Is the Term ‘Special Needs’ Derogatory?

The term has been criticized as patronizing and vague and is falling out of favors

By Deborah Jeanne Sergeant

The euphemism “special needs” has come under fire in recent years as derogatory when referring to people with disabilities, in part because of the term’s misuse as a slur.

“Special needs” also seems to indicate that someone with a disability and their family expect extraordinary treatment.

“I haven’t personally used ‘special needs’ in a very long time,” said Christine Ashby, Ph.D., professor in the School of Education and director for the Center on Disability and Inclusion with Syracuse University. “It’s not a term we typically use in our programs at the university, partly because wanting a life where students have access to education and inclusion in the community aren’t ‘special needs.’ They’re needs. Calling them ‘special’ tends to imply there are needs that are special.”

On the other hand, attempts at normalizing disability may lead to euphemisms like “exceptional” which may downplay disability instead of seeing disability as a source of pride and personal identification.

“We use identity first, ‘autistic person,’ ‘disabled person,’” Ashby said. “It’s not something to shy away from. Like all language, it’s personal. Some prefer person first. That’s more common in intellectual disability. But others are proud to be part of the disability community and they can’t separate it from themselves. It’s part of their identity. It’s not that people shouldn’t use person first language but respect the person.”

But such gangly phrases like “individuals with developmental disabilities” easily become clumsy with repeated use, whether in print or spoken. Asking individuals for their preferred term when in a one-on-one conversation is both frank and thoughtful. When writing or speaking to a large group, it’s impossible to use the favored term of each reader or listener. That’s why in those cases, Ashby tends to use person-first language.

“But I never use ‘special needs’ because it’s vague and unhelpful,” Ashby said. “We should be recognizing that they’re not ‘special’ needs. We all have needs. If some people have ‘special needs’ what do others have?”

“Special needs” could mean anything from a person who struggles to read to someone completely dependent on others for activities of daily living. She added that support is dynamic because anyone who lives long enough will likely need more support, yet older adults who need help aren’t referred to as “special needs” people.

Claiming that everyone has some kind of special needs is disingenuous to families who have fought school boards and intensely struggled to help their children access school resources, for example.

The fact that terms like “special education” change over time doesn’t strike Cathy Leogrande, Ph.D., as kowtowing to political correctness.

“It’s because we know more now,” Leogrande said. “It’s not politically correct to use a better term when we’ve gotten smarter.”

Leogrande is a professor in the education department at Purcell School of Professional Studies at Le Moyne College. She sees the shift away from “special needs” as reflecting the movement away from the medical model towards the social model.

“There’s a ‘typical’ and a ‘not typical’ category that means different, not less than or bad,” she said. “When you reflect that in your language, we know everyone could probably benefit from some kind of adaptation or need. We have to slap this label on kids if they want services. That’s the way the law is.”

Most employers use “disabled” because of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) law. In her writing, Leogrande tends to use disclaimers whenever possible to avoid offending readers.