• Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 36 subscribers
  • Views 520 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

New research on autism charities

Wordsmith

I just came across some interesting / disturbing research about how major autism charities regard autistic people. The research paper itself is on PLOS One and you can find a more journalistic discussion of it on The Conversation.

The researchers analysed the annual reports and accounts of 11 large autism charities, and the abstract of their paper reads in part:

Representation within these reports emphasises adversities associated with Autism, and the language chosen to portray Autistic people largely describes Autism as an impairment. In contrast, charities represent themselves as the solution to the ‘problem’ of Autistic people, and thus deserving of increased resources and funding. Government is largely depicted as ineffective and deficient. We argue that these Autism charities are thereby upholding – rather than challenging – the disabling barriers in society experienced by Autistic people. For Autistic charities to better represent Autistic people and improve wider societal understanding of Autism, there is a need for more positive portrayals that challenge the ‘charity saviour’ trope in charity communications.

I’d be interested to know what you think about this.

Parents

  • I'm intrigued whether this is American or British. My little knowledge of American charities very much gives the impression of them being the solution to the "problem". Autism speaks is well known (although they've back tracked on it now) to look for cures and solutions. But I have no first hand experience being British.

    I don't know many in UK if I'm honest apart from NAS. I know there are local charities but I've never had much to do with them. I think the NAS does tend to put autistic people more at the forefront and does try to debunk the stigma. They do work to try and make schools more inclusive and give guidance to employers on how to make adjustments. And I'm not aware of them using language like impairments.

  • in reply to Expecto_Patronum

    The charities studied were all British. 

Reply Children
  • in reply to Wordsmith

    Also, interestingly the researchers are part of an autism charity I haven't heard of. The website is very hard to navigate so it's difficult to find out much of what they actually do. Intriguing.

  • in reply to Wordsmith

    That is interesting. I've just had a quick flick through but I can't take it all in at once. There is only 1 other charity in the list I've actually heard of and I haven't had much dealing with.

    The NAS is ticked for a lot of the negatives, however, I've read quite a lot of their site and I'm just not seeing all those negatives there. Impairment is ticked but I can't find that word on their website. The big one I would say all the charities are guilty of is us being spoken for. There is a small gesture to hear from autistic people themselves. But to truly be able to run a successful autism charity I do think there should be a bigger push to hear from autistic people themselves and let them have input into what is provided.

    I do also think that some of the NAS's work is smoke and mirrors and not quite as helpful as they might want you to think. I think this goes for many charities if I'm honest.

    I do think it becomes tricky. We as autistic people are crying out saying we need support but then charities are being criticised for suggesting we should have support.

    I'm not sure what the answer is.