> But I also feel that groups have the right to determine what they find acceptable as a collective noun.
The group of people with disabilities is not one hive mind with a collective opinion of which nouns they prefer: some will like some terms and some won't. Handicapped seems to be generally accepted as inoffensive to most people, so I don't see any reason to not use it.
i agree and is a very neutral term for a wide range of disabilities. now cripple would have some negative connotations to it.
though i suppose context and use of any term could be used to degrade especially something like this which does point to capabilities but because of a condition and specific to the disability.
That's your call. I couldn't have been clearer that this applies to my understanding of the majority view within the UK. If those people aren't part of your audience then knock yourself out.
The group of people with disabilities is not one hive mind with a collective opinion of which nouns they prefer: some will like some terms and some won't. Handicapped seems to be generally accepted as inoffensive to most people, so I don't see any reason to not use it.