As I tell my
students, there’s been a shift in the world of philosophy over the last few
decades toward context and the particular. Philosophers and ethicists used to
search for “the one answer;” now they tend to embrace a range of possibility in ethically/philosophically "appropriate" responses. Similarly, in
the larger world, the presence and testimony of neurodiverse individuals and
families have made room for a range of what is “normal,” as well as a diverse array
of approaches to difference. Since SPD (sensory processing differences) and
autism are a huge part of my family’s life, I’m curious about these shifts.
I’ve been seeing a lot in the press lately
around the immunology and neurology of difference (my favorite article, which happens to be about schizophrenia - by the brilliant Siddhartha Mukherjee - is
here); I’ve also been seeing a nuanced view of “fixing” people that
acknowledges the subtle, sometimes tragic losses our “fixing” can cause, along
with potential positives (this slayed me [for the record: I was surprised
that John Elder Robison chose this treatment, but that’s another post]).
I’ve been asking
myself: if context and situation vary so enormously, how could there possibly
be one answer to the sorts of questions we navigate when we and/or our loved
one(s) are neurodiverse? Respectful disagreement, while not being super-well modeled by U.S. Politicians, IS possible!
I’ll use the word
“change” to represent a range of possibility, from “cure” to “heal” to
“progress,” but want to be clear that I stand pretty firmly in the
acceptance-as-is camp. However, I respect the rights of others to want and
advocate for something different than what
I want and advocate for...!
With all the current
research into our immune and neurological systems, both of which are related to
neurodiversity (as well as other differences), we are faced almost inevitably
with the following questions:
Do you want to
change?
Do you want your child to change?
Do you want your child to change?
Does your child want
to change? (And, for non-verbal children and adults, how do we determine this?)
Or do you want
society, community, family, institutions, and/or context to change?
Or BOTH?
We have limited time
and energy (sometimes extremely
limited!): where will you choose to put your energy?
Into yourself? Your
child(ren)? Community advocacy? General advocacy? Change? Acceptance? BOTH?
There are limited institutional, state, federal, international, and
non-governmental/not-for-profit resources: Where do you think these resources
should go?
To funding a search for a cure? A cure for what (autism, SPD, ADHD, difference...?)? Therapies (Physical? Physiological?
Psychological? Neurological? Immunological?)? Resources to support families? Resources
for schools and other institutions? Advocacy for change in the direction of
inclusion?
(And...Finally...Do you even have time to
think about all this stuff?)
Figure I – Spectrum of “Appropriate” Possible Answers to Each Question
As I also say in my
classes, complex questions may naturally elicit answers that are complex, even
seemingly contradictory or inconsistent. Our immune systems and our neurologies
are intricately intertwined with our ways of being ourselves. We have many, many layers in our approaches to and
feelings about who we are – and who we want to be.
We all want to be
healthy, function at our best, be accepted; yet these things can manifest very
differently, and mean widely different things to different people.
Acceptance
and change can conflict, coexist, contradict, and/or complement each other...
The respect we offer
individuals, presuming competence and sharing autonomy, demands that we honor
the multifaceted array of possible answers in a multitude of contexts.
Love,
Full Spectrum Mama
Welcome to the Sensory Blog Hop — a monthly gathering of posts from sensory bloggers hosted by The Sensory Spectrum and The Jenny Evolution.
Click on the links below to read stories from other bloggers about what
it’s like to have Sensory Processing Disorder and to raise a sensory
kiddo!