Embracing Complexity: A Response to the Mad In America Series on Neurodiversity
Addressing Anonymous Critiques, Critical Media Ecology, and the Importance of Lived Experiences in Understanding Neurodivergence
Author's Note
This response is written by Shamani (Sher Griffin), the founder and harmony facilitator at The Compassion Collective, through a collaborative process with the community.
At The Compassion Collective (TCC), our foundation is inclusion. We recognize and honor the unique needs of each individual and strive for systemic change that supports everyone. Our mission is to promote social justice, support marginalized communities, and advocate for the well-being of all individuals through respectful dialogue and collaboration. We believe in creating an environment where all people can thrive, free from the constraints of divisive paradigms.
The Compassion Collective is currently in the process of formalizing our organizational structure as a hybrid foundation and cooperative social enterprise. This innovative structure allows TCC to leverage the strengths of both models—combining the philanthropic efforts of a foundation with the member-driven initiatives of a cooperative. Our goal is to foster community resilience and empowerment through the development of sustainable support systems, the creation of meaningful employment opportunities, and the promotion of social and economic justice. As we work towards establishing ourselves as a formal nonprofit, our efforts are concentrated on self-supporting our mission and activities through comprehensive community support services and other vital resources.
TCC is a diverse group, comprising members of various ages, neuro-identities, diagnoses, races, genders, sexual orientations, socioeconomic backgrounds, and professions, including clinicians, educators, and activists. This diversity enriches our understanding and informs our approach, ensuring that our perspectives are comprehensive and representative of the broader community. Furthermore, TCC is not a lone wolf; there are many other communities like us that share similar goals and values, working together to support neurodivergent individuals and advocate for their well-being. These are self-supporting communities, operating without the privilege of funding that is often dominated by larger nonprofits and government systems.
In response to the recent article critiquing the neurodiversity movement and the rise of neuro-affirmative practices, we must assert, with all due respect, that the anonymous therapist fundamentally misunderstands several critical aspects of identity development, liberation psychology, and the processes of self and community actualization. Furthermore, the decision to remain anonymous not only undermines the credibility of the critique but also closes the door to meaningful collaboration and dialogue. Here, we aim to address these misunderstandings and advocate for a more nuanced and inclusive perspective.
Addressing Algorithmic Bias and Social Media Realities
In the context of neurodiversity, it is crucial to recognize the impact of algorithmic biases on social media platforms. These biases often amplify certain voices and perspectives while marginalizing others, creating a skewed representation of the neurodivergent community. Popular content on social media does not always reflect the everyday realities and diverse experiences of most neurodivergent individuals.
Algorithmic bias can lead to the overrepresentation of sensational or controversial content, which might not accurately depict the nuanced and varied experiences of neurodivergent people. This discrepancy can contribute to misunderstandings and misconceptions about neurodiversity. It is essential to approach social media narratives critically and seek out a broad range of voices and experiences to gain a comprehensive understanding.
Critical Media Ecology
Critical media ecology examines how media environments influence perceptions and discourses. When critiquing movements like neurodiversity, it is important to consider how media ecosystems shape public understanding. Media platforms often prioritize content that generates engagement, which can lead to the amplification of extreme or polarized views. This phenomenon can distort the reality of movements by presenting a limited or biased perspective that does not capture the full spectrum of experiences and viewpoints.
Awareness of critical media ecology helps us understand the limitations and potential biases inherent in media representations. It encourages us to seek out diverse sources and engage in deeper, more reflective conversations. By recognizing the influence of media ecosystems, we can better appreciate the complexities of movements like neurodiversity and avoid oversimplified or skewed critiques.
Identity Development: More Than Just Labels
The author’s perspective on identity development is overly simplistic and dismissive of the profound impact that a diagnosis can have on an individual’s understanding of themselves. Identity is not a static label but a dynamic, evolving process influenced by a myriad of factors, including personal experiences, social interactions, and cultural contexts.
For many late-diagnosed individuals, receiving a diagnosis is not merely about acquiring a label but about making sense of a lifetime of experiences. It provides a framework for understanding themselves, reduces feelings of isolation, and can be a pivotal moment in their journey toward self-actualization. Dismissing this as mere pathologization or commodification ignores the real, tangible benefits that many people experience.
Liberation Psychology: A Path to Empowerment
The critique also overlooks the principles of liberation psychology, which emphasize the importance of validating individuals' lived experiences and empowering marginalized communities. Liberation psychology seeks to understand and address the social and systemic factors that contribute to mental health issues, advocating for social justice and the well-being of oppressed groups.
Neurodiversity advocates are not merely selling diagnoses; they are challenging the dominant narratives that pathologize difference and advocating for a more inclusive society. This movement is about recognizing and celebrating diverse ways of being, fostering environments where neurodivergent individuals can thrive. By dismissing these efforts, the author fails to grasp the liberatory potential of the neurodiversity paradigm.
Self and Community Actualization: Building Stronger Communities
The author’s critique also neglects the importance of community in the process of self-actualization. Being part of a supportive community can enhance self-esteem, provide mutual support, and foster a sense of belonging. For many neurodivergent individuals, finding a community of people who share similar experiences is invaluable.
Shared narratives within these communities are powerful tools for collective identity formation and advocacy. They help individuals articulate their experiences, connect with others, and build solidarity. This is not about creating echo chambers but about fostering genuine connections and mutual support. The author’s dismissal of these communities as overly deterministic or commodified overlooks the significant positive impact they have on individuals' lives.
Professional Integrity: The Importance of Openness and Collaboration
The decision to remain anonymous in critiquing the neurodiversity movement is unprofessional and counterproductive. Open dialogue and collaboration are essential for advancing understanding and improving practices. By hiding behind anonymity, the author not only undermines their own credibility but also closes the door to constructive engagement.
In academia and professional discourse, transparency and accountability are crucial. If the author genuinely believes in their critique, they should be willing to stand by their arguments and engage in open, respectful dialogue with those they critique. Only through such engagement can we hope to bridge gaps in understanding and work toward more inclusive and effective practices.
Double Empathy Problem: A Missed Understanding
Ironically, the author epitomizes the double empathy problem by failing to recognize and empathize with the feelings of exclusion that many neurodivergent individuals face. The critique itself highlights a disconnect in understanding the lived experiences of those within the neurodivergent community, which is a fundamental issue the neurodiversity movement seeks to address. By not experiencing these feelings of exclusion firsthand, the author may not fully grasp this crucial aspect of neurodivergent lives, thereby inadvertently reinforcing the very barriers to empathy and understanding they critique.
Appreciating the Work of Lucy Johnstone
We appreciate the work that Lucy Johnstone is doing in the field of mental health. Her efforts to promote critical perspectives on psychiatric diagnoses and advocate for more holistic approaches are important contributions to our movement. Clinical work and research are crucial for advancing our understanding and developing better support systems for neurodivergent individuals. The dialogue she fosters is vital for the evolution of mental health practices and aligns with our commitment to inclusive and informed approaches.
Metasystematic Analysis of the Anonymous Therapists Perspective
A metasystematic analysis of part three of the article reveals that the anonymous author's perspective is limited, overgeneralized, and undermines the experiences and contributions of neurodivergent individuals. The tone used throughout the article likely contributes significantly to the backlash the author receives. Here’s a closer look at these issues:
Narrow Perspective: The author's viewpoint appears to be rooted in a narrow understanding of neurodiversity, which may fail to fully appreciate the complexity and diversity within neurodivergent communities. This perspective seems to emphasize potential negatives while overlooking the positive impacts of neurodiversity advocacy.
Overgeneralization: The critique often generalizes the neurodiversity movement, suggesting that all advocates and practices fall into similar patterns of commercialization and determinism. This perspective seems to neglect the diversity of approaches and experiences within the movement.
Undermining and (Unintentional?) Gaslighting: The tone of the article may be perceived as undermining the legitimacy of neurodivergent identities and the value of lived experiences. By downplaying the positive impacts of diagnoses and community support, the author risks invalidating individuals who have found empowerment and validation through these means.
Authoritative and Dismissive Tone: The authoritative and dismissive tone of the article likely contributes to the backlash the author experiences. Such a tone can alienate those who feel invalidated by the critique and stifles constructive dialogue.
The Compassion Collective is Not a Trojan Horse
The Compassion Collective (TCC) stands in stark contrast to the depiction presented in the critique. Our mission and values are rooted in inclusion, respect for diverse experiences, and the pursuit of systemic change that benefits all individuals. We recognize the unique needs of each person and strive to create environments where everyone can thrive, free from divisive paradigms. TCC is not a lone wolf; there are many other communities like us that share similar goals and values, working together to support neurodivergent individuals and advocate for their well-being. These are self-supporting communities, operating without the privilege of funding that is often dominated by larger nonprofits. Here, we address the concluding arguments made in the critique of part 4, emphasizing the integrity and genuine intentions of the neurodiversity movement, particularly as embraced by TCC and our partner communities.
Affirming Neurodiversity
Article's Quote: "In closing, we would like to repeat that many people have welcomed the neurodiversity paradigm in good faith. We understand their appreciation of its potential, at least as first conceived, for de-pathologisation and the acceptance of difference. These things are sorely needed in our conflict-ridden world."
TCC’s Response: The Compassion Collective fully supports the de-pathologization and acceptance of difference. We believe these principles are crucial in fostering an inclusive society where all individuals can feel valued and understood. The neurodiversity movement, as we advocate, seeks to affirm and empower neurodivergent individuals, challenging harmful stereotypes and promoting a broader understanding of human diversity.
On Justifying Changes through Neurodivergence
Article's Quote: "We just don’t think these changes need to be justified by claims of neurodivergence, with all the ensuing problems we’ve discussed. What is good for those identified as neurodivergent will very often be good for everyone."
TCC’s Response: While it is true that many accommodations benefiting neurodivergent individuals can also benefit the broader population, recognizing and addressing neurodivergence is essential. It validates the experiences of those who have often been marginalized and misunderstood. This recognition is not about creating divisions but about ensuring that specific needs are met, leading to a more equitable and supportive society for all.
Critique of Neoliberal Influence
Article's Quote: "To understand how the positive potentials of neurodiversity have turned sour, we have suggested in these blogs that the development and use of the concept of neurodiversity have been profoundly shaped by the forces of neoliberalism."
TCC’s Response: The Compassion Collective acknowledges that any movement can be co-opted by neoliberal forces. However, our focus remains on the original, liberatory intent of the neurodiversity movement. We actively work to resist commodification and ensure that our efforts remain grounded in social justice and the well-being of marginalized communities. Our commitment is to transformative change, not just superficial adjustments.
Addressing Weaponization and Division
Article's Quote: "Additionally, a minority strand within the neurodiversity movement has cynically weaponised the concept in order to discredit the significant aims and achievements of contemporary UK critics of psychiatry."
TCC’s Response: It is important to differentiate between the actions of a vocal minority and the broader goals of the neurodiversity movement. The Compassion Collective condemns any efforts to discredit constructive criticism or to create division. Our approach is to foster dialogue and understanding, recognizing that multiple perspectives can coexist and enrich the conversation around neurodiversity.
Collective Liberation and Diagnostic Categories
Article's Quote: "There is a deep irony here, since the most prominent promoters of the neurodiversity movement see themselves as left-leaning challengers of the status quo, championing the causes of marginalised groups."
TCC’s Response: The Compassion Collective takes a metamodern stance that aligns with principles of social justice and the empowerment of marginalized groups. We are aware of the risks of reintroducing oppressive systems through new terminologies. However, our goal is to use the concept of neurodiversity to highlight and dismantle these systems, promoting genuine collective liberation that transcends diagnostic categories. Through this metamodern approach, we aim to navigate the complexities and nuances of social movements, fostering an environment where all individuals can thrive and contribute to systemic change.
Emphasizing Integrity and Open Dialogue
Article's Quote: "We do not expect everyone to agree with this analysis, but we do believe that it is of central and urgent importance for Mad in the World to be aware that the neurodiversity paradigm may be a Trojan horse."
TCC’s Response: The Compassion Collective embraces a metamodern approach, emphasizing transparency, integrity, and open dialogue. We invite critical perspectives and value respectful, empathetic discussions. Our stance is clear: neurodiversity is not a Trojan horse but a genuine movement towards a more inclusive and understanding society. We recognize the complexities and potential contradictions within social movements and strive to navigate these with a commitment to mutual respect and engagement. By fostering collaboration and welcoming critique, we believe we can address concerns and continue to advocate effectively for neurodivergent individuals, promoting a more nuanced and holistic understanding of neurodiversity.
Conclusion: Reaffirming Our Commitment
In conclusion, while we acknowledge the concerns raised in the critique, we remain steadfast in our mission to promote a compassionate and inclusive approach to neurodiversity. The Compassion Collective is dedicated to fostering environments where all individuals can thrive, challenging oppressive systems, and advocating for systemic change. We are not a Trojan horse; we are allies in the pursuit of social justice and collective well-being.
Opening Dialogue: Welcoming Competing Perspectives
The Compassion Collective acknowledges the importance of diverse perspectives, including those of clinicians like the anonymous therapist. However, we emphasize that promoting an anonymous perspective without incorporating lived experiences of neurodivergent individuals fails to provide a comprehensive view. Additionally, the critique does not recognize the role of critical media ecology in shaping public perceptions of the neurodiversity movement. Social media algorithms often amplify extreme viewpoints, which may not accurately reflect the experiences and needs of the broader neurodivergent community.
While we strongly disagree with many aspects of the series of articles, we believe that respectful and empathetic dialogue is crucial for advancing our understanding of neurodiversity. We welcome competing perspectives and invite the author and others to engage in open, respectful discussions that presume the competence and sincerity of all participants, including autistic individuals. Only through such collaborative efforts can we hope to foster a more inclusive, supportive, and nuanced understanding of neurodivergence. Recognizing the impact of media representations and the necessity of including lived experiences in these discussions is essential for a balanced and informed approach.
Supporting the Work of TCC
The Compassion Collective is committed to fostering community resilience and empowerment through sustainable support systems and meaningful employment opportunities. As we strive to gain nonprofit status for our Foundation, your support plays a crucial role in helping us achieve our mission. By supporting TCC, you contribute to:
Sustainable Support Systems: Developing innovative strategies to support neurodivergent individuals and marginalized communities.
Meaningful Employment: Creating job opportunities that honor diverse talents and capabilities.
Social and Economic Justice: Advocating for systemic changes that promote equity and inclusion for all.
Your contributions help fund the development of our cooperative and the nonprofit status of our Foundation, ensuring we can continue our vital work. Together, we can build a community where everyone thrives.
Annotated References Introduction
In light of the critique presented by the anonymous therapist, we at The Compassion Collective believe it is crucial to foster a more inclusive and nuanced understanding of neurodiversity. To this end, we have compiled a list of annotated references that provide valuable insights into the complexities of neurodivergent identities, the principles of the neurodiversity movement, and innovative strategies for inclusion and support. This bibliography is shared with the hope that clinicians, educators, neurodiversity advocates and other professionals will utilize these resources for continuing education, bias reduction, and the enhancement of their practice. By engaging with this literature, we aim to promote a more empathetic and well-informed approach to supporting neurodivergent individuals and communities.
Annotated References
Antze, P. (2010). On the pragmatics of empathy in the neurodiversity movement. In M. Lambek (Ed.), Ordinary ethics: Anthropology, language, and action (pp. 310). Fordham University Press.
Relevance: This work addresses the role of empathy within the neurodiversity movement, reinforcing the argument about the importance of mutual understanding and shared experiences in neurodivergent communities.
Armstrong, T. (2015). The myth of the normal brain: Embracing neurodiversity. AMA Journal of Ethics, 17(4), 348-352. https://doi.org/10.1001/journalofethics.2015.17.4.msoc1-1504
Relevance: Armstrong's discussion on embracing neurodiversity provides foundational support for the neurodiversity paradigm as a means of validating diverse neurological experiences.
Bagatell, N. (2010). From cure to community: Transforming notions of autism. Ethos, 38(1), 33-55. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1352.2009.01079.x
Relevance: Bagatell's work illustrates the shift from pathologizing autism to fostering community, aligning with the response's emphasis on community and identity development.
Botha, M., & Gillespie-Lynch, K. (2022). Come as you are: Examining autistic identity development and the neurodiversity movement through an intersectional lens. Human Development, 66(2), 93-112. https://doi.org/10.1159/000524123
Relevance: This article supports the argument that neurodivergent identities are complex and dynamic, countering the critique's oversimplified view of neurodivergent identities.
Bowen, B. (2022). From the boardroom to the bedroom: Sexual ecologies in the algorithmic age [Doctoral dissertation, Bowling Green State University]. OhioLINK Electronic Theses and Dissertations Center. http://rave.ohiolink.edu/etdc/view?acc_num=bgsu1647543728483027
Relevance: Bowen's research on algorithmic biases and inclusion highlights the broader social context affecting neurodivergent individuals, supporting the response's call for systemic change.
Brown, L. X. Z. (2011). Identity-first language. Autistic Hoya. Retrieved from https://www.autistichoya.com/p/identity-first-language.html
Relevance: This source provides an important perspective on identity-first language, reinforcing the response's stance on the significance of how neurodivergent individuals choose to identify.
Chapman, R. (2021). Neurodiversity theory and its discontents: Autism, schizophrenia, and the social model of disability. Autism Policy & Practice, 2(1), 5-24.
Relevance: Chapman's critique of neurodiversity theory and the social model of disability offers a nuanced perspective that aligns with the response's discussion on the balance between identity and disorder.
Crippen, C. (2021). The neurodiversity paradigm and the social model of disability: Conflicts and tensions. Disability & Society, 36(8), 1262-1281. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1828047
Relevance: Crippen's analysis of the neurodiversity paradigm provides critical insights into the conflicts and tensions within the movement, supporting the response's call for a balanced and inclusive approach.
Dreiling, N. G., Cook, M. L., Lamarche, E., & Klinger, L. G. (2022). Mental health Project ECHO Autism: Increasing access to community mental health services for autistic individuals. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 26(2), 434-445. https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613211028000
Relevance: This study highlights innovative approaches to improving mental health services for autistic individuals, aligning with the response's emphasis on practical, inclusive solutions.
Edwards, C., Love, A. M. A., Jones, S. C., Cai, R. Y., Nguyen, B. T. H., & Gibbs, V. (2023). ‘Most people have no idea what autism is’: Unpacking autism disclosure using social media analysis. Autism, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/13623613231192133
Relevance: Edwards et al.'s research on autism disclosure through social media underscores the importance of understanding and addressing public misconceptions, supporting the response's advocacy for better awareness.
Ek, A. (2020). Neuroqueer phenomenology: Interrogating the nature of autistic social exclusion (Order No. 2427273762) [Master’s thesis, University of Toronto] ProQuest One Academic. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2427273762
Relevance: Ek's work on autistic social exclusion through a neuroqueer lens provides a critical perspective on identity and social dynamics, enriching the response's discussion on exclusion and belonging.
Happé, F., & Frith, U. (2020). Annual research review: Looking back to look forward—Changes in the concept of autism and implications for future research. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61(3), 218-232. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13176
Relevance: This review offers a comprehensive overview of changes in autism research, supporting the response's argument for a dynamic understanding of neurodivergent identities.
Hughes, R., Corcoran, T., & Slee, R. (2016). Health and the educative needs of autistic girls. Autism in Adulthood, 1(3), 163-170. https://doi.org/10.1089/aut.2018.0004
Relevance: This study addresses the specific needs of autistic girls, highlighting the importance of inclusive practices that the response advocates for.
Kapp, S. K. (2020). Autistic community and the neurodiversity movement: Stories from the frontline (1st ed.). Springer Nature. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8437-0
Relevance: Kapp's book provides an in-depth look at the neurodiversity movement and its impact, supporting the response's defense of the movement's principles.
Lafond, K. (2022). Free solo-an original poem. Johns Hopkins University, 3(1).
Relevance: Lafond's poem emphasizes the experiences of social exclusion, reinforcing the response's discussion on the importance of understanding and addressing these experiences.
Leadbitter, K., Buckle, K. L., Ellis, C., & Dekker, M. (2021). Autistic self-advocacy and the neurodiversity movement: Implications for autism early intervention research and practice. Frontiers in Psychology, 12, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2021.635690
Relevance: This article highlights the role of autistic self-advocacy in shaping intervention practices, supporting the response's emphasis on the importance of lived experiences and advocacy.
Lekic, K. (2019). Collective intentionality and autism: Against the exclusion of the “social misfits”. Filozofija i Društvo (Zbornik Radova), 30(1), 135-148. https://doi.org/10.2298/FID1901135L
Relevance: Lekic's work on collective intentionality and autism supports the response's focus on inclusion and community building.
Levi, M. K., Schreuer, N., Granovsky, Y., Bar-Shalita, T., Fogel, I. W., Hoffman, T., & Gal, E. (2023). Feeling unwanted, when nobody wants you around: Perceptions of social pain among people with autism. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(2). https://doi.org/10.5014/AJOT.2023.050061
Relevance: This study on social pain among autistic individuals reinforces the response's discussion on the shared experiences of exclusion and marginalization.
Loftis, S. F. (2015). Imagining autism: Fiction and stereotypes on the spectrum. Indiana University Press.
Relevance: Loftis's book critiques stereotypes and fictional portrayals of autism, supporting the response's argument against oversimplified and harmful representations.
Long, É. (2023). Difference which makes a difference (Bateson, 1972): How the neurodiversity paradigm and systemic approaches can support individuals and organisations to facilitate more helpful conversations about autism. Journal of Social Work Practice, 37(1), 109-118. https://doi.org/10.1080/02650533.2022.2142768
Relevance: Long's article discusses the neurodiversity paradigm and systemic approaches, aligning with the response's call for a more inclusive and supportive discourse.
Manett, J. (2022). The social association for students with autism: Principles and practices of a social group for university students with ASD. Social Work with Groups, 45(2), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.1080/01609513.2021.1994511
Relevance: Manett's study on social groups for autistic students provides practical examples of community support, reinforcing the response's emphasis on the importance of supportive environments.
Milton, D. E. (2012). On the ontological status of autism: The ‘double empathy problem’. Disability & Society, 27(6), 883-887. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2012.710008
Relevance: Milton's concept of the double empathy problem is central to the response's critique of the original article's failure to understand neurodivergent experiences.
Murray, A. L., Allison, C., Smith, P. L., Baron‐Cohen, S., Booth, T., & Auyeung, B. (2017). Investigating diagnostic bias in autism spectrum conditions: An item response theory analysis of sex bias in the AQ‐10. Autism Research, 10(5), 790-800. https://doi.org/10.1002/aur.1724
Relevance: This research on diagnostic bias supports the response's discussion on the need for more inclusive and accurate diagnostic practices.
Murthi, K., Chen, Y., Shore, S., & Patten, K. (2023). Strengths-based practice to enhance mental health for autistic people: A scoping review. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 77(2). https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.2023.050074
Relevance: This review on strengths-based practices underscores the response's call for affirming and supportive approaches to mental health care for neurodivergent individuals.
Nicolaidis, C., Raymaker, D., McDonald, K., Dern, S., Boisclair, C., Ashkenazy, E., & Baggs, A. (2011). Collaboration strategies in non-traditional CBPR partnerships: Lessons from an academic-community partnership with autistic self-advocates. Progress in Community Health Partnerships, 5(2), 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1353/cpr.2011.0022
Relevance: This article highlights the importance of collaboration between academic researchers and autistic self-advocates, supporting the response's emphasis on open dialogue and partnership.
Pickard, B., Thompson, G., Metell, M., Roginsky, E., & Elefant, C. (2020). "It's not what's done, but why it's done": Music therapists' understanding of normalisation, maximisation and the neurodiversity movement. Voices: A World Forum for Music Therapy, 20(3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.15845/voices.v20i3.3110
Relevance: This study on music therapists' understanding of the neurodiversity movement provides insights into the therapeutic benefits of embracing neurodiversity principles.
Silva, C., Jover, C., Da Fonseca, D., Esteves, F., & Deruelle, C. (2020). Acting on observed social exclusion and pro-social behaviour in autism spectrum disorder. Autism: The International Journal of Research and Practice, 24(1), 233-245. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362361319857578
Relevance: Silva et al.'s research on social exclusion and pro-social behavior in autism supports the response's discussion on the importance of understanding and addressing social exclusion in neurodivergent communities.
Sinclair, J. (2012). Why I dislike “person first” language. Autonomy, the Critical Journal of Interdisciplinary Autism Studies, 1(2). Retrieved from http://www.autonomyjournal.org/article/why-i-dislike-person-first-language-by-jim-sinclair/
Relevance: Sinclair's critique of person-first language aligns with the response's discussion on identity-first language and the importance of respecting neurodivergent individuals' preferred terms.
Walker, N. (2014). Neurodiversity: Some basic terms & definitions. Retrieved from http://neurocosmopolitanism.com/neurodiversity-some-basic-terms-definitions/
Relevance: Walker's definitions of neurodiversity terms provide foundational support for the response's discussion on the principles and terminology of the neurodiversity movement.
Yergeau, M. (2018). Authoring autism: On rhetoric and neurological queerness. Duke University Press.
Relevance: Yergeau's book on autism and rhetoric offers critical insights into the representation and understanding of neurodivergent identities, supporting the response's emphasis on the complexity and depth of neurodivergent experiences.