The Cure or Institutionalize dichotomy

Standard

I have a lot to say on this topic, and the writing is fairly slow going. I’m trying to write about precisely why some of the people hurt worst by statements like “My child will need a cure, or else she will live in an institution the rest of her life, so you may not have to worry about that but my child does…” are actually the autistic people living or likely to live in institutions.

There is a rhetorical tactic lately where people who believe in curing autism make themselves out to be the only ones who notice or care about autistic people who live in institutions, and those of us who are anti-cure are being insensitive to that group of people. As an ex-institutionalized autistic person, this puzzles me greatly.

Ten years ago there were supposedly two points of view about my future. One said that I would be cured, or brought close enough to a cure that I could live with the same level and kind of support that non-autistic people get, and live “independently” by the time I was in my twenties. Another said that I was not capable of learning these things and would therefore require some form of lifelong institutionalization. Those were the two viewpoints and my two choices.

The first viewpoint was considered hopeful or optimistic. Both of them seemed equally dreary to me, because I was becoming well aware that I would not change enough to live the way non-autistic people live. Because of the false dichotomy contained in these ideas, I began to have absolutely no hope for my future. I knew that I would not become non-autistic — no matter what I tried or anyone else tried, it just wasn’t happening and it was clearer to me than to anyone else — and I thus “knew” that my only future was in institutions. That’s what each of those two viewpoints taught me equally.

What I needed — and what I believe everyone in that situation needs in one form or another — is to see adults like myself living outside institutions, to hear people talking about a future in which I was both autistic and non-institutionalized even if I remained exactly the same as I was back then. I needed to both hear and see stories of freedom that were not contingent on having a certain kind or level of ability. Despite it being the law by then, I heard and saw nothing of the sort. I either saw people who were able to struggle and manage the way ordinary people did, even if they barely hung on, or I saw people incarcerated. That was it.

It’s a serious thing to learn that who you are merits a life sentence without parole or recourse to the law. That is the message sent out by people who insist that certain kinds of people can either be cured, or institutionalized, that there are no other options. It’s also the message sent out by people who believe that the only way out of institutions is to gradually learn skills, and then get transferred to lower and lower security institutions until you’re finally released into community living. It’s the message sent out by people who believe that what often gets called functioning level or degree of disability (a concept that is more problematic than it looks on the surface to most people), is measured primarily by where a person lives. And people who say that someone they know could not possibly receive services in their own home, because that person is too “low-functioning” — probably the same people who magically transformed me from low-functioning to high-functioning as soon as I left institutions, despite me being the same person. And a lot of other things people say, directly and indirectly, day after day.

The kind of despair that sets in when you realize you’re not good enough to be let around running loose is pretty serious, especially when other options don’t even register as possible. I can’t imagine these attitudes are useful or sensitive to much of anyone, least of all people who are living like I did when I realized simultaneously that I would never be cured and what that meant in the worldview I’d been raised within. It might make it possible for some people to pass long enough to get out (not the only way to get out, but a common way), which is good, but in the long run the cost for people who don’t get out, and who get put in in the future, is devastating.

There are a lot of other thoughts on this, but I need to of course figure out how to weave them together into something coherent and readable in English. That, at any rate, seems to be my current writing project.

Defining Autistic Lives

Standard

Defining Autistic Lives is a review of Sue Rubin’s movie, Autism is a World. One that I mostly agree with.

I finally got the chance to watch the movie. A lot of the things I would have to say about it are covered in Defining Autistic Lives. Among the things that are not, what stood out to me over and over again was the behavior of staff and other professionals.

I’m way too familiar with a particular kind of staff behavior. I don’t know how to describe it. It’s patronization with a veneer of friendliness over it. That behavior has been present in all but a few people who’ve worked for me. I am startled, in fact, when I do not encounter it. I am so conditioned to being treated in some manner like a child that I frequently forget what it’s like to be treated like an adult.

When I’ve had the opportunity to interact with people I know who are primarily known as physically disabled, their staff seem to have overall less of that tendency. That tendency is still there in some, but I have a good chance of seeing staff without it. In the developmental disability service system I could wait years and only see one or two, if that, who don’t behave like that.

I am not surprised that Sue Rubin’s staff behave that way. In all the time I’ve spent in California’s DD system, I’ve only known maybe two who haven’t, and even they’ve slipped into it from time to time. What’s also worrisome, and also difficult to pin down, is how people like me, and quite possibly like Sue Rubin (although I obviously don’t know her background enough to say that for sure), are socialized to behave certain ways in response to that kind of staff behavior.

From here on out, I’m not talking about the movie except when I explicitly mention it.

I call it Cute Little Client mode when I do it. It feels like someone else is taking over my body. One of the best examples I have comes from when I was running around the house and couldn’t stop. I was getting out of breath and started having an asthma attack and screaming at the same time, so my staff at the time decided to try to help me stop. She put up her hands and told me to put up mine, and something about the way she did it triggered Cute Little Client mode.

When I put my hands against hers, and ran into them, I switched into this weird giggling. I didn’t find anything funny, or amusing, or anything, and I knew that this was some bizarre conditioned response and not a response of my own. (Yeah, the running around hadn’t been my intentional doing either, but the giggling and other behavior at that point was a whole ‘nother kind of involuntary.) I felt kind of sick and creeped out. Her response to my mannerisms at that point was to treat me even more like a child than she normally did. What needed to happen, happened — I got under a weighted blanket and used my inhalers — but the manner in which it happened was patronizing and infantilizing. I was happy when her work shift ended and I could lie there and sort things out in my head without going through all these weird triggered responses.

My current staff says she’s seen these things in another client I know, too. Staff like to trigger a certain response in him that looks eerily automatic to her. Then they congratulate themselves for having “connected” with him, and basically go on about how cute he is, whether they say it out loud or not. When he stops responding that way, they do the same thing over and over until he’s worn out. What is eerie is that they don’t seem to be responding to him, but to some sort of cuteness mechanism.

Since he can’t talk or type, I’m not going to say that’s what’s going on with him definitely. But I’ve certainly experienced the same. Staff push and pull on me mentally in certain ways and I go into that mode. They find it cute and sometimes believe they’ve connected with me in some “special” way. I struggle hard again st it and sometimes succeed at stopping all movement, which they find alarming and wonder why I just switched off like that. Then I try to reorient my mind to something other than being cute, compliant (or only cute forms of “non-compliant”, like my friend Vanesa sometimes managed in one institution, she was a master of Cute Client Mode and even had “naughty-but-cute non-compliance” down to a T), sweet, and pleasing to staff.

Thinly-veiled patronizing staff behavior disturbs me to watch. Feeling taken over, almost possessed or puppeted, by the cute-clienty behavior makes me feel physically ill in a way that just plain ordinary involuntary behavior doesn’t. I don’t know where I learned it, but I have a suspicion it’s yet another institutional survival skill, both in the enclosed kinds of institutions and the institutions that pass for community. Watching the staff end of that behavior — not sure about the client end, because I’m not in her head, but I wouldn’t be shocked since she’s in the same developmental system I am and a lot of us there seem to pick it up — in that movie reminded me pretty jarringly of what Cute Client Mode feels like.

I will welcome a time when nobody has to act like that. I will also welcome a time when it doesn’t pop up to haunt me in random interactions with people. I know very few people who can see through it and realize that I am not gleeful, but sickened.

“Functioning Level” and desire for cure

Standard

I have said for a long time that not only is the idea of a unified functioning level misleading, but that perceived ‘functioning level’ is not as far as I have seen related to whether a person wishes to become non-autistic or not.

But I was talking to another autistic person the other day, and I noticed something that runs the opposite of conventional wisdom on this matter: The people I have seen who detest their autism the most, are often (not always of course) people who can almost fake normalcy, but not quite. People who can appear almost as if they are not autistic, almost make it in the non-autistic world, almost ‘succeed’ in life.

And I think of my own life. I refuse to identify with a particular ‘functioning level’, I have been classified as low and high for reasons that had nothing to do with me and everything to do with the ones doing the classifying. I am told though that even when I attempted to look normal, I was not succeeding. I am far removed from the life that most people see as a ‘normal life’. I am easily recognizable as out of the ordinary by others (in the offline world).

While I have had struggles with self-hatred, I have had to come to terms rapidly with the reality that there is no possibility of reaching non-autistic normalcy, as a matter of survival. This seems true of many autistic people who share my views.

This is not the only factor in the cure/anti-cure debate, but I find it very interesting that one aspect seems to go opposite to how most people predict: That people closer to the outward appearance of non-autistic norms are in some respects more likely to wish to be non-autistic (even if it is just as impossible for them to do so as it is for me to do so). I doubt I am articulating this properly, but I hope my meaning will be clear.

Out of order, or chaos, or something.

Standard

Autistics.org has been non-functional and I’m still trying to get this blog up and running again.  Most of the data has been lost, so I’m starting over.  I am especially peeved that “Lessons on Inclusion from a Segregated School” has gone missing.  I may try to reconstruct some old entries that I have a cached version of, but others are likely to be gone now.  [Edit:  “Lessons from Inclusion…” is gone permanently.  I still have others somewhere.]