Clear English and respectful language
I was delighted to learn, recently, that a leaflet I produced for the Child Maintenance Options service has received a Clear English award from the Plain Language Commission. There is no doubt that parents who are going through divorce or separation need information that is easy to read and easy to act on. However, what delights me more is that the Options service is producing information that is respectful to parents, irrespective of their circumstances or status.
The original Child Support Act used the appalling label ‘absent parent’. This was changed in 1993 to ‘non resident parent’. Not quite so awful, but not particularly helpful, either. Unfortunately, the language of the Child Support Agency matched the draconian intents of the legislation that brought it into being. The state was no longer going to pay the cost of family separation and it was going to crack down on ‘feckless fathers’ and ‘single mothers’.
In particular, all fathers whose marriages or relationships failed were tarred with the same brush. They, so the myth had it, not only caused family breakdown but failed to meet their financial responsibilities. And you need only pick up a newspaper to see that the language has changed very little since 1991.
The language of the Agency is still fairly brutal. It talks in numbers and targets rather than circumstances. It thinks in labels and stereotypes rather than people. But maybe that isn’t so surprising given the task it has been set and the attacks it has had to withstand.
It is my fervent hope that, as the Child Support Agency is replaced, its language will die with it. Because changes in language are not about being politically correct; they can indicate and set in motion very real changes in culture.
Using language that is respectful of parents does one other significant thing, and that is that it engages people rather than distances them. A parent who is providing hands on day-to-day care for their children does not want to be described as ‘absent’ or ‘non resident’. They want their parenting contribution to be recognised. And, by recognising that contribution, an expectation that both parents will work constructively for the wellbeing of their children is set.
Giving parents labels like ‘resident’ and ‘non resident’ creates division and builds barriers to ongoing parenting. It suggests that one parent is more important to a child than the other. It creates an imbalance in power that becomes reflected in services delivery and in the actions of parents themselves.
Those who brought into being the Child Maintenance Options service should be proud that they have set in motion a new way of working with family separation, one that should be nurtured and developed.
[The Child Maintenance Options leaflet Emotional Wellbeing can be found here]
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
About Admin
Clear English and respectful language
21/08/2009 Leave a comment
I was delighted to learn, recently, that a leaflet I produced for the Child Maintenance Options service has received a Clear English award from the Plain Language Commission. There is no doubt that parents who are going through divorce or separation need information that is easy to read and easy to act on. However, what delights me more is that the Options service is producing information that is respectful to parents, irrespective of their circumstances or status.
The original Child Support Act used the appalling label ‘absent parent’. This was changed in 1993 to ‘non resident parent’. Not quite so awful, but not particularly helpful, either. Unfortunately, the language of the Child Support Agency matched the draconian intents of the legislation that brought it into being. The state was no longer going to pay the cost of family separation and it was going to crack down on ‘feckless fathers’ and ‘single mothers’.
In particular, all fathers whose marriages or relationships failed were tarred with the same brush. They, so the myth had it, not only caused family breakdown but failed to meet their financial responsibilities. And you need only pick up a newspaper to see that the language has changed very little since 1991.
The language of the Agency is still fairly brutal. It talks in numbers and targets rather than circumstances. It thinks in labels and stereotypes rather than people. But maybe that isn’t so surprising given the task it has been set and the attacks it has had to withstand.
It is my fervent hope that, as the Child Support Agency is replaced, its language will die with it. Because changes in language are not about being politically correct; they can indicate and set in motion very real changes in culture.
Using language that is respectful of parents does one other significant thing, and that is that it engages people rather than distances them. A parent who is providing hands on day-to-day care for their children does not want to be described as ‘absent’ or ‘non resident’. They want their parenting contribution to be recognised. And, by recognising that contribution, an expectation that both parents will work constructively for the wellbeing of their children is set.
Giving parents labels like ‘resident’ and ‘non resident’ creates division and builds barriers to ongoing parenting. It suggests that one parent is more important to a child than the other. It creates an imbalance in power that becomes reflected in services delivery and in the actions of parents themselves.
Those who brought into being the Child Maintenance Options service should be proud that they have set in motion a new way of working with family separation, one that should be nurtured and developed.
[The Child Maintenance Options leaflet Emotional Wellbeing can be found here]
Like this:
Filed under Comment