disabled - Emergent Divergence

Feb 8 2024

Disabled; Warwickshire Council demonstrate a broader issue

It’s likely (if you follow the political landscape of the UK) that you will have seen that three Tory Councillors are currently being asked to resign. These calls for resignation have come in response to comments they made about disabled children Special Educational Need provision in their locality of Warwickshire UK. Comments included claims that disabled children are just “badly behaved” and that parents are sharing tips with each other online about how to get certain diagnoses. Regardless of what party you vote for during elections, this kind of rhetoric should worry everyone. Disability is something we will all have to engage with at one point or another, and the words these Councillors spoke demonstrate just how stark the landscape is for disabled people in the UK. You can find the BBC article about what happened here.

How many disabled people are in the UK?

According to the House of Commons Library, there were 16 million disabled people in the UK in the 2021/22 period. This figure, at just shy of 25% of the national population, shows just how common this particularly form of marginalised existence is. The Commons Library goes on to demonstrate that there has been an upward trend year on year for some time. Disabled people exist, and they are not going anywhere.

Kirk-Wade (2023) in their parliamentary briefing demonstrates that 11% of children are disabled compared to 23% of working age adults, and 45% of people at state-pension age. The commons library also demonstrates that disabled people experience a high degree of inequality and minority stress compared to those who do not have a disability. I have spoken about this with respect to Autistic people, which you can find here.

What does the law say?

There are fairly extensive legal frameworks within the context of this discussion. When it comes to the most obvious issue, we have to turn to the Equality Act (2010). The Equality Act sets out a number of minority identities as “protected characteristics”. Those falling under this definition are considered protected by the law, making it illegal to mistreat or discriminate against a person based on their protected characteristics. In this regard, disability is considered a part of this definition, and therefore mistreatment on the basis of disability is against the law, recognised as ranging from civil cases of workplace discrimination through to criminal cases of hate crime.

We also have the Chronically Sick and Disabled Persons Act (1970). This act discusses the legal entitlement of those considered disabled or chronically ill. It considers the rights of such people with regard to welfare and housing, and access to public spaces and institutions. It is a piece of legislation that helps to define the rights of the disabled person. It’s important to note that the Equality Act positions a person as having a disability if they have a long term health condition that will affect their ability to function for twelve months or more.

What are the attitudes towards disabled people in the UK?

Our research into attitudes has found 3 out of 4 disabled people (72%) have experienced negative attitudes or behaviour in the last 5 years.

9 out of 10 disabled people (87%) who had experienced negative attitudes or behaviour said it had a negative effect on their daily lives.

scope.org.uk

When we think about disability and the attitudes towards it, the remarks of the Councillors serve as a good indicator of the current rhetoric surrounding this area. Disability has been positioned as a drain on national resources, particularly with regard to welfare benefits such as certain type of Universal Credit (UC) and Personal Independence Payment (PIP). Our government has spent over a decade trying to remove welfare payments from disabled people and force them back into work. In a letter to the Treasury, Independent Living (2023) highlighted that around 6,000 people had died after being sent back into the workforce and having their welfare benefits stopped.

In particular I feel it necessary to zoom in on accusations of parents or individuals faking or curating their symptoms to receive specific diagnoses. Disabled parents in particular are at risk of being blamed for negative outcomes in the lives of their children (Clements & Aiello, 2021). These accusations run a risk of inappropriate and harmful applications of terms such as “Fabricated or Induced Illness” (FII). The attitude that disabled people fake their symptoms or that their parents are lying runs the risk of destroying family units and individual lives.

Is disability bad behaviour?

It seems that any time we discuss disabled children, we invariably end up discussing the behaviour of those children. This is perhaps because we tend to use observational approaches to measure and gauge the needs of disabled people. These observational approaches are flawed because they rarely account for an individuals internal experience. They also tend to position anything that inconveniences professionals as “aberrant” or “challenging” behaviour. Rather than learning how to recognise distress and emotional dysregulation, many professionals will position disabled people as “difficult” and “unwilling to engage”. There is a toxic shame culture in professional circles that seeks to solve problems by force rather than in collaboration with the person being assessed. In short, no. Disability is not synonymous with bad behaviour.

Disabled people are oppressed

To understand the nature of disability, not just in the UK, but world wide, we first have to understand the social model of disability. The social model of disability highlights that disabled people are oppressed by inaccessible physical environments and societal attitudes. While disability may be rooted in a biological difference, it is social barriers that primarily lead to reduced access to the environment. In this respect, disability represents a state within which minority stress has expanded into a critical state of oppression.

Concluding thoughts

The attitudes demonstrated by the Warwickshire Councillors are deeply troubling, but can not be taken in isolation. These attitudes are endemic to society. If we want to change attitudes and create a more inclusive landscape for disabled people and other minorities, we can not simply observe. As Popper (1945) suggested there is a paradoxical nature to oppression; when we tolerate intolerant attitudes, the world becomes less tolerant. We need to hold our leaders and others in positions of power to account, and sanction intolerant and bigoted behaviours. Bigots have no business being in positions of power, and yet we keep putting them there. It’s time that we took back the power.

Sign the petition to hold this council to account.

Sign the petition

Check out David’s new book about Child and Adolescent Mental Health Service’s failures to support Autistic young people.

Check out the book!

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments

Jul 3 2023

Is autism a disability?

When we think about autism, a number of things may (or may not come) to mind. The question of whether Autistic people are disabled is one that has been discussed for decades, with medical professionals largely being the ones to hold the power over how this answer is reached. Many may think of Autistic people as living tragic and unfulfilled lives, while others will talk about us having “superpowers” and advantages over others. The fact of the matter is that neither of these answers capture the full range of Autistic experience.

What is a disability?

There are two commonly cited models that define how we think about disability (there are more than two, but for the purposes of this article we will think about the two most common).

The Medical Model of Disability:
- In terms of disability theory, this model posits that disability arises from physiological issues. In other words, a problem with the body gives rise to a body that can not full participate in society.
- With respect to autism, this means that Autistic people are viewed as having improper development of the brain that leads to deficits when compared to a non-Autistic cohort.
The Social Model of Disability:
- The social model positions disability as the result of systemic discrimination and lack of accessibility.
- According to this model, Autistic people are not disabled by autism itself, given that autism is a socially constructed diagnostic category, but rather by a world that is designed for a very specific groups of individuals (for example, neurotypical people).
- This means that disability can be accommodated through the use of accessibility features that make the environment better adapted to the Autistic person.

The problem with these two models of disability is that they do not entirely fit autism as a diagnostic category. While it is true that many Autistic people can feel less disabled with accommodations and changes to the environment, things such as an aversion to bright lights will still be an issue on sunny days. Regardless of this, it does not mean that a person has a disordered brain, hence neither model is a perfect fit.

Dynamic Disability

Autism itself doesn’t exist, what does exist is Autistic people. People rarely remain exactly the same over a period of time, and as such, neither does disability. For this reason, I refer to being Autistic as a dynamic disability. This means that a number of factors have to come together to define our strengths and struggles, and the role they play in our lives from day to day.

Some day’s we may feel very capable and achieve what we need to, other days might be more difficult and we may feel more like a disabled person.

The problem is that disability has been conceptualised in society as a fixed point, meaning that when we have those good days, it can lead to imposter syndrome and make us question our own experience of being Autistic.

Functioning Labels

You will likely have heard people talk about “high-functioning” and “low-functioning” autism. You may have heard of levels 1, 2, and 3 autism spectrum disorder. These terms supposedly describe the level of disability we experience, but again, are misleading. Functioning labels are intimately associated with one’s economic status. Those deemed low-functioning are classed as such because they are unlikely to ever be self-reliant, a key target of neoliberalism. Those deemed high-functioning are the ones whose quirks and outside-the-box thinking can be used by the economic system to drive profit and growth.

There are further issues with these labels for disability. Those Autistic people who are viewed as having higher support needs often live a life of limited autonomy with people around them assuming they can not contribute to their own lives, or that they would even want to. For those deemed as needing less support, it is often a life of struggle and traumatic self-reliance within a system not designed for them that can be expected.

But is autism actually a disabilty?

Simply put, yes. Regardless of what models of disability are used, or what amount of support a person might need, Autistic people experience disability related issues. This can come in the form of ableist discrimination, hate crime and & mate crime, improper accessibility to the environment, or issues that can not be accommodated for.

The problem is that disability has been situated as an inherently bad thing. The truth is that disability, much like autism, is neutral. It isn’t inherently good or bad, it is a fact of life. Some days we’ll feel better about it than others, some days will be harder than others. The idea that disability is a negative thing that needs to be removed from discourse around autism is ableism. We are positioning disability as something that harms our humanity.

In other words, avoiding the topic of disability inadvertently dehumanises disabled people, including Autistic people. This is why we need a more inclusive world, and it is why we need to normalise disabled embodiment from a young age.

David Gray-Hammond 1 Comments

Apr 16 2023

Neurodivergence, disability, and the politics of existence

Neuroqueer theory has been the single most important idea to emerge from the academic circles of neurodiversity into my own life. I say that with a hint of irony; neurodiversity is my life. It’s all our lives. Neurodiversity is a fact of human existence. Yet, to not perform to a cultures normative standards, neurotypically, is a disability.

The cold, hard truth of being neurodivergent is that you are disabled. This doesn’t mean that there is an issue within your body that requires fixing. It doesn’t mean that you are worth less. It does mean that the world will be a harsh place.

This is particularly problematic for those who engage in neuroqueering. The further away from that pinnacle performance of neurotypicality that we get, the more labels of pathology that society will paste onto us. To diverge from normality is to have a relationship with the world that is, at best, indifferent to your pain and, at worst, violently hateful.

In my own opinion, this has to do with the way that society frames deviation from the status quo. As soon as we decondition ourselves or fail to assimilate, we are dehumanised and discriminated against. We are told that our experiences are not valid and that our pain is our own fault.

This neatly absolves the powers that be of any responsibility for the suffering they inflict on neurodivergent people. Disability (to my mind) arises not only from obstacles in the environment but also from volatile and harmful relationships within that environment.

One of the most disabling things about being neurodivergent is the way that society frames our existence.

Our existence is able to be framed as such because there is a distinct power imbalance in our world. It’s not enough to tackle ableism and autistiphobia. We must also dismantle the bigotry and oppressive system that have infected and affected our society en masse.

You can not tackle disability as an issue without tackling white supremacy, homophobia, transphobia, or any form of bigotry. We have to decolonise in order to make the world accessible. All of these forms of hatred and discrimination play a role in the way that neurodivergent people are framed by society.

This is the nature of difference. Because society has a toxic relationship with difference and diversity, we are disabled for not assimilating.

The time has come to not just queer ourselves, but queer society. By abandoning the false hierarchies created by our capitalist systems in the west, we can embrace the anarchy of bringing the fringe to the centre. We can start this in our own communities by Embracing neuro-anarchy and breaking free of the normativity within our own circles.

The first step to decolonisation is to look inwards at our own environment.

We need to consider what parts of neurodivergent culture are helpful and what parts have arisen from the politicising of our existence. We can give rise to a society that is kinder to all, a world where difference is not a disability, but the first step is to realise our own role in that oppression.

Get access to extra content by purchasing a subscription to my Substack.

David Gray-Hammond 0 Comments

Mar 23 2023

Autistic people should not have to educate their therapist

I have had extensive therapy, as one might expect for a recovering drug addict who is also Schizophrenic. I have had mindfulness therapy, Acceptance and Commitment Therapy. I’ve had Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, trauma therapy, psychoanalytic therapy. I’ve also had courses of therapy that use mixed approaches. Thanks to the NHS here in the UK, I have recieved all this for free. The problem is that while free, it was time limited.

Here is why that has been a problem for me as an Autistic person.

So often, therapists have said that they are able to work with my admittedly rather complicated profile of experiences. In particular, they will often claim that they have experience working with Autistic clients. The problem is that fundamentally, they don’t have a clue. This has left me with a difficult decision; educate the therapist or endure hours of inappropriate therapy.

People don’t come to therapy because they are in a good place. In the UK, a lot of therapy is gatekept behind “thresholds” of distress. Most (if not all) NHS trusts currently operate on a framework of crisis-driven intervention, which means that a person has to be in crisis before they receive support. Why then are we expecting Autistic people to waste their spoons and therapy sessions teaching a therapist what life is like as an Autistic person?

When we approach a therapy session, we come with the expectation that the therapist is the expert. Being faced with a professional who has little knowledge outside of awareness courses and mandatory training not only places the onus on the Autistic person to educate them; it undermines our confidence in the effectiveness of therapy. Having a level of confidence that therapy can work is vitally important to the process.

Therapists who do not understand Autistic experience will often employ behavioural strategies and infer thought patterns that are overtly incorrect. This can leave Autistic people feeling like therapy is more of an exercise in gaslighting than something there to help them. When faced with this, Autistic people will often feel forced to explain Autistic experience to their therapist. This means that time is wasted, and the process itself can often be intensely triggering, making any crisis worse.

This is why therapists need to spend time engaging with the communities that they work with in not only a professional context but also in the context of being the learner to willing educators. It is not okay for therapists to expect free labour from those in crisis.

This is perhaps one of the biggest accessibility issues in the world of therapy. Until such time that it is resolved, Autistic people are going to be left out in the cold during their time of greatest need.

David Gray-Hammond 1 Comments

Jul 19 2022

Neuroqueer: Gender Identity and Autistic Embodiment

This article was co-authored by David Gray-Hammond and Katie Munday

Neuroqueering means to subconsciously queer yourself by way of your neurology. One’s neurology is queer and therefore so is one’s Neurodivergent or Disabled embodiment (Walker, 2021). So, what does this mean for gender?

There appears to be a large overlap between LGBTQ+ identities and being Autistic, including being trans, non-binary or otherwise gender divergent (see references below). Autistic folk grow up with our own distinct culture, language and communication. Perhaps due to this that many of us are disinclined to take up prefabricated gender identities.

Our understanding of gender (like many things) is queered by our Autistic neurology. We simply do not embody non-Autistic gender. If we are male, we are Autistically male, if we are female, we are Autistically female. Whatever gender we are (or are not), we embody this Autistically.

Even cisgender Autistics have a tendency to construct our own versions of our assigned gender. “Traditional” gender roles often make little to no sense to us, especially for those of us in same gender and/or polyamorous relationships. We extend the boundaries of gender, devising a path toward neuroqueerness (Katie Munday discusses this in their article on neuroqueer cartography found here).

Exploring gender off the beaten track, starts with us engaging differently in social learning. A lot of us take an anthropological stance, studying those around us so we can better shield ourselves, challenge norms, and live more authentically. Through this deep thinking, structuring and restructuring we find where we belong, or more typically we create where we belong. We understand structures as entirely malleable and make identities which make sense for ourselves, not for other people (see Doing gender the Autistic way).

Some of us see the binary boxes of ‘male’ and ‘female’ and run for the hills – we are both, neither, in-between, some of us are spinning around in our own genderless galaxy. ‘Male’ and ‘female’ are strange arbitrary categories used to oppress those of us who are not men, or not considered masculine enough. So, many of us look at these categories of gender and throw them out the window – they are meaningless to us.

We are neuroqueering the very perception of the self.

References and further reading

Barnett, J.P., & Maticka-Tyndale, E. (2015). Qualitative exploration of sexual experiences among adults on the Autism Spectrum: Implications for sex education. Perspectives on Sexual and Reproductive Health, 47(4), 171–79. https://doi.org/10.1363/47e5715

Bush, H.H. (2016). Self-reported sexuality among women with and without autism spectrum disorder (ASD) (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Massachusetts.

George, R., & Stokes, M.A. (2016). Gender is not on my agenda: gender dysphoria and autism spectrum disorder. In L.Mazzoni, and B,Vitiello (Eds.), Psychiatric symptoms and comorbidities in autism spectrum disorder (p.121-134). Springer.

George, R., & Stokes, M.A. (2018). Gender identity and sexual orientation in autism spectrum disorder. Autism, 22 (8), 970-982.

Van der Miesen, A.I.R., Hurley, H., Bai, A.M., & de Vries, A.L.C. (2018). Prevalence of the wish to be of the opposite gender in adolescents and adults with autism spectrum disorder. Archives of Sexual Behaviour, 47, 2307-2317.

Walker, N. (2021). Neuroqueer heresies: Notes on the neurodiversity paradigm, Autistic empowerment, and postnormal possibilities. Autonomous press.

Walsh, R.J., Krabbendam, P., De Winter, J., & Begeer, S. (2018). Brief report: gender identity in Autistic adults: associations with perceptual and socio-cognitive profiles. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 1-9.

David Gray-Hammond 5 Comments

Tag Archives: disabled