In this response article, the author agrees with Jacobson that the labeling of individuals as "hard to serve" is unfortunate and misdirected in that it suggests that these students are somehow deficient and are the problem rather than identifying complex systemic issues that make some adult education programs necessary in the first place. Systemically and institutionally, there is disproportional access to quality education, health care, and housing for people of color, the poor, and the immigrant. This disproportionality is often driven by race, class, and immigration policies. Overall, the author agrees with Jacobson's predominant premise -- words matter. And the use of the term hard to serve is at best misinformed and at worst harmful. Unfortunately, Jacobson does make one error when referring to people formerly involved with the criminal justice system as "ex-offenders." Ex-offender like "'ex-inmate," "ex-felon," or "ex-con" is inappropriate and pejorative, defining individuals by perhaps the worst moments in their lives. It is not the totality of who they are. Therefore, using identifiers such as "a person who experienced the criminal justice system," "person formerly in prison," or "formerly incarcerated citizen" is better. (Tranet al., 2018). The author concludes that the overarching thrust of Jacobson's article is well articulated and rings true. There is a need to "stress the specific nature of oppressions some learners face ... change the terminology we use, ... call attention to the ways in which some adult learners are disempowered and help prioritize systemic change." [For Jacobson's article, "There Are No Hard-to-Serve Learners, Only Ill-Served Ones," see EJ1290190.]