Neurotype 3
Charo Lemucchi
This section will: familiarize the student with the basic concepts behind the Neurodiversity and Autistic Rights movements and provide a venue for students to discuss these concepts. Additionally, students are encouraged to research neurotypes and write a section on the neurotype of their choice for other students to read and edit.
To conclude I did not develop much on my take on neurotypes, what is a neurotype and what is not a neurotype(or did I?), I shared some comments but I'm intending to further develop this section. I was considering creating a separate resource page on Wikiversity but on second thoughts this is a place where I can develop some of my thoughts regarding what I see as a neurotype. (Work In Progress)
The Neurodiversity movement is centered around the idea that there are many natural forms of variant human wiring in the brain. This diversity of neurology is where the term "Neurodiversity" originates from. A neurotype is the name given to one individual form of wiring. The so-called "normal" neurotype is referred to as Neurotypical (abbreviated NT) and is what we once thought of as being the most common, or "typical" form of wiring, hence the name. It is frequently considered, by society at large and particularly by medical professionals, to be the most desirable and possibly the only healthy type of brain functioning. The Neurodiversity movement seeks to change that assumption. Advocates propose that there are many different neurotypes, perhaps so many that the so-called NTs are actually in the minority. Furthermore, they believe that each neurotype is its own kind of healthy brain, with both pros and cons of ability, function, etc. Society is designed for NTs and therefore the good side of many neurotypes is not seen because those who are not NT are not able to succeed as easily in society. The movement seeks to make society change, to teach people how to understand and support those who are neurodivergent and create a society which does not discriminate against them.
Historically, though, there has been some disagreement over what a neurotype actually is and what qualifies as one. In this blog post(succumbed to link rot) (archived version at 2009-02-27 by Wayback Machine in where the word "neurotype" can be found) by Kevin Leitch, and in the comments that follow, several different positions are espoused which are fairly representative of the different factions:
We can divide different ideas about what is and what is not a neurotype into two basic camps: The scientific approach and the social approach. The scientific approach defines a neurotype as literally a completely differently wired brain, which is observable in a lab, able to be classified scientifically, and caused by genetics (otherwise it is not a form of "natural variation"). According to the scientific approach, one cannot have two neurotypes at once and anything that is not genetic, like cerebral palsy caused by an accident, is not a neurotype. In the social approach, however, a neurotype is not defined by what we can observe in a lab. In this approach, a person with cerebral palsy caused by an accident could be considered to have a non-neurotypical (or "neurodivergent") neurotype, because this approach assumes that even things not caused by genetics are a form of natural variation. The social approach also allows that one can have two different neurotypes at once, such as autism and ADHD, if that description suits the person in question.
I want to begin the discussion with some questions: Do you agree more with the scientific or the social approach to defining a neurotype? Do you feel that it might be possible to somehow combine the two?
If we were to take neuro diversity as a whole it makes sense to include all neurological types including neurotypical as anything more divisive would undermine the ability of research. Research would benefit from seeing the whole picture instead of only being able to look at specific types. When we limit the information due to a preceding idea it also limits the outcome of data overall and if we are searching for any knowledge we should always take a look at the whole picture before during and after dividing things up. How is sensory information prevalent to a neurotypical individual? If we focus on specific types instead of the neurological nature behind them then the research will become limited as well. If we look at neurotypicals as being a part of the neurodiversity which they are then we can see the entire fabric of our neurological being and we can see how each individual interacts with the whole and how we all make up the whole. This will lead to understanding how we all fire and the effects of these firings on the whole. Perhaps this way may pave a path of understanding in other realms of life we have pondered since our beginnings.(previously unsigned comment)--Kelsieenwikiversity 20:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
- I find it fascinating that all the neurotypes listed above can be considered ailments. Assuming the social sciences definition of a neurotype than gender identity, sexuality, learning preferences (visual vs. auditory, etc.) - if pronounced enough should be considered a neurotype as well. Also I disagree with this part of the concepts description.
While the sentiment of neurodiversity and its importance in society I agree on, the idea that a mind with f.eg. Tourettes Syndrome, Schizophrenia or Down's Syndrome is a kind of healthy brain is absurd. Yes, they can be brilliant, valuable members of society but outside of fringe cases they are massively hampered in all elements of social and personal life, thus clearly showing that their minds are not OK. Without proper research though this is all anecdotal evidence. I'd be fascinated to read some actual research on the subject of neuroplasticity.
Neurodiversity is a framework for understanding human brain function that recognizes the diversity within sensory processing, motor abilities, social comfort, cognition, and focus as neurobiological differences. The neurodiversity paradigm argues that diversity in human cognition is normal and that some conditions generally classified as disorders, such as autism, are differences and disabilities that are not necessarily pathological.
The neurodiversity movement started in the late 1980s and early 1990s with the start of Autism Network International. Much of the correspondence that led to the formation of the movement happened over autism conferences, namely the autistic-led autreat, penpal lists, and Usenet.
The framework grew out of the disability rights movement and builds on the social model of disability, arguing that disability partly arises from societal barriers, rather than attributing disability purely to inherent deficits.[1] It instead situates human cognitive variation in the context of biodiversity and the politics of minority groups.[2][3][4] Some neurodiversity advocates and researchers argue that the neurodiversity paradigm is the middle ground between a strong medical model and a strong social model.[5][6][7]
The neurodiversity paradigm has been controversial among disability advocates, with opponents arguing it risks downplaying the suffering associated with some disabilities, and that it calls for the acceptance of things some would wish to be treated.[8][9][10][11][12]
The word neurodiversity first appeared in publication in 1998, in an article by American journalist Harvey Blume,[13] as a portmanteau of the words neurological diversity, which had been used as early as 1996 in online spaces such as InLv to describe the growing concept of a natural diversity in humanity's neurological expression.[1] The same year, it was published in Judy Singer's sociology honors thesis,[14][15] drawing on discussions on the independent living mailing list that included Blume.[16] Singer has described herself as "likely somewhere on the autistic spectrum".[14]
Blume was an early advocate who predicted the role the Internet would play in fostering the international neurodiversity movement.[17] In a New York Times piece on June 30, 1997, Blume described the foundation of neurodiversity using the term neurological pluralism.[18] Some authors[19][20] also credit the earlier work of autistic advocate Jim Sinclair in laying the foundation for the movement. Sinclair's 1993 speech "Don't Mourn For Us" emphasized autism as a way of being, claiming "it is not possible to separate the person from the autism."[21]
The Neurodiversity Movement grew largely from online interaction. The internet's design lent well to the needs of many autistic people.[22] People socialized over listservs and IRCs. Some of the websites used for organizing in the Neurodiversity Movement's early days include sites like Autistics.Org[23][24] and Autistic People Against Neuroleptic Abuse.[25][26] Core principles were developed from there. Principles such as advocating for the rights and autonomy of all people with brain disabilities with a focus on autism. The main conflicts from the beginning were about who the real experts on autism are, what causes autism, what treatments are appropriate, and who gets to call themselves autistic.[27] During the 2000s, people started blogs such as Mel Baggs' Ballastexistenz[28] and Kevin Leitch's Left Brain Right Brain.[29] Eventually, Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) was started by Ari Ne'eman and Scott Robertson to further align the Neurodiversity Movement with the greater Disability rights movement. ASAN led the Ransom Notes Campaign[30][31] to successfully remove stigmatizing disability ads posted by the NYU Child Study Center. This was a massive turning point for the Neurodiversity Movement.[32]
From there, the Neurodiversity Movement continued to grow with the formation of more organizations in the early 2010s such as Autistic Women & Nonbinary Network[33] and The Thinking Person's Guide to Autism.[34] More autistic people were appointed to federal advisory boards like Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee and National Council on Disability. There were various campaigns like the ongoing #StopTheShock related to the use of aversive treatment at Judge Rotenberg Center and various protests against Autism Speaks. Various flashblogs[35][36] popped up during the 2010s to support campaigns. Annual traditions were formed such as Disability Day of Mourning [37] and Autistics Speaking Day.[38]
c80f0f1006