Explaining Said Neurodiversity

I've been busy this week, doing more of my personal project that I'll talk about later. Right now, however, I'm going to be doing more of the typical.

So I was on autismvox.com again, looking through the comments regarding a new ABC article on Neurodiversity. No, I'm not going to be ripping into ABC (actually, there wasn't as much to rip into, though I read complaints about the TV segment). Instead, I'm going to answer a really well phrased question of sorts. Here it is...

"My daughter (3.5) and I just saw you (Cliff's note: Kristina) and Charlie on GMA. I had recorded it to watch when I had a few minutes to sit down. We came to the couch to watch and my daughter kept asking for her favorite cartoon. I told her that we were going to see Charlie first. Then I saw him and said “There’s Charlie!” and she kept watching with me. Then every time they showed Charlie, she said “there’s Charlie!!” :)

On the “accepting autism” front, how can you help parents (like me) see that their/my child isn’t in pain? My 3.5 year old is doing much, much better these days as she’s able to express herself a little better, so we’re able to fix what might be wrong, but it was 3.5 years of her doing little but crying and very little sleeping. All the time. Nothing medically was wrong, but she was constantly upset and constantly awake. I know that for a long time, I would gladly have said that I would have her take a magic pill to take away the autism if it would make her happy and not so prone to what seemed like such pain and anxiety and misery. How do I readjust my thinking to not want to make that go away for her, to accept it as just part of who she is? I don’t think all parents just want a typical kid or one that doesn’t embarrass them (I have run into those kinds of parents and I’m not one of them). I do think I’m one of those parents that hates to see my child so upset so much of the time. I would love to see her just enjoy the day without having to experience so much worry and anxiety or frustration. I’ve long since strayed from the idea of “I’d do anything to make it better” and I’m much happier on the neurodiversity side, but it is difficult to “accept” all the tears and seeming pain for someone I love so deeply."

I liked, this, actually. It comes from a parent perspective which is actually trying to understand, and I really find that heartwarming (enough so that it made my day, really). So I'm going to answer the question in my own way, as well.

I think what this does so well is to help clarify a distinct point the neurodiversity has had issues making clear: there is a distinct difference between accepting your child's autism and your child's lack of certain skills. What this is, in essence, is that it confuses the DSM notion of "autism" with the reality of autism as a whole, underlying condition. I can poke holes in the DSM notion until it makes corkboard seem solid, but let's leave it at this: Those who read the DSM would look at a behavior and say "Oh, that indicates autism", but they wouldn't go so far as to consider what that implicates for the person as a whole. A more complete notion of autism includes that implication.

What also might be made clear is that a child is not upset because of autism per se. A child is upset, in my view as an autistic, more often than not because of a lack of understanding of the rationale behind certain events. The rationale for events, it has to be understood, is largely a product of social communication, and with that gone you're largely exposed to having to ideologically construct the surrounding universe in your own terms. It's a daunting task.

However, teaching someone how to socially communicate and thus communicating those ideas is not "curing autism". In fact, it doesn't even come close. See, autism itself is implicated in almost everything an autistic person does, because it essentially sets the person out on a specific remove for social influences. Because of that, it's also then is implicated heavily in the creativity, intelligence, willpower, and eccentricity of an autistic individual. None of those would be said to be 'autism" per se, but they're no less a part of it than a lack of social reciprocity. Again, I would define, for reasons you will find on this blog and other places, that autism is defined as a specific distance from social media. Its a complicated concept (because then, as it works out, the individual is more influenced by the media that he/she is receptive to because there aren't as many other influencing factors that are competing ), but that's the basic outline of it.

So a neurodiversity perspective itself isn't at odds inherently with things like ABA (which can be understood, in my view correctly, as a teaching mechanism), nor in supporting autistic individuals. What it does fight distinctly against is the attempt to eliminate said remove which defines autistics. That, in a neurodiversity perspective, is changing the individual to such a degree that he/she can no longer be considered the same person, and is effectively a form of personal substitution. The notion of "cure", in that regard, is challenged on many ethical grounds.
Indeed, many neurodiversity advocates are primarily arguing that the current perspective isn't paying enough attention to autistic individuals themselves, and instead are seeking a nebulous cure. Neurodiversity advocates would prefer research into more effective teaching methods and practices, better supported living situations, and discrimination of autistics in the social realm.

I think I answer the question, and I hope I didn't use too many wacky constructed sentences (a byproduct of different, autistic thinking, though it brought you the good stuff, too). It was well framed, and something so much clearer to write about.