Photo Credit: © Can Stock Photo / len4foto
We live in a time when the terms “normal” and “abnormal” are used far too often to describe the news, politics, and, unfortunately, even our young people. While the idea that some terms fit a definition of “normalcy” is fairly commonplace, what is considered typical or “normal” varies tremendously depending on a number of factors. As a result, when we think of—or actually refer to youth as—either “normal,” “typical,” “differently abled,” “special needs,” or any other term that may describe a particular characteristic (including race, gender, etc.), attribute, or challenge, we run a real risk of limiting how they are viewed, approached, challenged, and at times even granted access to certain programs or resources.
Before elaborating on the problems and limited benefits of assigning labels to individuals, there’s one important—and even obligatory—caveat. Of course, some labels are absolutely necessary and help to identify and prepare for specific needs, challenges, and supports. I am NOT advocating that we do not have or appropriately use labels in the course of our work with youth! What I do believe and have witnessed on numerous occasions is that far too often (and generally with the best of intentions), adults who are tasked with working with and serving youth become far too concerned with a particular label or group to which a child may or may not belong, and as a result they end up missing or ignoring what would otherwise be easy opportunities to promote positive development for that young person.
Another overarching point is why—as a general rule—we humans like labels. For fear of putting too fine a point on it, we have evolved to rely on group membership for safety and social status; our membership in various groups is one of the main ways that we define ourselves. Do you like a certain sports team? If so, you probably display its name/logo, and as a result you are more likely to find other individuals who also root for that team. Even our clothes can and do signal what groups we are affiliated with (think “white collar,” “blue collar,” “prep,” “punk,” etc.). The problem that arises for those of us who work with youth is that kids are not clothes, and frequently young people have less choice than adults in determining their own group membership (not that adults have absolute or anything close to total control). As a result, when we think about a young person as primarily defined by a group to which he or she does not belong, we do that person a disservice and run the very real risk of treating that person as an “other.” It is critical to remember that regardless of membership in any particular group, everyone has challenges, fears, strengths, and passions, and as youth development professionals, it is up to us to help young people find and develop their full potential.