As a person who works on behalf of children with disabilities almost 24/7, and who understands from an inside perspective what the term “disability” means to a family and a person, I must express my dismay at the media’s initial reaction to recently released research on the prevalence of Autism. Researchers working with South Korean children and families have reportedly identified a broad population of individuals with features of Autism who bring the ratio of incidence of the disorder from 1 in 110 (already shockingly frequent) to 1 in 38! Ultimately, this means that we can expect almost one in three of the toddlers in our homes and the students in our schools to show evidence of disordered development that can be recognized as within the range of Autistic Spectrum Disorders.
I found the recent discussion of this result in mainstream programming very challenging. On the Today Show (NBC), Dr. Nancy Snyderman, who is the program’s medical expert and knowledgeable on many issues that impact on the health of children and adults, suggested that this means there are many children in the population who have gone undiagnosed and untreated. She suggested that these children, previously missed, should and would now be recognized and receive remedial/rehabilitative services from medical entities and schools. The discussion swooped low over Silicon Valley, where many high functioning but nerdy, quirky people are now considered OK—successful, even—but would, with this redefinition, be revisualized as having an Autistic Spectrum Disorder. My question is, “Why?!”
Why are we reformulating our view of these individuals, no matter what their ages, in terms of a disabling condition, rather than recasting our view of “typical development” to embrace more variation? Why can we not see that the broad, robust tapestry of life is diminished when every crinkle and peculiarity is removed or smoothed? As a culture, we “medicalize” differences, instead of seeing them aAs a person who works on behalf of children with disabilities almost 24/7, and who understands from an inside perspective what the term “disability” means to a family and a person, I must express my dismay at the media’s initial reaction to recently released research on the prevalence of Autism. Researchers working with South Korean children and families have reportedly identified a broad population of individuals with features of Autism who bring the ratio of incidence of the disorder from 1 in 110 (already shockingly frequent) to 1 in 38! Ultimately, this means that we can expect almost one in three of the toddlers in our homes and the students in our schools to show evidence of disordered development that can be recognized as within the range of Autistic Spectrum Disorders.
I found the recent discussion of this result in mainstream programming very challenging. On the Today Show (NBC), Dr. Nancy Snyderman, who is the program’s medical expert and knowledgeable on many issues that impact on the health of children and adults, suggested that this means there are many children in the population who have gone undiagnosed and untreated. She suggested that these children, previously missed, should and would now be recognized and receive remedial/rehabilitative services from medical entities and schools. The discussion swooped low over Silicon Valley, where many high functioning but nerdy, quirky people are now considered OK—successful, even—but would, with this redefinition, be revisualized as having an Autistic Spectrum Disorder. My question is, “Why?!”
Why are we reformulating our view of these individuals, no matter what their ages, in terms of a disabling condition, rather than recasting our view of “typical development” to embrace more variation? Why can we not see that the broad, robust tapestry of life is diminished when every crinkle and peculiarity is removed or smoothed? As a culture, we “medicalize” differences, instead of seeing them as variations in the way people respond to life and then seeking to accommodate their needs. For only one example, we look for active young boys to be calmed with medicines to reduce their ADHD, rather than finding ways to adapt the learning environment to take advantage of their speedier view of the world.
By no means am I suggesting that we ignore or trivialize the challenges presented by the disabilities that truly prevent children or adults from meeting their own needs throughout their lives! I am simply asking why we don’t do what’s necessary to keep them with us, woven into the tapestry…accommodate and support their needs, find ways to help them compensate for the things that get in their way, keep them among us where they belong.
We spend great effort in the educational system to bring students back into the mainstream, to integrate them after they have been helped, to “include” them, instead of just providing what they need so they can stay there in the first place. For a student who has not been identified as sufficiently different to have a “diagnosis,” this would mean no different life, only a better one.s variations in the way people respond to life and then seeking to accommodate their needs. For only one example, we look for active young boys to be calmed with medicines to reduce their ADHD, rather than finding ways to adapt the learning environment to take advantage of their speedier view of the world. By no means am I suggesting that we ignore or trivialize the challenges presented by the disabilities that truly prevent children or adults from meeting their own needs throughout their lives! I am simply asking why we don’t do what’s necessary to keep them with us, woven into the tapestry…accommodate and support their needs, find ways to help them compensate for the things that get in their way, keep them among us where they belong.
We spend great effort in the educational system to bring students back into the mainstream, to integrate them after they have been helped, to “include” them, instead of just providing what they need so they can stay there in the first place. For a student who has not been identified as sufficiently different to have a “diagnosis,” this would mean no different life, only a better one.
No comments:
Post a Comment