NAS now provides an autism training package for the police. I wonder what this involves.
The NAS website covers Criminal Justice with a Position Statement and some links. The Position Statement mentions stress and meltdown in unfamiliar environments, vulnerability to others taking advantage, and having difficulty following procedures.
Encounters with the Criminal Justice System must be crucial for parents, as so many issues could arise. Tony Attwood looks at this quite effectively in his complete guide to asperger's syndrome (pages 334-240). He includes some individuals being manipulative and experimenting with social situations or other people's reactions out of obsessive curiosity who could get themselves into trouble with the law. Special interests can lead to problems, like an excessive interest in cars drawing police attention, and confused sexuality can get them into trouble. Computer obsessions have led to hacking.
There have been instances of arson, stemming from experimentation, or injury done to others out of fear of bullies. And of course there is the iossue of being let astray trying to gain approval from unsuitable others. There are a lot of possibilities. So good advice on the criminal justice system and the police is invaluable.
The NAS website lists over a hundred solictors around the country, but less than 20% specifically mention autism, and only three of these are in London, some in small provincial centres. Most refer to learning disability, special education needs or mental health. Surely there is more legal knowledge specific to autism.
The website has a link to the Toolkit 3 from The Advocate's Gateway, a resource for courts about autism produced by Lexicon in 2013. There is a lot of useful information here, but the examples are worrying. I don't think it helps as much as it should.
Section 2 covers areas of difficulty, very much led by the triad. The example of rigid behaviour is an adult witness with autism who was permitted to give evidence wearing a lion's tail, which was his 'comfort object' in daily life. I've tried to find out what court case, but it is just an example in similar law papers, without source. What image of autism does this create?
On sensory sensitivity: "smells (even something as 'minor' as flavoured crisps) or colours, fabrics or materials (eg a different kind of chair might be needed). "Taking a short break to allow the person to calm down may save time in the long run".
I can see what they are trying to explain, but they do seem to have somewhat misunderstood the issues, or else their rather prurient illustrations suggest they are not really taking autism seriously. Are their lordships really getting the right kind of information?
The whole state of affairs over the criminal justice system is worrying. So I do hope these training courses are up to the mark.
One of the paragraphs in the advocate's toolkit concerned me because it covers so many not necessarily related things in nine lines. They could more effectively examined each of the factors as separate paragraphs, giving each a wider range of contexts.
It is all perfectly valid but implies interdependencies that give the wrong understanding. For example is hand flapping a sign of fear? Or simply an aid to focussing attention? If someone was hand flapping would they stop proceedings for fear of a meltdown? And is a "short break" the same as providing a quiet place to recover? The latter need is not mentioned in the document
NAS was among the consultees or authors and must have approved the document. After all there is a link to the document on the NAS web pages.
"2.3 People with autism are prone to heightened anxiety and have a pressing need for "sameness" and predictability. Problems can be caused by new places, disrupted routines, strangers or other events deviating from normal experience. The individual often lives with high levels of anxiety and reaches 'overload' or 'meltdown' quickly. Responses to fear, confusion and frustration (including inability to make sense of questions) may include hand flapping, pacing, laughing, self harming, screaming, making non-verbal noises, feeling the need to run away and hide or losing control. These are efforts to stop the stimuli and retreat into a calm state. Taking a short break to allow the person to calm down may save time in the long run."
Also, while the above may describe some people with autism, those with more extreme reactions are less likely to appear in court, either as a plaintiff (accused) or witness. The paragraph does not help identify someone seemingly fully in control of their situation, not stimming or showing ununsual behaviours, who could nevertheless have a meltdown. Surely the whole purpose of such documents is to help the legal profession and court officials understand autism. But without a full understanding of the possibilities, the court might completely misunderstand a meltdown that wasn't preceded by hand flapping, pacing, laughing, self harming.....
Another paragraph which puzzled me was "Those who speak may have difficulty with personal pronouns (eg easily muddling up 'I' and 'you') and terms for space and time (here, there, come, go)".
It might well be the case that some people with autism have that problem but I couldn't find it looking it up in books.
What we need, in support of people on the spectrum who encounter the criminal justice system, whether the police or the courts, is the assurance that they fully understand autism, and that they aren't confused by unusual examples as to what to expect most of the time.
Even in 2017 we have young adult with ASD, learning disabilities,told to be interviewed or be arrested. Went alone which should not have happened. Came out of interview wanting to kill himself. It's so sad. An advocate was there, but unknown. And handed suicidal leaflets to read. No one should feel suicidal after interview by two officers stated he'd felt hypnotized by them. Felt manipulated. Duty solicitor was there but the dreadful one we were trying to avoid to use again.