President Javier Milei’s government faced backlash for using derogatory terminology in a resolution regarding disabled individuals, referring to them as “idiots” and “mentally deficient.” Following protests from human rights organizations, the administration pledged to amend the language used in the resolution. The incident highlights the need for updated terminology and a shift towards a more inclusive understanding of disability rights.
The government of President Javier Milei has sparked significant controversy by using outdated and offensive terminology for disabled individuals within a recent governmental resolution. Released on January 16 by the Agencia Nacional de Discapacidad (ANDIS), the document referred to individuals as “idiots,” “mentally deficient,” and “imbeciles” in its annex, which detailed evaluation criteria for disability allowances. Organizations advocating for disability rights criticized this language as archaic and discriminatory, contradicting Argentina’s commitment to international human rights conventions.
In response to the backlash, particularly from seven human rights organizations including ACIJ and CELS, the Milei administration agreed to amend the resolution. These organizations argued it violated the rights of disabled individuals as recognized in UN conventions ratified by Argentina. On January 16, ANDIS announced plans to update its language to align with contemporary medical and regulatory standards while clarifying that the evaluation criteria would remain unchanged.
On January 19, ANDIS terminated employee Miriam Améndola, responsible for medical oversight, and implicated her predecessor Tatiana Alvarado in the drafting process. ANDIS chief Diego Spagnuolo, who signed the resolution, acknowledged the importance of the matter and stated that those accountable had been dismissed. Despite this, critics argue that Spagnuolo remains responsible for the offensive terminology used.
The controversial terminology, sourced from a 1998 decree under then-President Carlos Menem, classified individuals into categories such as “profound,” “moderate,” and “light” based on their intellectual development. Critics have drawn parallels between these offensive terms and Milei’s own derogatory rhetoric toward his opponents, perceiving it as a reflection of his anti-woke ideology.
ACIJ attorney Agostina Quiroz condemned the state’s use of such terms, arguing that it perpetuates historical prejudices against individuals with disabilities. She highlighted the urgent need to shift from a medical model, which emphasizes deficiencies, towards a social model that focuses on the interaction between individuals and societal barriers. Quiroz stated that fostering inclusion requires community and state transformation.
In a February 7 statement, ACIJ asserted that all individuals with disabilities can work if provided adequate support. The continued use of outdated terms by the public, according to Quiroz, undermines both disabled individuals and their families, reinforcing stereotypes and barriers that hinder the creation of equitable and inclusive communities.
The Milei administration’s reliance on offensive terminology for disabled people sparked widespread condemnation and illustrates the need for terminological modernization. The government acknowledged the backlash and announced plans for revisions while maintaining existing evaluation criteria. This situation underscores the importance of promoting inclusive language and addressing prejudices that affect the rights and dignity of individuals with disabilities.
Original Source: www.batimes.com.ar
