MSNBC has a news article about institutionalizing the use of the phrase ‘at hope’ kids instead of ‘at risk’ kids using the legislative system. It’s an interesting idea and one that fascinates me very much. Language is so very powerful, often in ways we aren’t thinking about when we use it. Even when we decide to pay attention to our word choices it’s often difficult to be consistent. In addition, there are countless disciplines in the areas of science, social science, law and many others where specialized language is required. Or at least it is thought to be required. And sometimes it’s misused or used to disenfranchise others without the same knowledge base or education level. What about parents of a seriously ill child who become experts in complex medical terminology in order to be able to understand the situation their child is in and to track their progress in ways quite similar to their doctors?
In this case, perception is the issue. Using the phrase ‘at risk’ to describe a group of children lacking in basic resources for life has, for some, gone from a helpful tool used for change and to create urgency to a label that inadvertently blocks change and growth.
The arguments against the official change in wording are equally interesting and both sides are undoubtedly complicated by politics and economics. Overall this reminds me how central language is in our daily work and how important it is to be mindful and thoughtful about our choices. I think it’s also important not to be afraid to reevaluate language as we have done in many circumstances throughout history to make sure the current accepted norms continue to be the most relevant word choices to impart the meaning we desire.
Here’s the link: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34826655/ns/us_news-life/
Alex Russell
Alex is a Program Manager for Six Seconds focused on implementing effective social emotional learning programs with schools and educational organizations. She conducts research on school climate and the links between EQ and success.
