For New Zealand to evolve into a society where individuals with long-term impairments are treated as equal members socially, economically, politically, and in personal relationships, a significant shift in language usage and implicit associations is necessary.

The term “disability” poses a challenge because it is familiar to most people when used as the medical or identity-based model where disability resides within the individual. This perpetuates ableism and reflects a preference for able-bodied individuals over those with impairments. The term itself implies a continuum of ability with one end being ideal and desirable, and the other less so, creating an underlying foundation of inequality.

Although people may not be consciously aware of these implicit biases associated with the word, studies such as the Implicit Association Test by Harvard University reveal society’s unconscious negative associations with disabled individuals.

The social model of disability separates disability from the person and situates it within society, dissociating negative connotations from individuals with impairments. This model utilises the term “impairment” to describe the individual, removing the negative associations tied to individual identity.

Critics may argue that the term “impairment” perpetuates the categorization of individuals with impairments, thus perpetuating the dichotomy between normalcy and abnormalcy. However, it represents a necessary step forward for now.

According to the social model of disability, disability arises from external factors, including social attitudes, political structures, physical environments, and institutional policies, and it is an experience that arises from the intersection of an individual living with an impairment and societal barriers.

Embracing the social model of disability and adopting clear language is crucial for New Zealand’s progression towards equality. By distancing disability from the individual and situating it within societal structures, a foundation for political and societal change is laid, fostering a deeper understanding and appreciation of human diversity.

To achieve this, sensitivity to the preferences of individuals with impairments regarding identity is essential. Recognizing individuals as equals, devoid of inspirational or pity narratives, and acknowledging their intrinsic value in contributing to society, is paramount.

In conversations with individuals with impairments, respecting their preferred identity is akin to acknowledging gender and political identities, fostering an environment of equality and respect.

It is crucial to scrutinize language usage, challenge implicit biases, and engage with individuals as equals, recognizing their inherent worth and contributions.