https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/my-life-aspergers/202007/your-autistic-child-is-perfect-and-may-need-help
There are two majors schools of thought around autism at present.
At its best, it's the worried but ignorant parent, misled by possibly similarly ignorant others in positions of authority. Such people simply want the best for their loved ones, and see the autism as the summation of the child's problems, whether those problems are caused by society or internally. But something that, with the right treatment, could be taken away so their cherished child would finally thrive.
At its worst, this philosophy devolves into rampant ableism. Tyrannical individuals who won't stomach human diversity. Only some idealized neurotypical "way of living" is correct, and all that don't fit into it must be forced to do so. Abusive and coercive ABA "therapy" is common, and the mental and emotional scars of such cruelty "for your own good" can last decades. Pointing out that some of our disabilities are societally created, like the unfairness of the job hiring process, doesn't typically phase these kinds of people. The retort tends to be, "that's just how it is, deal with it."
Keep in mind that while many things are wrong with this philosophy, it isn't totally wrong in every aspect. It acknowledges that autism comes with challenges, regardless of whether those challenges are medical or social. It recognizes the need for help and support. It's what got autism research started, and what lead to the good therapies we have, such as Floortime, our AAC tools, and things like probiotics, enzymes, and nutritional supplements.
For example, the state of hiring for jobs, especially ones with upward mobility, is slanted heavily against autistic people. When getting a job, it's far more often "who you know" than "what you know." Autistic people may be experts at our hobbies and interests, but without the broad social networks and ease of communication (and white lies) that our neurotypical peers have, we typically don't get hired. And if we do, we're often fired for not fitting in. This is simply how things currently work. It is not an innate problem with us.
The best of this philosophy is perhaps a conscientious young autistic adult, likely abused by "therapeutic" ABA, fighting for inclusion for all people to the best of their ability. Typically such a person is highly verbal, and while they may struggle in day-to-day life, they may not suffer the crippling chronic medical issues that other autistics must face. As such, they may not advocate for all the same things that someone with epilepsy, intellectual disability, and gasto-intestinal issues might. And they may not understand or be able to advocate for users of AAC.
The worst of this philosophy is the sort of person that thinks their experience of autism is everyone's, and while they may struggle with some things, overall their perception of their life is literally, "There's nothing wrong with me, and if neurotypical people would stop being jerks and just accept us, we'd all be fine."
This sort of person may believe that people with more serious disabilities simply need to try harder, or that all their problems are created by neurotypical people, or that if other autistics would adopt a certain diet that helped them, and then everything would be fine. Unfortunately, you cannot simply diet away epilepsy, visual processing differences, muscular communication challenges or cerebral palsy. Certainly, a good nutritious and balanced diet can help manage your symptoms and improve your quality of life, and might even help improve the severity of these challenges. But cure? No. This mindset is shortsighted to the point of being cripplingly flawed. Challenges exist. Help may be required to manage them.
The other falling down point here is that making a society that works for all kinds of human diversity does not start by telling one group to drop everything and change. At the moment, the situation is mostly the neurotypical majority telling the autistic minority to do exactly that. But what these sorts of people advocate for is the polar opposite: autistic people shaping policy for ourselves, without input or care for neurotypical folks. And sometimes, without input or care for members of any other minority group, such as our fellow minority groups: black and brown folks, people with mental illness, religious minorities, and others. While only one of those examples fits the "neuro" in neurodiversity, these other minority groups include autistic individuals.
In fact, even if the world was literally only neurotypical people and autistic people, and all those other groups didn't exist, the fairest form of society is a compromise. Autistic needs should be supported and accommodated, but those needs vary, sometimes widely, and having neurotypical people avoid things simply because they might upset an autistic person means a lot of metaphorical walking on eggshells, possibly pointlessly.
There are two majors schools of thought around autism at present.
Autism as a Disease
The first, the older of the two, is the one most often held by medical professionals and parents: autism is bad. It makes our children and loved ones suffer. We should look for a cure and try to help those with it rather than letting them struggle on their own. This viewpoint includes the medical model of disability as well as Autism $peaks' brand of demonization.At its best, it's the worried but ignorant parent, misled by possibly similarly ignorant others in positions of authority. Such people simply want the best for their loved ones, and see the autism as the summation of the child's problems, whether those problems are caused by society or internally. But something that, with the right treatment, could be taken away so their cherished child would finally thrive.
At its worst, this philosophy devolves into rampant ableism. Tyrannical individuals who won't stomach human diversity. Only some idealized neurotypical "way of living" is correct, and all that don't fit into it must be forced to do so. Abusive and coercive ABA "therapy" is common, and the mental and emotional scars of such cruelty "for your own good" can last decades. Pointing out that some of our disabilities are societally created, like the unfairness of the job hiring process, doesn't typically phase these kinds of people. The retort tends to be, "that's just how it is, deal with it."
Keep in mind that while many things are wrong with this philosophy, it isn't totally wrong in every aspect. It acknowledges that autism comes with challenges, regardless of whether those challenges are medical or social. It recognizes the need for help and support. It's what got autism research started, and what lead to the good therapies we have, such as Floortime, our AAC tools, and things like probiotics, enzymes, and nutritional supplements.
Neurodiversity
The second is the neurodiversity movement, which opines that autism is good. That human diversity in general is good, and that the human species needs people who are different to survive and thrive. The social model of disability features here, which notes that some disability is socially created.For example, the state of hiring for jobs, especially ones with upward mobility, is slanted heavily against autistic people. When getting a job, it's far more often "who you know" than "what you know." Autistic people may be experts at our hobbies and interests, but without the broad social networks and ease of communication (and white lies) that our neurotypical peers have, we typically don't get hired. And if we do, we're often fired for not fitting in. This is simply how things currently work. It is not an innate problem with us.
The best of this philosophy is perhaps a conscientious young autistic adult, likely abused by "therapeutic" ABA, fighting for inclusion for all people to the best of their ability. Typically such a person is highly verbal, and while they may struggle in day-to-day life, they may not suffer the crippling chronic medical issues that other autistics must face. As such, they may not advocate for all the same things that someone with epilepsy, intellectual disability, and gasto-intestinal issues might. And they may not understand or be able to advocate for users of AAC.
The worst of this philosophy is the sort of person that thinks their experience of autism is everyone's, and while they may struggle with some things, overall their perception of their life is literally, "There's nothing wrong with me, and if neurotypical people would stop being jerks and just accept us, we'd all be fine."
This sort of person may believe that people with more serious disabilities simply need to try harder, or that all their problems are created by neurotypical people, or that if other autistics would adopt a certain diet that helped them, and then everything would be fine. Unfortunately, you cannot simply diet away epilepsy, visual processing differences, muscular communication challenges or cerebral palsy. Certainly, a good nutritious and balanced diet can help manage your symptoms and improve your quality of life, and might even help improve the severity of these challenges. But cure? No. This mindset is shortsighted to the point of being cripplingly flawed. Challenges exist. Help may be required to manage them.
The other falling down point here is that making a society that works for all kinds of human diversity does not start by telling one group to drop everything and change. At the moment, the situation is mostly the neurotypical majority telling the autistic minority to do exactly that. But what these sorts of people advocate for is the polar opposite: autistic people shaping policy for ourselves, without input or care for neurotypical folks. And sometimes, without input or care for members of any other minority group, such as our fellow minority groups: black and brown folks, people with mental illness, religious minorities, and others. While only one of those examples fits the "neuro" in neurodiversity, these other minority groups include autistic individuals.
In fact, even if the world was literally only neurotypical people and autistic people, and all those other groups didn't exist, the fairest form of society is a compromise. Autistic needs should be supported and accommodated, but those needs vary, sometimes widely, and having neurotypical people avoid things simply because they might upset an autistic person means a lot of metaphorical walking on eggshells, possibly pointlessly.
Putting It Together
The thing is, at least in the best case scenario, we all want the same thing: better lives for autistic people. We may disagree on what that looks like, and each autistic person is different and has different needs, interests, and desires for life. Like John Elder Robison in this article, I hope someday to help these two groups find common ground so we can more powerfully and effectively advocate for change.
As is often the case around an issue, there are differing opinions and each side has the tendency to go off the rails. The truth of the matter is often in the middle ground. In this case: some autistic people are absolutely disabled, and innately, not merely socially. This is a fact, not an opinion, and no amount of arguing or whining about neurotypical people being terrible will make it not true. However, autistic people are also not merely our disabilities. We are also our strengths, our joys, our quirks, and our creativity. Humanity needs us, and it has for thousands of years. Rather than be alienated from humanity in institutions, we should be supported so we can live our best lives within the larger community of humanity.
I wish this wasn't such a hard concept for both sides.
No comments:
Post a Comment