Language Guide for Respectful Communication

Introduction

The language we use when discussing homelessness matters. Words shape perceptions, influence policies, and affect how people experiencing homelessness are treated. This guide provides practical recommendations for more respectful, accurate terminology when communicating about homelessness in various contexts.

These recommendations are not about political correctness or policing speech. Rather, they reflect a commitment to accuracy, dignity, and effectiveness. By using language that recognizes the full humanity of people experiencing homelessness and accurately describes the nature of housing instability, we can contribute to more productive conversations and better solutions.

Person-First Language

Person-first language puts the person before their circumstance, recognizing that homelessness is a temporary situation, not an identity.

Instead of...	Consider using...	Why it matters
The homeless	People experiencing homelessness	Avoids reducing diverse individuals to a single category based on housing status
Homeless person	Person experiencing homelessness	Recognizes homelessness as a temporary circumstance, not a defining characteristic
Homeless veteran	Veteran experiencing homelessness	Acknowledges the person's identity as a veteran first, with homelessness as a circumstance
Homeless youth	Youth experiencing homelessness	Puts the young person's humanity before their housing situation
Homeless families	Families experiencing homelessness	Recognizes that families remain families regardless of housing status

Avoiding Dehumanizing Terms

Some terms have historically been used to stigmatize, criminalize, or dehumanize people without housing.

Instead of...	Consider using...	Why it matters
Vagrant, vagabond	Person experiencing homelessness	These terms have legal connotations of criminality and historical associations with vagrancy laws used to control and punish poverty
Bum, tramp, hobo	Person experiencing homelessness	These terms carry strong negative connotations and historical stigma, implying laziness or moral failing
Transient	Person without permanent housing	Emphasizes impermanence and lack of connection to community, reinforcing othering
Derelict	Person experiencing homelessness	Originally referred to abandoned property; applying it to humans explicitly frames them as discarded objects
Street people	People living outdoors, people sleeping outside	Defines individuals by their location rather than recognizing their humanity

Describing Living Situations

Homelessness encompasses many different living situations. More specific terminology can provide clarity while maintaining respect.

Instead of...	Consider using...	Why it matters
Living on the streets	Unsheltered, living outdoors, sleeping outside	More accurate and less stigmatizing; recognizes that people may sleep in various outdoor locations, not just streets
Tent city	Encampment, outdoor community	Recognizes the organized nature of many encampments without sensationalizing
Living in their car	Vehicle resident, person living in a vehicle	Acknowledges this as a form of residence, albeit precarious
Couch surfing	Temporarily staying with others, precariously housed	More precise and less casual; recognizes the instability of this arrangement
Squatter	Person living in abandoned building, person in informal housing	Avoids criminalizing language while accurately describing the situation

Describing Actions and Policies

The way we describe interventions and policies related to homelessness can either reinforce or challenge dehumanizing perspectives.

Instead of...	Consider using...	Why it matters
Homeless sweep	Encampment removal, forced displacement	"Sweep" implies trash or debris rather than the forced relocation of human beings
Cleaning up homelessness	Addressing homelessness, resolving homelessness	Avoids language that implicitly compares people to trash or pollution
Dealing with the homeless problem	Addressing housing instability, responding to the housing crisis	Frames homelessness as a housing issue rather than framing people as problems
Homeless services	Housing and support services	Emphasizes the actual services provided rather than defining them by who receives them
Combating homelessness	Preventing and ending homelessness	Avoids militaristic language that can imply combat against people rather than conditions

Describing Behaviors and Conditions

How we describe behaviors and conditions associated with homelessness affects perception and response.

Instead of...	Consider using...	Why it matters
Homeless alcoholic, homeless addict	Person experiencing homelessness who has a substance use disorder	Separates the person from both their housing status and health condition
Refusing services, service-resistant	Not currently engaging with available services, facing barriers to service access	Recognizes that non-engagement often results from barriers, trauma, or services that don't meet needs
Choosing to be homeless	Living without conventional housing due to limited options	Acknowledges the constrained choices people face rather than implying free choice in a vacuum
Chronically homeless	Person experiencing long-term homelessness	While "chronic homelessness" has a specific definition in policy contexts, in general communication, person-first language is still preferable
Panhandler, beggar	Person asking for money, person seeking assistance	Focuses on the action rather than labeling the person with historically stigmatizing terms

Alternative Terminology

Some communities and organizations prefer alternative terms to "homeless" or "homelessness."

Term	Context and Usage	Considerations
Unhoused	Increasingly used by advocacy organizations and some media outlets	Emphasizes that the issue is lack of housing, not lack of a "home" (which can have broader meanings); still best used with person-first construction: "person who is unhoused"
Houseless	Similar to "unhoused," preferred by some advocacy groups	Emphasizes that people may have a sense of home and community despite lacking physical housing
Without fixed address	Used in some administrative and service contexts	Focuses on the practical aspect of not having a permanent address; useful in contexts discussing mail, documentation, etc.
Experiencing housing instability	Broader term that includes those at risk of homelessness	Useful when discussing the spectrum of housing challenges, including those doubled-up or in precarious housing
Rough sleeper	Common in the UK and some other countries	Specifically refers to people sleeping outdoors; not commonly used in the US

"The words we choose reflect our understanding of homelessness. When we use language that recognizes the humanity, dignity, and potential of people experiencing homelessness, we create space for more effective and compassionate responses."

Context-Specific Recommendations

Different communication contexts may call for specific language considerations.

For Journalists and Media Professionals

• Use person-first language in headlines, captions, and body text
• Provide context about structural factors alongside individual stories
• Avoid sensationalistic language that emphasizes otherness
• Include voices of people with lived experience of homelessness
• Consider the cumulative impact of language choices across multiple stories
• Be specific about living situations rather than using general terms
• Examine visual choices for potential stereotyping or dehumanization

For Service Providers

• Review all forms, materials, and signage for respectful language
• Use person-first language in case notes and documentation
• Avoid clinical terms that reduce people to their challenges
• Consider how language choices affect service engagement
• Develop organizational language guidelines with input from people with lived experience
• Be mindful of how language is used in staff meetings and discussions
• Recognize that language shapes service design and delivery

For Policymakers and Government Officials

• Use person-first language in all public communications
• Review existing policies and documents for dehumanizing language
• Consider how language in legislation affects implementation
• Avoid framing that positions people experiencing homelessness as problems
• Use language that recognizes structural factors alongside individual needs
• Ensure that data collection and reporting use respectful terminology
• Model respectful language in public discourse

For Advocates and Nonprofit Organizations

• Balance compelling storytelling with dignity and respect
• Review fundraising materials for potentially exploitative language
• Center the voices and preferred terminology of people with lived experience
• Consider how language choices align with organizational values
• Develop clear guidelines for staff and volunteers
• Use language that emphasizes strengths and resilience alongside challenges
• Recognize the tension between person-first language and identity-based organizing

Implementing Language Changes

Shifting language patterns takes intentional practice. Here are strategies for implementing more respectful communication:

For Organizations

• Develop a style guide: Create clear guidelines for staff and volunteers
• Conduct an audit: Review all materials, forms, and communications
• Provide training: Offer workshops on respectful language
• Create accountability: Establish processes for feedback and correction
• Lead by example: Ensure leadership models respectful language
• Include lived experience: Involve people who have experienced homelessness in developing guidelines
• Regular review: Update guidelines as language evolves

For Individuals

• Self-awareness: Notice your own language patterns and assumptions
• Practice: Consciously use more respectful terminology
• Gentle correction: Respectfully suggest alternatives when others use problematic language
• Explain why: Share the reasoning behind language choices
• Be patient: Recognize that changing habits takes time
• Listen: Be open to feedback about your own language
• Connect to values: Frame language choices in terms of shared values like accuracy and respect

Addressing Common Questions

Responses to frequently asked questions about language recommendations:

"Isn't This Just Political Correctness?"

This concern often arises when language recommendations are presented without context:

• Language recommendations are based on evidence about impact, not political ideology
• Research shows that language affects perception, policy support, and treatment
• The goal is accuracy and effectiveness, not censorship
• Similar language evolution has occurred across many professional fields based on evidence
• The focus is on improving communication, not policing speech

"Person-First Language Is Too Wordy"

Concerns about brevity and readability are valid considerations:

• The additional words serve an important purpose in accuracy and respect
• After establishing context with person-first language, shorter forms can sometimes be used
• In headlines or space-constrained formats, terms like "unhoused" may be more practical
• The slight additional length is generally outweighed by the benefits
• Clear communication sometimes requires more precise wording

"What If People Prefer Different Terms?"

Individual and community preferences may vary:

• When speaking with individuals, mirror their preferred terminology
• Some communities or advocacy groups may prefer terms like "unhoused" or "houseless"
• Identity-based organizing sometimes reclaims collective terms for political purposes
• For general communications, person-first language remains the most widely accepted approach
• Be open to evolving terminology as language continues to develop

"Does Language Really Matter That Much?"

Questions about the practical importance of language choices:

• Research consistently shows that language shapes perception and policy support
• People experiencing homelessness report that language affects how they are treated
• Service providers find that respectful language improves engagement
• Language both reflects and reinforces underlying attitudes
• While language alone won't solve homelessness, it creates conditions for more effective responses

Beyond Terminology: Broader Communication Principles

Respectful communication involves more than just word choice:

Accuracy and Context

• Provide accurate information about the causes and nature of homelessness
• Include structural context alongside individual stories
• Avoid generalizations about "the homeless" as a monolithic group
• Present statistics and data in proper context
• Acknowledge the diversity of experiences within homelessness

Dignity and Agency

• Portray people experiencing homelessness as active agents in their own lives
• Avoid voyeuristic or exploitative representations
• Recognize strengths and resilience alongside challenges
• Obtain meaningful consent when sharing personal stories
• Compensate people for their expertise and narrative contributions

Balance and Nuance

• Acknowledge both individual and structural dimensions of homelessness
• Avoid oversimplified narratives of either victimhood or blame
• Recognize the complexity of experiences and solutions
• Present challenges honestly while maintaining hope
• Include diverse perspectives, especially from people with lived experience

Solution Orientation

• Include information about effective approaches and solutions
• Avoid framing that suggests homelessness is inevitable or unsolvable
• Highlight successful interventions and positive outcomes
• Provide specific ways for audiences to engage constructively
• Balance problem description with solution possibilities

Conclusion

The language we use to discuss homelessness matters. By choosing more respectful, accurate terminology, we can contribute to more productive conversations and more effective solutions. Person-first language that recognizes homelessness as a circumstance rather than an identity, specific descriptions that avoid stereotyping, and framing that acknowledges both individual experiences and structural factors all help create more humanizing discourse.

These recommendations are not about policing speech or political correctness. They're about communicating more effectively and accurately while respecting the dignity of people experiencing one of life's most challenging circumstances. By being thoughtful about our language choices, we can help create the conditions for greater understanding and more compassionate, effective responses to homelessness.

Language continues to evolve, and these recommendations will likely change over time as well. The most important principle is to approach communication about homelessness with respect, accuracy, and a commitment to recognizing the full humanity of people experiencing housing instability. By doing so, we can contribute to a world where everyone is treated with dignity, regardless of their housing status.

References & Further Reading

1. National Alliance to End Homelessness. "Changes in HUD Definition of Homelessness." NAEH, 2012. https://endhomelessness.org/resource/changes-in-the-hud-definition-of-homeless/
2. Associated Press. "Homeless." AP Stylebook, 2020. https://www.apstylebook.com/
3. National Health Care for the Homeless Council. "Respectful Language Guide." NHCHC, 2020. https://nhchc.org/communication/language-guide/
4. National Coalition for the Homeless. "Talking About Homelessness." NCH, 2022. https://nationalhomeless.org/
5. HEAR US Inc. "Ethical Storytelling Guidelines." HEAR US, 2023. https://hearus.us/
6. Duneier, Mitchell. "Sidewalk." Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 1999. https://us.macmillan.com/books/9780374527259/sidewalk
7. Phelan, Jo et al. "The Stigma of Homelessness: The Impact of the Label 'Homeless' on Attitudes Toward Poor Persons." Social Psychology Quarterly, Vol. 60, No. 4, 1997. https://doi.org/10.2307/2787091
8. Canadian Observatory on Homelessness. "Canadian Definition of Homelessness." Homeless Hub, 2012. https://www.homelesshub.ca/resource/canadian-definition-homelessness