Clearing Up Some Misconceptions about Neurodiversity

[Autistamatic]

The article is great. Thank you.

I think, the best way to handle assist autistic people would be by helping them with their disabilities while looking for their exceptional abilities and making use of them. This would help them become partially or totally independent, lead a happier life, and alleviate the burden on society lack of opportunity. But, first, the definition of “disability” in autism needs some changes.

Unfortunately this approach is not possible in the current climate not least because not all of us have exceptional abilities, at least not in a way we can capitalise on. It is the curse of the autist that many of us have strengths which we cannot utilise since society expects them in combination with others in which we may be weak.
Another failing of society is that the current education systems are antagonistic to most autistics. One may possess a prodigious talent and a matching special interest but be unable to make practical use of it due to an inability or a lack of opportunity to obtain the qualifications deemed necessary.
This is not to say that the principle isn't correct, however our society requires root and branch change to both our employment and educational systems for it to become a possibility.

 

[leehart]

I think this is a really significant issue in the ND movement and one it needs to clarify and resolve. Simon Baron-Cohen is picking up on something that is valid in my view as I communicate with people of the ND movement on Twitter etc. This drastic push of social disability model IS (in my view) aggressively resisting any relevance of the medical view. The key issue and what has been unfolding in often extremely hostile debates is that those who are most vulnerable are left increasingly exposed and sidelined, and the advocates of those people, often parents are entirely demonised and trolled relentlessly.

Now I don't mean to be negative here, but if we are having the conversation I feel I need to be honest. I am increasingly sure I am Autistic myself, and for me I lap up all the ND stuff, it helps me see the positives in something that in my life has caused a lot of pain (namely the actions of others towards me and my struggle to understand some of what takes place around me). Equally, if not more important to me is my child who is a non-verbal autistic unable to risk assess and would be prone to wondering into traffic or the sea. How does the NDM positively impact them? In my view as it currently is, it does not, infact it roundly dismisses their vulnerabilities, even implies that I am doing something my child wants to run from (! Ill wont even start on my response to that) and fails to recognize their vulnerabilities.

Let me add a caveat here - I am very new to the momement and there are likely vast swathes of things I have missed in my understanding of some of these issues but I feel here is a good please to raise them and get understanding by dialogue. Please dont troll me, I dont mean to offend, simply to be honest and engage.

 

[Autistamatic]

This drastic push of social disability model IS (in my view) aggressively resisting any relevance of the medical view.

Lee - have a look at the video I posted above about the social model. It's about 10 minutes long and it will clarify what the social model actually IS rather than the distorted view certain militant agitators on social media wish you to believe. Baron-Cohen and all those people you mention who claim the social model is being favoured at the expense of the medical model are incorrect because they are fundamentally misrepresenting the social model of disability.

 

[leehart]

Lee - have a look at the video I posted above about the social model. It's about 10 minutes long and it will clarify what the social model actually IS rather than the distorted view certain militant agitators on social media wish you to believe. Baron-Cohen and all those people you mention who claim the social model is being favoured at the expense of the medical model are incorrect because they are fundamentally misrepresenting the social model of disability.

Thanks Autistamatic I will watch that soon. As I said there are some gaps in my info and therefore likely understanding. I know there are many who push against the social model but my fear hasnt come from them but the prominent NDM folks who keep saying 'Autism is' or 'Autism isn't' and as I read those things I think this is so far away from my kid they can't be part of this without their vulnerabilities being so exposed that they would be quickly dead - and that would be the result as my kids vulnerabilities are so substantial.

 

[Autistamatic]

The prominent NDM folks who keep saying 'Autism is' or 'Autism isn't'

You know me on Twitter, Lee - maybe DM me on there and point me to some of these There are quite a few people on social media who claim to champion neurodiversity yet have a distorted understanding of what it actually is, and plenty more who have a very narrow view of the autistic world on which they pontificate. Autism is many things, but it is more than one individual's world view. For instance - someone who says "autism is NOT a disability" is speaking from a personal point of view which is not only inaccurate, but misrepresentative of the neurodiversity paradigm. Autism can simultaneously be a disability AND a difference. One is not exclusive of the other, and "disabled" is not to be treated as an insult the way many do.
BTW - the "NDM" doesn't exist. It is an invention of those who want an enemy to confront.

 

[leehart]

You know me on Twitter, Lee - maybe DM me on there and point me to some of these There are quite a few people on social media who claim to champion neurodiversity yet have a distorted understanding of what it actually is, and plenty more who have a very narrow view of the autistic world on which they pontificate. Autism is many things, but it is more than one individual's world view. For instance - someone who says "autism is NOT a disability" is speaking from a personal point of view which is not only inaccurate, but misrepresentative of the neurodiversity paradigm. Autism can simultaneously be a disability AND a difference. One is not exclusive of the other, and "disabled" is not to be treated as an insult the way many do.
BTW - the "NDM" doesn't exist. It is an invention of those who want an enemy to confront.

Thanks, that is really helpful. Yeah i got you on twitter, ill drop you a wee message. What you have said here is precisely some of what I pick up on. I feel with some there is an attempt to flatten Autism to one experience and that anything that diverges from that is a co-morbiditiy. Whilst those likely exist I think Autism is far more diverse than that and there is a vast difference between one who live independently and hold down high level jobs (perfectly possible for some Autistic people) and others who like my child will need full time care all their lives unless something significant changes in their development (I will always hold out and pray that this is the case).

 

[Crossbreed]

Being 2e, I maintain that there is a difference between a "different" brain and a "damaged" brain. Further, a different brain is as susceptible to subsequent damage as any neuro-typical brain; in one scenario, even more so.

• Different brains are able to succeed, even if they do so by an unconventional means, just like left-handers can function in a right-handed world.
• Damaged brains lose some vital functionality, in every case. (Savantism just gets a recognized benefit, in the exchange.)
• When a brain is both different AND damaged, it takes extra effort to suss out where one ends and the other begins.

People of all neuro-states are deserving of respect and consideration, but that cannot change their status as being functional vs. dysfunctional models.

As a technician, I am not going to refer to a failing piece of equipment as one that is "succeeding on its own terms." That is both dishonest and a disservice to everyone concerned.

 

[Autistamatic]

Autism is very complex, but it is reductionist to suggest it is linear as many do. There is no "mild" or "severe" - it is described as a spectrum of differences and abilities, not a scale.
Most of the problems that get described as being part of "severe" autism are co-occurring conditions. We know this because they appear with equal impact on the lives of people who are not autistic. The core range of experience and difference which can be defined as autism is separate from that, yet it can still be disabling for the individual.
There are extremists who are pro ND and those who are anti, yet they all have in common a fundental lack of understanding of how much they have in common with the point of view they deride and attack. In both cases their willingness to stand on a platform without a balanced or comprehensive view of both sides of the debate undermines their arguments. Thankfully such malcontents are a minority, unfortunately they are a loud one.

 

[Darwin]

Unfortunately this approach is not possible in the current climate not least because not all of us have exceptional abilities, at least not in a way we can capitalise on. It is the curse of the autist that many of us have strengths which we cannot utilise since society expects them in combination with others in which we may be weak.
Another failing of society is that the current education systems are antagonistic to most autistics. One may possess a prodigious talent and a matching special interest but be unable to make practical use of it due to an inability or a lack of opportunity to obtain the qualifications deemed necessary.
This is not to say that the principle isn't correct, however our society requires root and branch change to both our employment and educational systems for it to become a possibility.

It might happen in the future that people look at autism differently. Governments might spend effort because, as I said, it will alleviate the burden on society. Education systems are mostly suitable for neurotypicals. Hopefully, this will change in the future, too.

I personally believe that, theoretically, a difference, any difference, is not all good or all bad. It is likely that each one with a developmental disorder has an ability that others don’t have, for the brain wiring is different. For example, those with ADHD can jump from an idea to another very quickly. This can relate many ideas together, which might provide creative solutions.

This is purely theoretical. I know that there are many things I probably don’t know about ASD and other developmental disorders, but I hope this is true.

 

[Autistamatic]

Governments might spend effort because, as I said, it will alleviate the burden on society.

It will happen a great deal faster if we stop using phrases like "The burden on society"
We are the ones carrying the burden of unfair disadvantage and narrow minded expectations piled on our shoulders.

 

[Darwin]

It will happen a great deal faster if we stop using phrases like "The burden on society"
We are the ones carrying the burden of unfair disadvantage and narrow minded expectations piled on our shoulders.

Both do suffer. For example, I don’t work, and won’t do until graduating, and my parents support me financially. Governments pay to treat people who probably do not work, i.e., who don’t benefit the society.

On the other hand, I suffer emotionally because I have to, for example, use public transport, which is a nightmare because I don’t like to be touched. (And this is one of the reasons I don’t currently work. Solving this issue would result in me not suffering anymore, and providing my services to the society. So, finding solutions to such issues would help both parties.)

Who suffers the most? It is variable.

 

[Autistamatic]

Would your parents not support you if you were not autistic? Do people who are perfectly healthy and not autistic but cannot find work not deserve a safety net as much as autistic people? If society were less judgemental and allowed capable autistic people fair opportunity would you still call them a burden?
A person's worth is not dictated just by their fiscal contribution. Societies don't suffer, people do.

 

[Darwin]

If society were less judgemental and allowed capable autistic people fair opportunity would you still call them a burden?

No. What I call burden is the disability that makes people not being able to serve the society, i.e., work. I do accept differences. I was diagnosed with ASD; I accept it, although I do not deny that I need to work hard on, for example, my social skills. I do accept neurotypicals, too; however, for me, they are disabled, too, because they are not as creative as I am.

I am not against autism. But it’s a difference that comes with advantages and disadvantages. We need to make use of the advantages, and help them with their disadvantages. Physically disabled people, if are not able to work, I describe them as “burden,” too.

Everyone deserves to be happy. We, humans, are, in general, social. We care about each others' feelings, and help each other. All I am saying is that it would be better if autistic people were able to find their exceptional abilities and serve the society. They would feel good about themselves for being independent, and the money and effort spent on them would be directed somewhere else (to deal with climate change, for example).

Lastly, I agree that people should be less judgemental. It doesn’t help at all.

 

[Darwin]

And those who still would not be able to work should be supported because everyone deserves to have a good life. :')

 

[GadAbout]

I shared this article with everyone in my mental/behavioral health circles. The people who actually read it really appreciated it, but my mother couldn't understand it AT ALL. I wonder about her sometimes....

I have a really hard time with abstractions, and this article was full of definitions of abstract concepts. No one who has ever met me would call me stupid, but sometimes I just back off from the challenge of having to understand abstract concepts.

 

[GadAbout]

BTW - the "NDM" doesn't exist. It is an invention of those who want an enemy to confront.

That was my impression as I (attempted to) read this article, too.

 

[Matthias]

I think the problem ultimately boils down to a lack of respect for other people due to a lack of morals. The desire of caretakers to fix people by treating their symptoms while ignoring what causes them (I don't care why you're acting abnormally, start acting normal to make my life easier or I'm going to punish you.) is selfish and hateful. A loving person would seek to understand why a person acted abnormally and be willing to help them with their problems.

For example, punishing autistics for stimming while ignoring the anxiety that causes it turns them into mindless robots who ignore how they feel and obey out of fear. Teaching someone that stimming is normal and that people wouldn't think he's weird if he did it in more socially acceptable ways (such as clicking a pen or tapping a foot) avoids harming his self-esteem while helping him understand his emotions and make better choices.

An opposite problem that is also very harmful is telling autistics that what they do is part of who they are as a person and that it's okay to act differently. Allowing someone to repeatedly flap his hands without telling him how other people see it or treating the anxiety that causes it is neglect. That neglect hinders him from bettering himself so he can have friends and be part of society which can be just as harmful as forcing him to suppress his symptoms.

 

[Finder]

To my dismay, Simon Baron-Cohen’s recent article “The Concept of Neurodiversity is Dividing the Autism Community” perpetuates a common misunderstanding of the neurodiversity movement: that it views autism as a difference but not a disability. Baron-Cohen presents the issue as one of opposing sides: the medical model, which sees autism as a set of symptoms and deficits to be cured or treated, and the neurodiversity model, which he believes ignores any disabling aspects of autism. Unfortunately, this confuses the neurodiversity movement with the social model of disability, and it is an incomplete understanding of the social model at that.

I read Simon Baron-Cohen's essay. He is not saying that at all. Rather he is advocating an open approach that encompasses all of the ideas around autism. There is nothing in the essay to suggest he is misrepresenting the different approaches, but simply showing the conversations in the autism community. I thought it was a thoughtful piece.