times you label things. Besides naming the objects around you or the day of the week, you create labels based on snap judgments about the people you encounter and yourself. If someone cuts you off in traffic, you might label them a bad driver. Being late to a meeting might make you think a coworker is scatter-brained. When you make a mistake on a report, you might label yourself dumb.
Labels may seem innocuous, but they can be harmful. The labels we use can attach to identity, whether assumed or actual. Labeling ourselves can negatively affect our self-esteem and hold us back. And labeling other people can perpetuate stereotypes. We may label and view nurses as good people, and traffic cops as bad people. This is an oversimplification and a distorted thinking pattern, as no one is entirely good or bad, everyone has both positive and negative traits, and someone’s job does not define them entirely as a person.
I attended a “women in leadership” workshop where the facilitator had us do an exercise about negative self-talk. She had us carry a piece of paper with us and put a hash mark down each time we labeled ourselves throughout the day. Examples she gave of these labels were loser, stupid, selfish, ugly, fat, weak, etc. I was in shock when I tallied up the hashmarks on my paper. When we define ourselves by our labels, it can lead to self-limiting beliefs and self-fulfilling prophecies. It also sets the stage for others to perceive or treat us poorly, since we set the example.
Labels can originate from our family, friends, school, workplace, community and society at large. The way you label yourself may have come from an offhand remark, a calculated insult, or entrenched social dynamics. Think back to your high school days. The first moment everyone walks into school, they’re judged, labeled and put in a box. It’s very difficult to change, and most people have that label till the day they leave. School isn’t the entire world, but it’s difficult to prove that to a teenager. Imagine if everyone had to keep those labels. Post high school we enter our work world where we imagined we would transcend stereotyping but we likely continue to experience this in one form or another. Labeling colleagues or employees not only affects interpersonal dynamics but also impacts the overall health of the work environment.
Labels go beyond our personality traits and personal experiences. Society labels people based on categorizations like race, gender, class, and sexual orientation. These social labels can also shape our perspective of the world and ourselves. Being included in a societal group can render you subject to a whole other set of expectations and assumptions because of things that you likely can’t control. Labels hold us back and keep us small. If a woman is assertive, demonstrative, or outspoken at work, negative labels might cause her to downplay her leadership skills for fear of being called out again.
Labels don’t have to be negative to have a harmful unintended consequence. In the first 10 formative years of my career, I was given a nick name that at the surface level was a compliment; I was the “get-it-done-girl”. I wore that label like a badge of honor and looked forward to the opportunity to hear someone describe me as such. The problem was that I associated that term with my identity, and I lacked the social and emotional intelligence to know that I had inherent value whether I produced at a seemingly inhuman rate or not. I could not decline a project as a result and would cause myself unnecessary stress and fatigue sacrificing my own health to continue to carry that label.
The existence of labels in a professional setting can lead to roadblocks in conflict resolution, reduced productivity and erosion of trust. For example, you’ve labeled a colleague as “uncooperative,” which leads you to avoid them whenever teamwork is required. Over time, this not only strains your relationship but can also divide teams and hinder collective goals.
“Words create worlds.”
-Unknown
Our work is relational. It is very difficult to do the work without an interest in and passion for people. We want to serve, and we want to see others succeed and have the best possible lives. As individuals, we understand how damaging labeling ourselves or others can be. But how does this apply to the people we serve?
I had an experience years ago that impacted the language I use to describe the people I support. I was attending a workshop about integration by Dr. Tom Pomeranz. He was the kind of speaker you either loved or hated as he often offended people with his blunt and passionate opinions. He had a slide where he was describing a situation, the characteristics of those involved and certain behaviors that occurred. In my mind, I had already thought of a few of the clients in my program at the time and was nodding my head in what I thought was shared experience and understanding. Then he said he was going to show us a picture of who he had been describing and the next slide was a picture of a puppy. I was instantly confused and then a little angry about feeling shame in my comfort in labels that were less than honoring when I knew how much I loved and cared for the people I supported. But I realized that if I truly respected and celebrate each person then my vocabulary should support that.
As human service leaders, the vocabulary we use has impact. If we use certain terms, people new to our organization and teams will presume those terms appropriate. The words we use when we refer to our clients can affect perceptions and even potential unintentionally. When an individual we support is described as childlike or having the mental capacity of a 5-year-old, it shapes our expectations and may limit opportunities as a result. If you treat someone like a child, they will often prove you right with their actions. The fact that we label people by their behavior and characteristics can end up limiting our curiosity about a person.
Person-first language places emphasis on the person, not condensing their entire identity to a diagnosis. From personal experience, it is exhausting to have a medical diagnosis be what defines your life. I love my oncologist- he is brilliant, direct, never condescending in his explanations and he is clearly passionate about helping people with cancer live their best life. But we do argue sometimes because I don’t want having cancer to be the only thing that is considered when choosing treatments. Who I am as a person and the elements of life that bring me great joy can’t be lost in the process. My Dr frequently says, “but you have cancer”. Obviously, I understand the point he is making but I feel marginalized by the “cancer” label and don’t want it to be tan overbearing and discriminatory consideration. Imagine if he referred to me as “cancerous” rather than someone living with a specific kind of cancer?
People with disabilities are-first and foremost- people, who have individual abilities, interests and needs. The people we support are always more than their condition; their condition does not define them as a person. By placing the person first when we talk about them, the disability is no longer the primary, defining characteristic, but one of several aspects of the whole person. Here are some suggestions for rethinking the language we use to be more person-first.
| Instead of this… | Use this… |
| The Disabled | People with disabilities |
| Jose is Downs | Jose has Down Syndrome |
| Lynn is wheelchair bound | Lynn uses a wheelchair |
| The four pack we have | Bill and his roommates |
| Amy’s Autistic or suffers from Autism | Amy has Autism |
| He’s a PW | Tom needs help with his food storage for his safety |
| We got a runner | Susan panics when she is scared and may try to escape the environment she is in |
| Frequent Flyer | Utilizes services and supports when necessary |
| Non-compliant, resistant | Chooses not to, isn’t ready for, not open to |
| David is bad, had a bad behavior | David made a poor choice today |
| He’s Low Functioning | He understands more clearly when simple pictures are used; or he needs help making these kinds of decisions |
For a thoughtful article on People First Language by Kathie Snow, visit www.disabilityisnatural.com.
Ways to manage and overcome labelling
Dig deep and discuss your own labels and the labels you’ve given others. Peeling back the layers that build up a label is crucial if you want to tear it down.
When we notice ourselves engaging in the cognitive distortion of labelling, try these:
- Notice the labels you have assigned to yourself and others – are they really true?
- When you fail after trying something new – instead of coming to the conclusion that you will never be successful, and thinking, “I am useless”, try saying, “I messed up this time, I have learned from it and will try again”
- A friend fails a big test – instead of thinking, “They are a loser”, try thinking, “It’s not easy for everyone to pass”
- A manager gives you a bad review – instead of thinking, “They are hypercritical” or “I am inept”, try thinking, “What can I learn from the feedback?”
- Ask yourself, Am I bad? or did I make a bad choice? Once you focus on your thoughts and recognize a pattern, replace the “I am” and “you are” statements with objective statements such as “it was”
- Use person-first language, or better yet, ask the person what label or descriptor they want used when one is warranted
- I know many people who prefer to be referred to as Deaf (with a Capital D!) and not a person who is Hearing Impaired and other people who label themselves as Autistic or Aspie. They key here is that they have chosen that descriptor.