Search

Controversies regarding the neurodiversity movement may be exacerbated by confusion over its meaning. For example, some suggest neurodiversity entails acceptance of the social model, whereas others describe it as more nuanced. We aimed to help resolve conflicting viewpoints by inviting insights from 504 autistic and autism community members (278 autistic, 226 non-autistic), including 100 researchers (41 autistic), 122 professionals (35 autistic) and 162 parents/caregivers (53 autistic). They rated the neurodiversity movement, social model, medical model and intervention goals, and answered open-ended questions regarding the meaning of neurodiversity, the neurodiversity movement and disability models. Neurodiversity movement support was associated with endorsing societal reform and making environments more supportive, and lower support for normalization and adaptive skill interventions, though teaching adaptive skills was widely supported overall. Although participants often suggested the social model attributes disability solely to society, this ‘strong’ view was not universal. ‘Strong’ social model supporters still endorsed some interventions targeting individuals’ characteristics (specifically, teaching adaptive skills, curing depression and epilepsy). Findings confirm that neurodiversity movement supporters denounce normalization, but are open to individualized supports. Findings highlight strong support for autistic leadership (especially among autistic people, including autistic parents) and for societal reform, and suggest that oversimplified rhetoric may cause confusion regarding advocates’ views.What is already known about the topic? Some people support the neurodiversity movement and other people criticize it. They often disagree about what the neurodiversity movement means. Confusion about what the neurodiversity movement is makes it hard for people to agree about how best to support autistic or disabled people.What does this article add? We studied autistic and autism community members’ views on the neurodiversity movement and autism interventions. Most participants supported the neurodiversity movement. Support for the neurodiversity movement was related to wanting to change society and make places more comfortable for autistic people. Neurodiversity supporters felt autistic children should choose their own intervention goals and that autistic adults should help children choose goals. Neurodiversity supporters did not think autistic people should be taught to act less autistic. Both those agreeing and disagreeing with the neurodiversity movement said that it is important to help autistic people be well. Many participants said that society causes all the difficulties disabled people experience. Yet they were somewhat open to helping people grow by teaching them useful skills and trying to cure depression and epilepsy.Implications for practice, research or policy. To better help autistic people, we should listen to participants in this study. They called for improving society, building more spaces where autistic people feel comfortable and helping autistic people lead change. They warned against teaching autistic people to hide their autism. Critics of the neurodiversity movement should read this article to better understand what neurodiversity movement supporters believe. By taking time to learn from one another, we can work together to better support autistic people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Controversy regarding the neurodiversity movement (NDM), the social and medical models of disability, autism intervention goals, and causal attributions of disability contributes to divides in the autistic and autism communities. The present study investigates the views of autistic and non-autistic autistic and autism community members on these topics. We explored whether these views are shaped by having close relationships to autistic people with intellectual disabilities (ID) and nonspeaking autistic (NSA) people., Methods: A total of 504 autistic and autism community members (278 autistic, 226 non-autistic) completed an online survey about theoretical models and intervention goals. Participants reported whether they had one or more close relationships with NSA people, autistic people with ID, neither, or both., Results: Overall, there was considerable consensus regarding desired intervention goals: normalization goals were generally opposed, while participants generally supported well-being, societal reform, supportive environment, and adaptive skill goals. While autistic participants reported less support for normalization and adaptive skills goals than non-autistic participants, they expressed somewhat more enthusiasm for societal reform and supportive environments than non-autistic people. Autistic people supported the NDM more and the medical model less than non-autistic people. Those close to autistic people with ID gave higher ratings to adaptive skill goals. On average, participants not close to autistic people with ID saw the challenges of those without ID as being slightly more due to environmental/social factors than the challenges of those with ID; there was no such statistical difference among those close to autistic people with ID., Conclusion: Further research investigating community views, with the inclusion of more autistic people with ID and NSA people themselves, is needed, but the results of this study suggest that the broader autistic and autism communities see NDM-consistent intervention goals as appropriate for all autistic people, including NSA people and those with ID. As autism interventions have often pursued unpopular normalization goals, this suggests directions for reform., (Copyright 2024, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., publishers.)