From: "Clive D. W. Feather"
Date: 19/04/2004 16:57 GMT Standard Time

To quote my site:

"An emergency lift is one provided for firefighters' access to the
platforms and for the evacuation of wheelchair-bound passengers.

Those of us who have had disability awareness training from our employers are
told to use the expression "Wheelchair users". You might want to bear this in
mind the next time you update.

Acrosticus wrote:
From: "Clive D. W. Feather"
Date: 19/04/2004 16:57 GMT Standard Time

To quote my site:

"An emergency lift is one provided for firefighters' access to the
platforms and for the evacuation of wheelchair-bound passengers.

Those of us who have had disability awareness training from our
employers are told to use the expression "Wheelchair users". You
might want to bear this in mind the next time you update.

So because you're told to use a specific form of words the rest of have to?

"Acrosticus" wrote in message
...
From: "Clive D. W. Feather"
Date: 19/04/2004 16:57 GMT Standard Time

"An emergency lift is one provided for firefighters' access to the
platforms and for the evacuation of wheelchair-bound passengers.

Those of us who have had disability awareness training from our employers
are
told to use the expression "Wheelchair users". You might want to bear this
in
mind the next time you update.


But that's a very mislaeding expression. Able-bodied passengers could still
*use* wheelchairs. ( e.g. As part of a puiblicity stunt to highlight the
difficulty in using wheelchairs on the undeground.) These people could be
evacuated easily, just by getting out of their chairs and walking. It's
only thoes users who are truly wheelchair-bound who need special provision.
Clive's phrase is the more accurate one in this context.

On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 09:09:59 +0100, Solar Pennguin
wrote:
But that's a very mislaeding expression. Able-bodied passengers could still
*use* wheelchairs. ( e.g. As part of a puiblicity stunt to highlight the
difficulty in using wheelchairs on the undeground.) These people could be
evacuated easily, just by getting out of their chairs and walking. It's
only thoes users who are truly wheelchair-bound who need special provision.
Clive's phrase is the more accurate one in this context.

Indeed. I've seen a wheelchair user at Leyton stand up, fold and
carry the wheelchair down the stairs, and then unfold and use it
again on the platform. Perhaps they are like me - the less they
do, the better they are. Personally I avoid stairs so I don't
antagonise my knee, but if there was a fire I think I'd move
quite fast, and sod the damage! So disability and ability varies.
For the discussion in question I think "wheelchair bound" is
appropriate.

However, I've come a cropper with a friend for referring to my
brother as having "special needs" when the term now is apparently
"individual needs". Again we can use "differently abled" and so on.
Some people seem bothered if we don't use the latest PC phrase.

Personally I don't care what term people use to refer to my own
mobility difficulty, as long as a) it's not meant as an insult
and preferably b) they are making an effort to accommodate it.
I don't care if they use a slightly less preferable term; if they
are trying to do something to benefit me, I won't take offense!

IMO, the intention's the main thing.

--
Flash Wilson - http://www.gorge.org

Comments in my journal or guestbook are welcome!

only thoes users who are truly wheelchair-bound who need special
provision.
Clive's phrase is the more accurate one in this context.
snip
IMO, the intention's the main thing.

Attitude is the issue and I agree that the intention is the most important
thing. However, 'wheelchair-bound' makes me wince (as it does most
wheelchair users) because people are not bound to their chairs - we sleep in
a bed, shower in a shower/bath and so on. Take your cue from the disabled
person - use the language they do! Political correctness is a nightmare!

Paul

"Paul Dicken" wrote in message
news:mb9hc.74$3c4.16@newsfe1-win...

Attitude is the issue and I agree that the intention is the most important
thing. However, 'wheelchair-bound' makes me wince (as it does most
wheelchair users) because people are not bound to their chairs - we sleep
in
a bed, shower in a shower/bath and so on.

How many people (wheelchar users or otherwise) take baths or use a bed *in*
*a* *tube* *station*? That is the context in which Clive's original
"wheelchair bound passengers" remark was made, and it still seems the most
accurate expression for this context.

only thoes users who are truly wheelchair-bound who need special
provision.
Clive's phrase is the more accurate one in this context.
snip
IMO, the intention's the main thing.

Attitude is the issue and I agree that the intention is the most important
thing. However, 'wheelchair-bound' makes me wince (as it does most
wheelchair users) because people are not bound to their chairs - we sleep in
a bed, shower in a shower/bath and so on. Take your cue from the disabled
person - use the language they do! Political correctness is a nightmare!

The only attitude which I can't abide is the one which goes through
well known texts with a red pen - take for instance the line in the
Xmas carol It Came Upon A Midnight Clear "Peace on the Earth, goodwill
to men" - and deems that some group may take offence at it due to an
utterly spurious interpretation a 7-year old could see was incorrect.

(Flash Wilson) wrote the following in:

However, I've come a cropper with a friend for referring to my
brother as having "special needs" when the term now is apparently
"individual needs".

It's not. Or at least I've never heard that term before and I'm quite
involved in that sort of thing. Special needs still seems fairly
current.

Personally I don't care what term people use to refer to my own
mobility difficulty, as long as a) it's not meant as an insult
and preferably b) they are making an effort to accommodate it.
I don't care if they use a slightly less preferable term; if they
are trying to do something to benefit me, I won't take offense!

Indeed. I think it's quite easy to get too bothered about terminology
with these sorts of things, but at the same time it's important to try
to get these things vaguely right and respect people's wishes. Easier
said than done!

--
message by Robin May, enforcer of sod's law.
"Dust Hill guy likes the Gordon clock"

"You MUST NOT drive dangerously" - the Highway Code
Spelling lesson: then and than are different words.

In article , Acrosticus
writes
To quote my site:

"An emergency lift is one provided for firefighters' access to the
platforms and for the evacuation of wheelchair-bound passengers.

Those of us who have had disability awareness training from our employers are
told to use the expression "Wheelchair users". You might want to bear this in
mind the next time you update.

I've borne it in mind. And I will continue to use the correct
expression, which is "wheelchair-bound".

I note you are maintaining your 100% record of content-free posts.

--
Clive D.W. Feather, writing for himself | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Written on my laptop; please observe the Reply-To address

On 21/4/04 6:50 pm, in article , "Clive D.
W. Feather" wrote:

Those of us who have had disability awareness training from our employers are
told to use the expression "Wheelchair users". You might want to bear this in
mind the next time you update.

I've borne it in mind. And I will continue to use the correct
expression, which is "wheelchair-bound".

This is in danger of turning into a PC-ness argument, but I must ask why you
think the expression 'wheelchair-bound' is correct compared with
'wheelchair-user'?

Somebody who sits in a wheelchair and uses it to get around is, surely, a
user of the wheelchair, thus, a wheelchair user.

Wheelchair-bound implies to me that the person is physically tied, or,
'bound' to it?

Some people might think it offensive they are thought of as tied to their
wheelchair?


Steve.