The Dastardly Diversion of “Differentlyabled”

Post Reply New Topic

“A group of ideological extremists is trying to rewrite not only the history, but also the fabric — the very DNA — of autism itself.”

An eminent autism advocate points out the counterfactual fantasies of Neurodiversity and asks the solemn majority to remain the voice of reason: “we will get our point across in the end”

By Thomas McKean

Over the weekend I went to my usual Sunday lunch with friends. This time one of them handed me an interview from the New York Times. This was an interview with autistic journalist Adam Garcia, regarding his book We’re Not Broken: Changing the Autism Conversation. From what I read of the interview (and the review here on NCSA), it is yet another book preaching the same old neurodiversity that has been going around for quite a few years.

On my way home, it dawned on me what’s really happening here. A group of ideological extremists is trying to rewrite not only the history, but also the fabric — the very DNA — of autism itself. This has been done before with other things, and many times. It happened with slavery, women in the work place, the deaf and hard of hearing, and people in wheelchairs, just to name a few. In each case, our society rethought these things and we are better for it.

So is what they are doing a bad thing?

In this case, I would argue that yes — yes it is a bad thing. I will tell you why.

In their eyes, they are doing the same as the people above, fighting for equal rights. And in all honesty, I do support them having those equal rights. The problem here is that by claiming they speak for every autistic everywhere (which they don’t), they are also saying the more severely affected don’t matter, that they are inconsequential. They are meaningless. They don’t exist.

I disagree.

What they are saying is, “Hey, we’re not disabled, we’re differentlyabled. And by the way, we speak for all of autism.”

People are hearing them and saying, “Okay. If you are merely differentlyabled, we can cut funding and programs for the autism community because they don’t need our help.”

Well, *I* need their help. And I know your kids certainly need it.

My friend Stephen Shore once famously said, “When you’ve met one person with autism, you’ve met one person with autism.” He’s right. That really is how different we all are. To not take that into consideration is not only negligent, it borders on the criminal. But that’s exactly what’s happening here. They are literally trying to change autism from a serious neurological disorder to a social justice situation.

Now I’m not saying there are no social justice aspects to autism, indeed there are. There would be no puzzle piece ribbon, Autism Awareness Month, or autism acceptance efforts otherwise. But for more people with autism, the much greater need is for treatment and lifespan services.

Another problem is these social justice autism warriors claim to speak for everyone with autism. And they do this without taking the more severely affected into consideration. Those who are not differentlyabled, but actually disabled. How can they not understand this? How can they believe they can speak for an entire population without permission, just because they said so?

One solution to this may be the DSM. Back when Asperger Syndrome was separate, these same people were proudly thumping their chests, boldly claiming they were “Aspie.” If we could somehow separate the higher and lower functioning again — which I firmly believe needs to be done for several reasons — it wouldn’t be as much of a problem. Your kids wouldn’t be as affected by the chicanery.

But since they are, what can be done about it?

I have always felt the best way to fight extremism (extremism of any kind) is with education. For example, anyone can say these guys are wrong, that isn’t enough. We also have to say why they’re wrong. In this case, the reason they’re wrong is because they are speaking for everyone with autism and there are people with autism who are more disabled than they are differentlyabled. Their lives and their needs are different. What they are proposing will be harmful (if not deadly) to these individuals. Also they are speaking for people with autism when a lot of them don’t have autism themselves. Or if they do, it is only because they said so. As an established and valid advocate, I have problems with that. I can prove my diagnosis. Anyone who claims to be a self advocate, especially if they charge for their services, needs to be prepared to do the same. (And no, it isn’t wrong to ask. Please never think that it is. If they want your money, feel free to ask them.)

So this is what I feel we need to do. We need to calmly, without the anger or rage we are obviously feeling (and which we have a right to feel), say not only are they a bit counterfactual, but also give the reasons why. And when we do this, we need to speak only for ourselves, not for others. We need to lead by example.

Let them continue to rage and attack as we remain the voice of reason. It will be slow going, but we will get our point across in the end.

Thomas McKean was diagnosed with autism in 1979 at the age of 14. As one of the original autism self-advocates he has served on the board of Autism Society of America, has written two books on autism, has spoken at numerous conferences, has done private consulting, and has even appeared on Oprah. He currently lives in Ohio with his sister, her husband, and their pomeranian. Learn more about Thomas at www.thomasamckean.com.

Disclaimer: Blogposts on the NCSA blog represent the opinions of the individual authors and not necessarily the views or positions of the NCSA or its board of directors.

I don't understand spotlighting said group of ideological extremists.
Other than I see it as just another rant -- though I share the same sentiments.


And I'd rather want a guide for everyone, especially at this very era -- to be able to discern and warn where they pay attention to, to give power to and 'follow'.

Not really understanding your comment, you say you don`t understand then say you share the same sentiments

To sum up what he`s saying he`s against those who talk of autism & autistic people as one entity all with the same needs & opinions. A quick look at WP will show that we are all different in that regard.

In fact many autistic people are unable to use WP as they are too mentally disabled so who talks for them? their families and loved ones or some unqualified Twitter user thousands of miles away who`s never met them & appointing themselves as their voice.

Unfortunately there are many in the community that do while at the same time while ignorant and uninformed of the needs of those they claim to be talking for.

That`s the issue in a nutshell

Gained Number Post Count (1).
Lose Time (n).

Lose more time here - Updates at least once a week.

Oh, I do understand the issue and the point.

Only that I said I really don't get the point of spotlighting said extremists.
People can be strange that way -- to conflate specific group into something more generalized.


And as to sharing the same sentiment -- as I said I rather want a guide for people to prevent said issues mentioned, though not limited to autism, but at society as a whole.

It said at the blog about education as a solution, yes? How about something basic like a guide for everyone?
To prevent said extremists of all "sides", along with the idea of individuals speaking for some collective whole.


Maybe one should take up some study and guides in engaging parasocial relations in such case online -- conjunct with advocacy movements.

As usual, they completely erase the existence of significantly disabled neurodiversity activists. Ironic, that they accuse neurodiversity activists of the very thing they're guilty of doing themselves.

High functioning means your challenges get ignored. Low functioning means your agency gets ignored.

As usual, they completely erase the existence of significantly disabled neurodiversity activists. Ironic, that they accuse neurodiversity activists of the very thing they're guilty of doing themselves.

High functioning means your challenges get ignored. Low functioning means your agency gets ignored.

The issue is that the Neurodiversity movement doesn’t properly represent them.

Many advocates even deny severe autism exists for a start. Next they refuse to accept it as a pathology which it clearly is.

To top it off they often use inappropriate sugar coating language to describe people who are in severe distress with a lifespan of 40.

This is why such organizations have branched off to setup separate organizations because they are not properly represented.

Just because they don't agree with your ableism doesn't mean they're sugarcoating or denying that "severe" autism exists.

And if you actually care about people in severe distress, wouldn't you want to understand why they're in distress instead of just chalking it up to "severe autism"? When you have someone who is regularly being abused in the vain attempt to cure them, they're likely to be very distressed and their health is likely to suffer. That's not "severe autism", that's abuse.

For example, take self-harm. No matter the functioning level, self-harm is almost always caused by distressing features in the environment. Sensory overload, lack of accommodation for communication needs, harmful therapies, etc. Very few people just randomly self-harm for no reason. But if you're part of the reason your "severe" child or student or care recipient is self-harming, it's in your own selfish interest to pretend it's happening for no reason. And if they can't communicate in ways most people can understand, then they don't have the power to contradict you.