A complaint made by Epilepsy Action about the use of the phrase “verbal epilepsy” in an article by The Spectator has not been upheld by the Independent Press Standards Organisation (IPSO), the regulator for the UK digital and print news industry.
On 18 March, Epilepsy Action made a complaint to IPSO about an article published by The Spectator titled “PMQs was ruined by Starmer’s verbal epilepsy”.
The organisation argued that this language was in breach of Clause 12 of the Editors’ Code of Practice, which states that “press must avoid prejudicial or pejorative reference to an individual’s physical or mental illness or disability”.
Epilepsy Action said the language “reduces a complex medical condition to a punchline”, adding that it is not relevant to the story and encourages stigma and outdated stereotypes about epilepsy.
“This creates a hostile environment for the millions of people in the UK affected by epilepsy,” the organisation wrote.
The rejection of the complaint from IPSO was on the grounds that Clause 12 is designed to protect specific individuals mentioned by the press from discrimination based on certain characteristics, including illness or disability.
A spokesperson for IPSO said because the word wasn’t referencing Sir Keir Starmer’s own illness or disability, “it criticised his performance at Prime Minister’s Questions, not his protected characteristic”.
Epilepsy Action has appealed for a review of the decision to reject the complaint. The organisation said: “To describe poor performance in PMQs as ‘verbal epilepsy’ pushes a narrative that epilepsy means poor performance. It doesn’t.
“It is a medical condition that many people live with successfully. It is also a condition that limits lots of lives, with 42% of employers telling us they would not employ or promote people with epilepsy, even though they know it is wrong.”
Epilepsy Action continued: “But why should people with epilepsy continue to be the punchline to jokes when so many other protected characteristics now sit firmly in our public consciousness as a place not to poke fun?
“Why is ‘verbal epilepsy’ permissible? The reality is that it is not.”
The appeal the decision has been passed on to the Complaints Committee.
What do you think about the use of phrases like that? Let us know your thoughts at press@epilepsy.org.uk.
More articles
