By Bob Katzen
House 150-0, approved, Senate approved on a voice vote without a roll call, and sent to Gov. Healey legislation that would modernize and remove archaic language in state laws to reflect the evolution of terminology relating to persons with disabilities.
Changes include replacing “handicapped persons” with “persons with disabilities;” replacing “the mentally retarded” with “persons with an intellectual disability;” replacing “retarded children” with “children with an intellectual disability;” and replacing “disabled American veterans” with “American veterans with disabilities.”
“Removing out-of-date and offensive language from the Massachusetts General Laws to describe people with disabilities is an important step in ensuring that our values are also reflected in our statutes,” said Rep. Jay Livingstone (D-Boston), House chair of the Committee on Children, Families and Persons with Disabilities. “As legislators, it is our job to help make sure that people with intellectual or developmental disabilities feel included, accepted and embraced for who they are, and this is an important step in doing so.”
“I am proud to support [the bill] and take this long-overdue step toward ensuring the laws of the commonwealth reflect the dignity and humanity of every person,” said Rep. Mike Finn (D-West Springfield), sponsor of the House bill. “Our General Laws still contain outdated language that demeans our neighbors with intellectual and developmental disabilities, and that language has no place in the statutes of a state that has always led on civil rights and inclusion. Updating these words is an affirmation that Massachusetts stands for the respect and dignity of all its people.”
“Language is constantly changing.” said Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), the sponsor of the Senate bill. “And it’s changing because of the activism of people who were ignored and demeaned for too long,” said Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville), the sponsor of the legislation. “When people tell us they feel insulted and offended by the use of outdated words, we worked to change the legal language. It took a long time because we kept finding more examples of offensive language. Language and activism will continue to evolve, and there’ll always be more work to do, but this is a gigantic step forward in respect.”
(A “Yes” vote is for the bill.)
Rep. Christine Barber Yes Rep. Mike Connolly Yes Rep. Paul Donato Yes Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven Yes