Letter to the Editor: Concern About Bias in Terminology

Although “Brain Health Fair Gives At-Risk Youth Hands-On Education” (May/June 2024) presented insightful information about health literacy and TBI, the title of the article was biased and steeped in cultural stereotypes.

This article gives the idea that just because the youth are African American and living in (assumed) underserved and under-resourced communities, that they are “at-risk” for something. Further, the citation used about the “8,000 children who use club services” was both grossly over-generalized and misleading. The story did not confirm that the children involved were in fact from underserved communities or involved in activities that placed them at risk for anything.

Risks are associated with conditions, not people. But your use of the term creates a category of racism that is used in society to alienate and criminalize Black youth. All youth, not just African American youth, could possibly benefit from this activity. So, the bigger question is why is the term “at-risk” necessary in the focus of this publication? We as a profession have to do better, and that starts with being mindful of the harm we cause, and the bias we contribute to with our words and perceptions.

It is recommended to utilize the terminology, “Youth placed at-risk for ...”— which reduces some bias and the inclination that African American/Black youth somehow willingly place themselves in the predicaments or harms they experience. Please revise this title to remove the term “At-Risk Youth.”

Shameka Stewart, Upper Marlboro, Maryland

The Leader responds:

The Leader editors take responsibility for writing this headline containing the problematic use of “at-risk” as a modifier for youth. We appreciate you pointing out and explaining the bias associated with such use of the term and have removed it from the online version of the article—along with an acknowledgement of doing so.