Tag Archives: language

Language Matters Pt 2: Caring vs carer

You might have read my earlier blog post about the language I’m using in my research, where I discussed why I’m using the word ‘queer’ in the title of the research, and why I use it to describe myself. (If you haven’t read that – check it out here).

Almost as divisive and controversial is the use of the term ‘family carer’ or similar, used to categorise or define someone who supports and cares for a person in their own home. In an Irish context, the term ‘family carer’ seems to be the consensus over and above other terms used elsewhere such as ‘informal carer’ or even the arguably simpler ‘carer’ or ‘caregiver’. This is because here, often, people see the word ‘carer’ and assume someone who is paid a wage to provide care, perhaps via the Home Support Scheme or similar. By using the term ‘family’ alongside ‘carer’, the hope is that enough of a delineation is made – but of course that also means that if you’re caring for a friend or neighbour, you might not see yourself in that language.

Embracing the identity of family carer is often what enables someone to start to access supports for their caring journey – without fully understanding that you are a carer, and that you have your own needs, it’s easy to become overwhelmed, burnt out, frustrated and angry. These are totally natural emotional responses, but tapping in to the supports available – scant though they might be – can help alleviate some of these negative emotions and experienced.

In 2017, I published a paper in the International Journal of Care and Caring; Defining and profiling family carers: reflections from Ireland. That paper, although a few years old at this stage, discusses some of the points that must be taken into account when discussing the idea of language use and it’s relation to caring supports and services.

In this Doctoral study, as I am looking at the experience of queer carers, the use of the term ‘family’, can, in some cases, cause confusion. Do I mean only those who are caring for a parent, grandparent, child or other blood relative? Of course not. The idea of family of choice is paramount in the research, in particular when we look back to the AIDS epidemic in the 1980’s and 90’s, where gay men were often cared for and nursed not by medical professionals, but by members of our own community, by lesbians, bisexuals, trans men and women, and other gay men. Past lovers, friends, community elders, all came together to provide the care that was needed. To erase that from the concept of care within the queer community would be a terrible mistake.

So, when I use the term ‘family carer’, I am referring to anyone providing care or support for a disabled person, a person with a chronic illness, long term condition, addiction, or dementia. The care provided does not have to be ‘medical’ in nature, it does not mean you have to be washing and bathing and changing dressings or administering medication. It simply means that you provide a level of support in tasks and at a personal level above and beyond what could be expected of a similar relationship.

If you have any thoughts on this, I’d love to hear from you. And don’t forget, my survey is STILL open for responses – you can click here to get more information.

Language matters pt. 1: It’s Pretty Gay

A brief overview of the language I’m using in this research.

Going back to my days in secondary school I was always interested in the words people used to describe themselves and the world around them. That’s not to say I had an aptitude for language; far from it as my French teacher would DEFINITELY agree! But how people use language to manifest the descriptions of particular ideas always interested me. Perhaps that’s why I chose to study philosophy at undergrad, or why I eventually made my way into social science.

When it comes to labels, the LGBTQIA+ community has long had a love/hate relationship with them. The language used to describe us as a group has changed and developed over time. For some, delving deep into the minutiae of identity is critical for understanding who they are, who is part of their community and how to navigate through life. For others, the idea of any kind of ‘label’ is abhorrent, flying in the face of individualism and inclusion which is a mainstay of the community.

An image of LGBTQIA+ written across 2 hands made into fists
Photo by Sharon McCutcheon on Unsplash

There can be a fluidity to language use too – for a long time I identified strongly as lesbian, then I began to use the simpler ‘gay’ to describe myself. Now, as I grow older and have an appreciation that nothing remains fixed, I much prefer the term queer. For me, it encompasses a far greater reach than sexuality or sexual orientation; the idea of ‘queer’ is to challenge, to ‘disrupt’ and to trouble. ‘Queers’ is anti-assimilationist in many ways.

However, I do understand that for many in our community the word ‘queer’ can be hurtful; for other it is a symbol of pride and of empowerment. I have chosen to use the word queer in the title of my study for two reasons.

  1. It is my own personal preference to describe myself. As a member of this community, and as someone who is a former family carer for a number of different family members over time, I am embedded ninths research – I am what they call an ‘insider’. I am being as transparent as possible about that.
  2. It is more manageable, and encompasses more people and identities that either LGBTQIA+ or the shorter, but somewhat more benign ‘sexual and/or gender minorities’.

An excellent introductory article on Medium.com includes a brief history of terminology and notes that although there are many different preferences that we all have when it comes to how we are described, that language use must be seen as diverse, and without any kind of hierarchy of merit.

There is not now, nor has there ever been, a consensus on approaches to activism within the LGBTQ community, including the politics of language. LGBTQ people are as diverse and varied as any other group. What unites us is a shared experience of being gender and sexual minorities, though the particularities of that experience differ from person to person. The point is not to position some versions of the initialism as “wrong” and others as “right.” Rather, it is to encourage critical thinking around language as a vehicle of social change, and to recognize that people do not have to agree on all things to work communally. Language ideally brings us together, not divides us. We should not exclude others for using terminology we may not agree with or prefer, or for taking a different approach. We should, however, think critically about the words we use and if they are actually serving their intended purpose, or creating additional problems.

A Brief History of the LGBTQ Initialism – Jeffry J. Iovannone

I’m always interested to hear what other researchers and members of the community are using; it’s easy to stay stuck inside a bubble where everyone uses the same language, the same assumptions, the same everything. Within my Doctoral research I will be going into these debates in much more detail, critiquing them, and before I finalise my thesis this language choice may change. I’ll keep you informed!