dis/lit 20

Kate Seltzer final

In Emily Perl Kingsley’s 1987 essay “Welcome to Holland” – which has since been widely disseminated to new parents of children with disabilities – she describes her experience raising a child with disabilities as extensively planning for a trip to Italy, boarding the plane to Italy, and then being surprised and not a little disappointed when the pilot announces that instead they have landed in Holland. “So you must go out and buy new guide books,” Perl Kingsley writes. “And you must learn a whole new language. And you will meet a whole new group of people you would never have met… and you begin to notice that Holland has windmills….and Holland has tulips. Holland even has Rembrandts” (Perl Kingsley, “Welcome to Holland”).

As a sibling of someone with autism, “Welcome to Holland” initially really resonated with me. Since discovering it, I have wrestled with whether the essay is a valuable contribution to disability studies or if it comes off as condescending and dismissive of what it means to be disabled. (The essay is undeniably centered around the able-bodied or able-minded parent’s perspective, which is its intent, and parts of it read sort of as describing disability as being “differently abled,” though it never uses that term.) However, after reading Alison Kafer’s introduction to her book Feminist, Queer, Crip and Jim Sinclair’s essay “Don’t Mourn for Us,” I am persuaded that “Welcome to Holland” has value, even if it is far from perfect. In addition to being two of my favorite pieces we read over the course of the semester, this paper will argue that Sinclair’s essay is an excellent practical application of Kafer’s “political/relational” model to autism.

To understand how “Don’t Mourn for Us” fits within the framework of a political/ relational model, it is essential to understand what precisely Kafer is arguing. First, Kafer calls for, as many disability scholars before and since her writing have done, a movement away from the traditional medical model of disability. Under the medical model, disability should be approached solely through a clinical lens, and the goal is to treat the condition rather than mitigating the social circumstances that constrict disabled lives (Kafer 5). Although Kafer acknowledges that this method is flawed and outdated, she does not go as far as the social model of disability, which states that disability is not a product of a medical condition, but rather social attitudes, norms, and physical structures. “As much joy as I find in communities of disabled people, and as much as I value my experiences as a disabled person, I am not interested in becoming more disabled than I already am,” Kafer wrote. “Nor am I opposed to prenatal care and public health initiatives aimed at preventing illness and impairment, and futures in which the majority of people continue to lack access to such basic needs are not futures I want” (Kafer 4). With this understanding in mind, Kafer argues that “recognizing illness and disability as a part of what makes us human” is essential, while she avoids a complete rejection of the medical model.

Under Kafer’s political/relational model, “the problem of disability is solved not through medical intervention or surgical normalization but through social change and political transformation” (Kafer 5).

Sinclair also indirectly advocates for an understanding of autism beyond the medical model. Autism, he says, is not an appendage; instead, it is inherently a part of the person. He discourages parents (and policymakers, etc.,) from seeking a cure: “Therefore, when parents say, I wish my child did not have autism, what they’re really saying is, I wish the autistic child I have did not exist, and I had a different (non-autistic) child instead,” Sinclair writes. “This is what we hear when you mourn over our existence. This is what we hear when you pray for a cure” (Sinclair, “Don’t Mourn for Us”). Here, he makes the case that Kafer made, pertaining to disability generally, specifically to autism: autism is not a “problem” that should be treated through the medical lens. However, he argues that parents should be angry about the political and social conditions that make having autism more difficult than it otherwise should be: “Better than being sad about it, though, get mad about it – and then do something about it. The tragedy is not that we’re here, but that your world has no place for us to be” (Sinclair, “Don’t Mourn for Us”).

Part of what I love about both pieces is that they don’t pretend that having a disability is sunshine and rainbows all the time. Both Kafer and Sinclair allow for – and Perl Kingsley gets at – is the mourning for changed expectations. As part of her political/relational model, Kafer writes “I want to make room for people to acknowledge – even mourn – a change in form or function while also acknowledging that such changes cannot be understood apart from the context in which they occur” (Kafer 6). Kafer says that it is okay for disabled people to feel real loss as a direct result of their impairment, while acknowledging that the impairment is made much more difficult in daily life because of social and political norms that permit discrimination and inaccessibility. Sinclair also creates space for this period of mourning, saying that “much of the grieving parents do is over the non-occurrence of the expected relationship with an expected normal child. This grief is very real, and it needs to be expected and worked through so people can get on with their lives – but it has nothing to do with autism” (Sinclair, “Don’t Mourn for Us”). Again, Sinclair’s understanding of autism permits sadness as a result of shattered expectations, but like Kafer, he removes the burden of bearing that grief from the disabled person.

Kafer’s introduction to Feminist, Queer, Crip provides for an important framework within disability studies. The political/relational model strikes a solid middle ground between the outdated medical model and the social model, which too often fails to acknowledge some of the pain inherent in disability that goes beyond failing to meet societal expectations. Because Sinclair so eloquently rejects the medical model while asking parents to learn the language of autism and to work to improve a world hostile to people with autism, his essay fits solidly within that framework as a practical application of the political/relational model to autism specifically. Both writers allow disabled people and families of disabled people to mourn what they’ve lost without letting that grief consume them. As it turns out, “Welcome to Holland” may have been right after all.

I pledge – Kate Seltzer

Word count: 1102

Works Cited

Kafer, Alison. Feminist, Queer, Crip. “Introduction.” Indiana University Press, 2013. JSTOR,

www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt16gz79x. Accessed 28 Apr. 2020.

Perl Kingsley, Emily. “Welcome To Holland.” Emily Perl Kingsley, 1987, www.emilyperl

kingsley.com/welcome-to-holland.

Sincllair, Jim. “Don’t Mourn for Us.” ANI, Autism Network International Newsletter, 1993,

www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html.

Alicia’s Final Exam

Alicia Frueh

English 384/ Foss

Final Exam

April 28, 2020

A diagnosis of severe or “low- functioning” Autism can oftentimes be accompanied by the inability or limited ability to communicate vocally, thus necessitating those with a diagnosis to communicate by other means. Tito Rajarshi Mukhopadhyay’s poem “Misfit” is a perfect illustration of how someone can be given a silent, yet powerful voice. Mukhopadhyay is a non-verbal autistic who, despite his communication barrier and atypical physical behaviours, is able to illustrate through this poem that he feels no less natural than the world he observes around himself.

“There was the earth, turning and turning.

The stars receded, as if

Finding no wrong with anything.”

It is no accident that Mukhopadhyay should choose this particular structure (Villanelle) in his poem as it seems to format perfectly his perception of the universe and it’s anticipated, or natural, rotation. This beautiful imagery invites readers to experience the daybreak with Mukhopadhyay as he stands witness to the neverending rotation of our planet, spinning night into day. The first two lines of the tercet bear testament to the incontestable truth that the world never ceases to turn, regardless of who or what is watching. The last line of the first tercet offers readers a bit of calming reassurance in that the star’s trajectory is, “Finding no wrong with anything.” (Mukhopadhyay) This line sets the tone for the remainder of the poem in that Mukhopadhyay acknowledges the natural order of the world around him and feels aligned to it.

“Birds flew by all morning-

The sky lit

From the earth’s turning and turning.”

In the second tercet Mukhopadhyay makes it apparent that he has watched the day evolve from dusk until mid to late morning and it is likely that it is not his first time in doing so. With the foreknowledge that Mukhopadhyay has a diagnosis of Autism, his repetition of the words “turning and turning” may give readers the visualization of a person literally spinning, or “stimming,” which is a common or stereotypic, self-stimulatory behavior for many autistics. One might speculate at this point that Mukhopadhyay is mimicking the natural conduct of the world around him or perhaps, at least where he draws inspiration for his whimsical motions.

“My hands, as usual, were flapping.

The birds knew I was Autistic;

They found no wrong with anything.”

This third tercet is where we really begin to perceive Mukhopadhyay’s behavior to be more than just self-stimulatory, but rather as a reenactment of what he sees taking place in his natural environment. He flaps his hands to the rhythm of the birds around him and states undoubtedly, they know him to be Autistic. This isn’t to be taken literal, because after all, how could a bird understand Autism? Rather, Mukhopadhyay finds solace in that the birds refrain from judging his odd or atypical behaviours. In fact, he may feel more like these birds than he does his fellow man. Regardless of the motivation for his flapping or turning, it is clear that Mukhopadhyay recognizes that birds and stars find “no wrong with anything.” They do not question his existence, nor he theirs. In her book, “The Way I See It,” Dr. Temple Grandin recounts her memories of meeting Mukhopadhyay when he was still a teenager. She remembers his mother, Soma, explaining, “How flapping calmed him down and made him happy. If he had been allowed to do it all day he would have never learned anything. Small amounts of ‘stimming’ were allowed so he could calm down.” (Grandin p. 161) We can suppose now that Mukhopadhyay uses his flapping as a means to find release from any sensory overload or societal exclusion he may feel.

“Men and women stared at my nodding;

They labeled me a Misfit

(A misfit turning and turning).”

Once more, Mukhopadhyay gives visualization to another of his stereotypic behaviours; nodding. He admits that he is labeled as a “misfit” by those who pass by and we can presume that he is often uncomfortably perceived as “odd,” “misplaced,” or even “bad.” A brief history of Mukhopadhyay’s early life can perhaps shed some light on this label. Mukhopadhyay was born and raised in India until his thirteenth year of life. In India he was denied formal education at several separate institutions. His Mother, Soma, is recognized as his main source of advocacy and education. Her life’s work as a chemist was set aside to spend the majority of her time working with Mukhopadhyay, teaching him and helping him develop his artistic proficiency. Despite the fact that he is considered now to be a borderline genius as well as a literary master, Mukhopadhyay has said, “I have Autism and learning with typical mammals will not work for me.” (Mukhopadhyay) His need for a particular learning structure, as well as time to turn and turn about may have left him feeling like a misfit, or one that just doesn’t “fit” into societal standards.

“And then I was the wind, blowing.

Did anyone see my trick?

I found no wrong with anything.”

In the final tercet of the poem Mukhopadhyay states that he has become the blowing wind. This line reinforces the central idea that he is capable of speaking the language of the Earth. Autistic people often feel out of place when in the midst of mainstream or “neuro-typical” society. Just because someone can not verbalize their thoughts does not mean they do not have anything meaningful to say. If one could slow down their pace and listen to the language of the world around them they may find that the world itself has quite a lot to say. Perhaps Mukhopadhyay has discovered that the quietness on his lips has provided him with another sense that most people are not equipped with, or at least do not utilize so often. Outside in the wind, turning and turning, Mukhopadhyay “finds no wrong with anything.” This line is repeated throughout the poem (in true villanelle style) and continually reinforces the initial concept that Mukhopadhyay feels “right” in his way of being when able to communicate within his natural element. The metaphorical trick he performs is achieving internal harmony with no judgement or condition, whilst “becoming the wind.”

“Somewhere a wish was rising,

Perhaps from between my laughing lips.

Why stop turning and turning

When right can be found with everything?”

In the closing quatrain, Mukhopadhyay begins to laugh and makes a wish. While we cannot know what his wish yearns for, we can rest assured that his turning and turning is allowing him the inner peace he needs to feel safe and happy in this particular moment. His movements clearly provide him with a zen-like mindset or the “reset” that all people necessitate in some frequency or another, so that “right can be found with everything.”

Dr. Oliver Sacks, Professor of Neurology at the NYU School of Medicine said, “It has usually been assumed that deeply Autistic people are scarcely capable of introspection or deep thought, let alone of poetic or metaphor leaps of the imagination.. Tito (Mukhopadhyay) gives the lie to all of these assumptions and forces us to reconsider the condition of the deeply autistic.” (Sacks) Mukhopadhyay’s “Misfit” reveals undeniable confirmation that although all voices are not expressed or received in the same manner they are no less compelling or impassioned.

I Pledge, Alicia Frueh

1255 Words

Works Cited

Mukhopadhyay, Tito Rajarshi. “Misfit.” 2010.

Grandin, Dr. Temple. The Way I See It: a Personal Look at Autism & Aspergers. Future

Horizons Inc., 2015.

Adam’s Final Paper

Adam Cooper

Dr. Foss

Disability Lit

26 April 2020

A Different Approach at Parenting

Jim Sinclair’s Don’t Mourn For Us outlines the perception a new parent may have upon finding out their child is autistic. In three sections it highlights the struggles parents may have with understanding the disability and how it affects the relationship they’ll have with their child. I found this to be my favorite piece in the autism unit mainly because it seems like it would be impactful to a large demographic of people. In some cases the way a child’s disability, in this case autism, is handled can actually make the effects of the disability much worse than they would be otherwise for both the parent and the child. To be a good parent to a child with a disability it is essential to not allow any grief you feel to ruin the relationship with the child, understand in certain cases it is not a curable ailment, and to learn to listen. As Sinclair explains this may mean no matter what you do the relationship will not be the normal one you had imagined but that’s not to say it won’t be a beautiful relationship regardless. This piece does a wonderful job of outlining the negative effects a parent can unintentionally have on a child with any disability, not just autism and can be related to other disabilities we’ve studied throughout the semester. In order to properly care for someone with a disability it is essential to not try to divide the disability from the person but rather to adjust the style of care given to them to better accommodate them. The big issue is trying to make the child fit into a mold the parent has created instead of changing the parenting style to fit the child. The issue becomes more about the parent and child and in trying to comfort themselves a parent may do harm to their child they are unaware of.

Sinclair recognizes that grief, in the case of a parent learning their child will have a disability such as autism, can be traumatic. But the issue comes when the trauma the parent experiences overshadows the disability itself. Caring for those with disabilities requires the caretaker to devote their time to the disabled person, not to dealing with their own feelings about disability. A distant example we see of something like this is from early in the semester when we read Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein. If we compare Victor to the parent and The Creation to the child it becomes a pretty clear example. Victor wanted a beautiful being and had imagined that whole heartedly. When The Creation was not what he had imagined he went into a state of grief completely neglecting the creation and letting it slip further away from him without care. The Creation genuinely just wanted to be loved and cared for but Victors own grief prevented that. Obviously I’m not insinuating that those with autism or other disabilities are “creatures” or “monster-like” but the parent-child relationship is present here along with the neglect that can be found alongside a grieving parent.

The first section titled Autism is not an appendage discusses the idea a parent may have that there’s another child within the “shell” of autism. A child that can fulfill all the dreams the parent had for them. This is problematic as attempting to uncover a person within will amount to nothing. I think a large misperception of all disabilities is that there’s a normal person within the disability who’s been caught by it. So instead of starting to understand who that person is with the disability we make their lives harder by trying to break them out of a mold we’ve imagined them being in. Take for example someone born with only one leg, you wouldn’t try to cure this as it’s clearly visible there is no “cure” and a real leg will never grow there. So you change the style of care you had envisioned giving the child. According to Sinclair, this problem is present in the relationship between parent and child when navigating autism. Sinclair says “It is not possible to separate the autism from the person–and if it were possible, the person you’d have left would not be the same person you started with.” (Sinclair) This is a clear example of how parents attempting to “free” their child from autism would create a rift in the relationship. Spending all the energy you have attempting to create a new child as opposed to parenting the one you have will never lead to a new child, rather one who is neglected and may suffer from the side effects from autism worse than they would have otherwise.

Communication is huge in any relationship, especially between a child and parent. However for someone with autism, communication can be extremely difficult. This means it’s the parent’s job to accommodate this and in turn help nurture a relationship and do their part in helping their child be the best they can be. A huge part of what we can do to help anyone with a disability is to merely listen. Far too often those with disabilities are drowned out by the hustle of everyday life and it leaves them without the assistance they need. Even in everyday life it’s easy for us to not hear what someone with any disability is saying. We go about our day to day lives not considering things from their point of view, not out of intentional rudeness but due to lack of education. For someone with autism they may not be able to flatout say what they feel in a way that a parent can hear and understand without education and changing the way they parent. Sinclar says “Each of us who does learn to talk to you, each of us who manages to function at all in your society, each of us who manages to reach out and make a connection with you, is operating in alien territory, making contact with alien beings.” (Sinclair) I think the same may apply to any individual struggling with any disability. To talk and not be heard is without a doubt extremely discouraging. Functioning in a society built for those without disability is hard enough, not being heard makes it harder.

Sinclair’s work goes a long way in humanizing those with disabilities, especially autism. Far too often we see children and adults alike who have disabilities as missing something. And in some cases this makes us grieve for them rather than care for them. In a parent child relationship this can have even more significant effects. Near the end of his passage Sinclair says “The tragedy is not that we’re here, but that your world has no place for us to be. How can it be otherwise, as long as our own parents are still grieving over having brought us into the world?” (Sinclair) This speaks not only about a parent and child struggling to build a relationship around a disability but also about everyone who lives around us with any disability in a world built for everyone else. There is no easy path for any parent and I’m sure I can’t comprehend what parenting is like but I think Sinclair’s work helps start to paint a more clear picture of what a parent can do to help their child and what we can do to help those around us.

Words: 1,230

I pledge – AMC

Sinclair, Jim. “Don’t Mourn For Us” Autism Network International newsletter, Our Voice, Volume 1, Number 3, 1993.

Rachel, James, and Lueden’s Final Paper

Rachel Mullins, James M Pryor, & Lueden Sheikhnureldin

Dr. Foss

ENGL 384-02

April 28,2020

Autism in Popular Culture

Prompt #2

In popular media representation such as on television and film, Autistic characters are overwhelmingly portrayed as males, specifically white males, and while there is a small percentage of Autistic female characters, they are also white. Visual media greatly lacks representation for Autistics of color. These shows and movies lack input from the Autistic community and are usually based on stereotypes which results in not only every character in these shows and movies being virtually the same, but also enforces the notion that only white people are Autistic. This stereotype is extremely harmful for Autistic people of color because they are invalidated constantly and can feel like there is no place in the community for them (Giwa-Onaiwu xiii). Another trope derived from the lack of Autistic input in these shows and movies is that these Autistic characters are usually there to simply ‘teach’ a non-Autistic person how to be kind, and they more likely than not have some sort of ‘bizarre’ talent or interest that is supposed to show how amazing Autistic minds are. While on the surface it sounds like acceptance, in reality it pushes the idea that an Autistic person needs some special skill to validate their existence. These negative representations of autism in movies and TV shows led to Autistic people not relating to canonly Autistic characters, but instead saying characters that they relate to or like are Autistic as a way of saying that if those characters were explicitly stated to be Autistic, they’d be better representations than what is shown now. Visual media representation is extremely important because this is where people get most of their ideas and beliefs, so by showing bad representation, it leads to harmful misconceptions of the Autistic community and makes Autistic people feel unrepresented (Ne’eman). If creators of these television shows and films used Autistic input, there would be less perpetuation of these stereotypes and more diverse representation for Autistic people.

A character that is considered the ‘blueprint’ for Autistic characters is Raymond ‘Ray’ Babbitt from the movie Rain Man. Raymond fits the stereotype for Autistic people greatly. He is a white male, is an extremely fast counter which is his ‘bizarre’ habit or trait, and as argued by many critics, his autism is not for representation, but is one of the many stories of how autism affects neurotypicals instead of how it affects Autistic people (Ne’eman). Raymond’s character is also not played by an Autistic actor. The inspiration for Raymond’s character was inspired by a man named Kim Peek who did not have autism, but had savant syndrome (Treffert). While Peek seemed to be in support of this character and this movie, this film is the cause of a lot of misconceptions of autism such as all Autistic people being savants and that autism is only present in white men. Furthermore, having a non-autistic person portraying an Autistic character makes autism seem like it is not a valid identity, but instead something one can just ‘pretend’ to be and turn on and off when needed. Having an Autistic actor is the best option for better representation because it shows how autism is a real, lived experience. A character that is the product of Autistic input is Julia from the popular kids’ show, Sesame Street. Julia is an Autistic little girl and was added to the main cast as a way to promote diversity and so Autistic fans of the same show could have a character to relate to. Julia was created with input from Autistic people such as the Autistic Self Advocacy Network who helped workshop her (ASAN). Julia was a revolutionary character, until Sesame Street partnered with Autism Speaks, an organization known for speaking over Autistic people and treating autism as something to be fixed. This completely undermined everything Julia stood for and took Julia from being great representation to another Autistic character whose sole purpose is to ‘help’ neurotypical people. What happened to Julia is more proof of how neurotypical people ruin Autistic representation for Autistic people.

In Ari Ne’eman’s Dueling Narratives: Neurotypical and Autistic Perspectives About the Autism Spectrum, he brings up several points on how parents and doctors damage the Autistic community with the way they talk about autism; saying falsehoods such as how autism “steals” children, ruins families, and is something that only people who are close to Autistic people ‘truly’ experience. Inevitably, these false narratives are translated into the media. Since autism is so villainized, these characters are portrayed as pitiful and helpless. This reason is why the savant trope is so problematic because it tells the audience that Autistic people are to be pitied, but ‘at least’ they have this talent going from them. These narratives are exceptionally harmful to Autistics of color. Neurotypical people do not get their input from Autistic people, so they make these narratives based on what they know instead which leads people of color not being accounted for in these narratives. Morénike Giwa Onaiwu’s Autistics of Color: We Exist…We Matter describes her experience as an Autistic Black woman and how both her identities have been invalidated. Some would say she is too Black to be Autistic and too Autistic to be Black. Autistics of color are only represented when they need to be seen as sad stories and examples for the community to not exclude them (Giwa-Onaiwu xii). They are rarely represented in the way white Autistic people are as people with interests and positive lives. Her experience with ableism and racism as an Autistic Black woman can be linked to the fact that Autistics of color are never seen in visual media (Giwa-Onaiwu xv). Bad representation is a vicious cycle in this case. Lack of Autistics of color in visual media leads to people thinking that people of color can not be Autistic which leads to more media without Autistics of color. This is why Autistic people being the actors, writers, creators, etc. is so important. More autistic people putting their lived experiences into something leaves less room for misconceptions and damaging stereotypes.

One positive from having stereotypical characters, is that Autistic community has found comfort in calling characters that are not canonly Autistic, autistic (Mullins). Many Autistic people had found the representation they were being given extremely offensive and found that there were many characters who were not explicitly stated to be Autistic to be much better representations than what they are given. Some of these characters are considered to be autistic coded which means the character is Autistic, but not stated by the creator for various reasons or based on an Autistic person (Mullins). While this can be a very empowering way to interact with ableist popular culture, it has its own issues such as white characters more likely to be coded as Autistic by fans than non white ones. White Autistic people can be just as guilty as white neurotypical people for the exclusion of Autistics of color (Giwa-Onaiwu xi). The problem lies in the fact that there is not enough Autistic created content or input being put into the mainstream pop culture which causes this aforementioned vicious cycle of bad representation.

Autistic representation in visual media is run by neurotypicals for neurotypicals instead of being by Autstic people for Autistic people. The harm these movies and television shows do have real world effects. The idea of autism affecting neurotypical people exclusively is only enhanced by these representations. Autistics of color being viewed as non existent is backed up by them never being what people see in movies and film. Autistic people are represented as white men who have one particular interest and if someone does not fit that image, then they can not be Autistic (Giwa-Onaiwu xv). The lack of Autistic voices causes the rise of neurotypical stories being told under the guise of Autistic stories. By not having Autistic representation that Autistic people can resonate with, they are given Autistic representation that neurotypical people can take and bend for even more damaging narratives (Ne’eman). By having more Autistic people being involved with the making of these TV shows and films, the neurotypical narratives would diminish greatly. Autistic people are not plot material and devices; autism needs to be shown as a valid identity and not simply something non autistic people experience and are completely changed by. The Autistic voice in the media should belong to Autistic people, so their stories are not told as sob stories or cure seeking.

Word Count: 1,408

We pledge

Works Cited

ASAN. “ASAN Has Ended Partnership With Sesame Street.” Autistic Self Advocacy Network, 2 Aug. 2019, autisticadvocacy.org/2019/08/asan-has-ended-partnership-with-sesame-street/.

Brown, Lydia X. Z., and Morénike Giwa-Onaiwu. “Autistics of Color: We Exist…We Matter.” All the Weight of Our Dreams: on Living Racialized Autism, DragonBee Press, 2017, pp. X-xxii.

Mullins, Christa. “Reflection: Autistic-Coded Characters and Fans in Fandom.” Canadian Journal of Disability Studies, vol. 8, no. 2, 2019, doi.org/10.15353/cjds.v8i2.495.

Ne’eman, Ari. “Dueling Narratives: Neurotypical and Autistic Perspectives About the Autism Spectrum.” The Society for Critical Exchange , 2007, case.edu/affil/sce/Texts_2007/Ne’eman.html.

Treffert, Darold. “Rain Man, the Movie / Rain Man, Real Life.” Agnesian, 2017, ttps://www.agnesian.com/blog/rain-man-movie-rain-man-real-life.

Allison Palmer

Dr. Foss

English 384-02

30 April 2020

Labeling Autism

The world consists of labels, whether on products or regarding people. Human beings create labels to identify things or create their own identification of other people. However, labeling other people can lead to misinterpretations of someone, offending someone, and is simply morally inappropriate. Labels are more often than not are inaccurate and create a misrepresentation of that person being labeled as well as offend them since they are usually negative. No matter what, labeling someone is usually morally wrong because it puts someone into a small box limited by that label and can tear someone down.There is a negative association already when it comes to Autism, however then non-autistic people label autistic individuals, enhancing the negativity surrounding Autism. The labels are inaccurate, inappropriate, and hurtful; they also place people with autism into a small group and definition about who they are. Tito Rajarshi Mukhopadhyay’s poem “Misfit” and Craig Romkema’s “Perspectives” mention being labeled by people regarding their Autism and the negative feelings tied to those labels. This paper will analyze how non-autistic people label people with autism, misinterpretations of Autism and how it impacts Autistic people, as well as the connotations involving Autism. Mukhopadhyay, Romkema and even Jim Sinclair’s “Don’t Mourn Us” alludes to the impact labels have on these individuals and how they should simply be treated and viewed as a human being because that is who they are.

Craig Romkema’s “Perspectives” is a poem that includes an autistic speaker who goes through his life facing being studied, labeled and intentionally omitted. Romkema shows the speaker being “diagnosed” or “helped” when the “Psychologists used to blame it on “refrigerator mothers”, Optometrists prescribe special exercises and glasses, Researchers recommend vitamin A.” He highlights the idea that doctors, or just people in general attempt to blame or find a way to “fix” autistic individuals as if it is this terrible thing that was caused by something terrible and needs to go away simply because they are unique. Some people are uncomfortable with anything that is not similar to themselves and they are afraid of anything that slightly differs, therefore, they think that it is an issue that needs a cure. When in reality it is simply who someone is, Sinclair addresses this in “Don’t Mourn For Us” when he says “Autism isn’t something a person has, or a “shell” that a person is trapped inside.” It is not something someone is stuck with or something that covers up someone’s “normalcy”, it is who they are and it does not need to be cured.

The poetic speaker in Romkema’s poem has labels placed upon him by non-autistic people and indicates how he feels regarding the labels; these moments of labels and his perspective is relevant to how other autistic people are labeled. In a moment he mentions how some do not acknowledge his ability and ignore the fact that he understands them “So freely did they label me retarded. Or some other variant, equally untrue.” They made a quick judgment about his abilities and attempting to create him as an outcast by devaluing his abilities and pretending he could not understand. Then similarly how they made a judgment based on his abilities they labeled him a degrading, inappropriate, inaccurate and negative word in order to devalue him even farther. This is how autistic individuals are labeled everyday, with negative terms that devalue their abilities and them as people. Some people label people with autism because they like to have the upper hand on others, especially people with disabilities who they see as easy targets in taking their power; they are ignorant and are power hungry. However, Romkema even states how inaccurate these various labels are because they are simply judgments to knock autistic individuals down to a powerless position; they do not define who they are as individuals and are not even close to the truth.

The speaker grows towards the end of the poem and gains ownership over who he is despite the labels placed upon him his entire life. Romkema states that he is “Not startlingly different in appearance or habits from that little boy so willingly labeled.” He is still outwardly similar to the little boy who was mislabeled except now he can participate in discussion posts, vote, and share his opinions. He rises above those labels with his voice and he owns who he is, showing that he is more than he appears and labeled to be. He states “now my mind is free ”, he is finally free of the labels because of his abilities and the voice he has to share his story and the accuracy. The suggestion of being free suggests the freedom autistic individuals lack due to the labels they are given because they are not free to be themselves because someone else is deciding who they are. The poem also suggests that one way to reach freedom is to own their voice and own who they are.

Mukhopadhyay’s “Misfit” and Romkema’s “Perspectives” parallel each other through the poetic speaker being an autistic individual who gets labeled and in the end there is a deeper realization. The speaker notices birds and how they knew he was “Autistic; they found no wrong with anything.” The birds knew who he was and they did not label him, try to define him, or find anything wrong, because nothing is wrong. Yet non-autistic “men and women stared at [him] nodding; they labeled [him] a Misfit(a misfit turning and turning)”; They were quick to notice something that they define as “abnormal” only because they were ignorant and labeling him misfit which means someone or something that is set apart from the others. Similar to how many label autistic individuals as misfit or abnormal or retarded or strange, they attempt to set him apart from everyone else and determine an identity for him which is that he does not belong. They labeled him a Misfit who was turning and turning, however he states “why stop turning and turning when right can be found with everything?” This final realization shows that though he may be turning and turning, that is who he is, not a misfit; he enjoys turning and turning so why stop based on someone’s opinion of him that is wrong. He realizes that just because some people want to try and find things that are wrong in the world, does not mean there are things wrong and does not mean he is wrong; a person cannot be wrong. Therefore, he is free to turn and turn because that is who he is and he enjoys it; nobody can control what someone can do, who they are because of how they want to label them.

In the end of the poem the speaker owns who he is, he knows he is autistic and he knows people are going to label him or autistic people in general, but that does not stop him from being who he is because he is a human and is right. Autistic individuals are labeled by people who do not understand who they are and they are aware of these labels, the inaccuracy, the hurtfulness, however, they still own who they are, their abilities and create their own definition of themselves because that is their right as people.

Work Cited

Mukhopadhyay, Tito Rajarshi. Misfit.

Romkema, Craig. Perspectives.

Sinclair, Jim. “DON’T MOURN FOR US.” Don’t Mourn For Us, www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html.

“I pledge…” Allison Palmer

Word Count 1216

Jess’ Final

Step Aside Neurotypicals: Analyzing the Autistic Narrative

Ari Ne’eman, founder of the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network, critiques the academic ableism within autism studies with his paper “Dueling Narratives: Neurotypical and Autistic Perspectives about the Autism Spectrum.” Ne’eman admits that his writing is more biased than scholarly, but argues that there is a lack of real representation of autism in academic writing and research. Ne’eman states his purpose is: “to provide new information and analysis to the academic community that will help build a better understanding of an important and growing issue: the autism spectrum, how to define it, what it entails and what to do about its growing visibility in the world today . . . an insider perspective should be welcome” which successfully supports Ne’emans reasoning for the importance of his own lived experience. As an autistic individual and prominent self-advocate, Ne’eman’s voice is important to acknowledge. Ne’eman cites a lack of autistic perspective within studies as another reason for his paper to show “the biases inherent in the . . . image of the autism spectrum, as defined by family members of autistic children and medical professionals, and explain how these biases have negatively impacted both parents and people on the spectrum;” thus, the reasoning for Ne’eman’s title of dueling narratives in reference to the autism spectrum. Ne’eman’s paper demonstrates how neurotypical dictatorship of perspectives on autism are damaging to autistic individuals and their families.

The medical spectrum of autism is very wide. A diagnosis of autism can vary in form from Asperger’s Syndrome to Nonverbal Learning Disability. With such a wide range of diagnoses within the label of autism, it is hard to really narrow down a concrete definition. Autism advocacy is also very politicized with neurotypicals like Jon Shestack, founder of Cure Autism Now, declaring war on autism, and searching for a cure as if autism is cancer to society (Ne’eman). The war on autism gained political traction when the bill “Combating Autism Act” passed in the House with a $1 billion dollar research budget to find a cure for autism. These public acts reinforce the damaging narrative that autism is a disease. Theories that mothers cause autism by acting cold towards their children can autism also circulated. This places the blame of a genetic condition from birth upon the parents of any neurodiverse child.

Treating an autism diagnosis as a negative enforces the fallacy of the missing self. Ne’eman defines the fallacy as an: “overarching message of most portrayals of the autism spectrum and the people on it reflect a tragedy that robs humanity, leaving behind something –someone – that must, implicitly, be sub-human,” meaning that people who are autistic are unable to possess a sense of self. The fallacy of the missing self dehumanizes people who are autistic by making autistic individuals appear as soulless creatures. Ne’eman quotes Shestack again with: “this is the special curse of autism. You have your child, and yet you don’t have him. You have a shell, a ghost of all the dreams and hopes you ever had.” Shestack and his organization present autism as an evil force that steals away the true child. This kind of impaired thinking from the neurotypical narrative pressurizes educators, parents, and professionals to believe that autistic individuals are never capable of independence – which hinders autistic people in their strive for individual freedom.

The fallacy of the missing self continues to fail autistic people who are nonverbal. Ne’eman references an autistic woman who runs her own website called “Getting the Truth Out,” to share her narrative as a neurodiverse individual. The site contains a photograph of the woman wearing a shirt that reads: “not being able to speak is not the same as having nothing to say.” According to Ne’eman, “Getting the Truth Out” serves as “a condemnation of the simplistic and inaccurate view of autistics as voiceless tragedies.” The woman who runs the site does not share a message of despair, but rather of the normalcy of the life she lives.

In order to enact real change, Ne’eman calls upon the autistic community to “continue to condemn language and advertising that implicitly endorses eugenics.” The condemnation of organizations like Cure Autism Now will reveal the truth behind the harmful neurotypical ideologies. On the other hand, Ne’eman does acknowledge that autism advocates have been trying to spread the effects of cure rhetoric upon the autistic community. The way to improve this tactic is to “advance a positive image of the autism spectrum” by showing the strengths of a non-neurotypical diagnosis to the public. Ne’eman calls upon the autistic community to present a clear definition of autism to the neurotypical narrative so that individuals who are autistic can be understood by society as a whole. It is frustrating to admit that the neurotypical community cannot understand autism without a clear-cut definition – especially since autism can present itself vastly different from person to person.

The major roadblock for advancement is the clash between the narrative of the autistic community and the neurotypical script. Ne’eman writes: “The autistic community recognizes the grieving process that parents go through after receiving their children’s diagnoses and learn that the life of an autistic individual can be very different from what parents expected for their child.” However, that grieving process cannot last for the child’s entire life, or else the autistic child will grow up believing the fallacy of the missing self. Parents, educators, and the rest of society need to reject the neurotypical narrative that has dominated the meaning of an autism diagnosis for too long. Ne’eman’s evidence of the damaging effects of organizations like Autism Speaks, Cure Autism Now, and legislation such as the “Combating Autism Act” show how the neurotypical narrative can rip away autonomy from autistic individuals. Ne’eman also cites the need for more supports for families and individuals with disabilities; “by improving special education and funding for transition and adult supports, we can reduce the perceived and actual difficulties on families. On the whole, it is clear that the neurotypical community needs to step aside to allow the autistic community to share and explore their narrative.

Word Count = 1024

I hereby pledge upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work – JML

Works Cited

Ne’eman, Ari. “Dueling Narratives: Neurotypical and Autistic Perspectives About the Autism Spectrum.” The Society for Critical Exchange , 2007, case.edu/affil/sce/Texts_2007/Ne’eman.html.

Madison’s Final

The History of Autism: A Shaky Foundation

To understand something in the present, it helps to look at its roots. The cultural ideas and stigmas that are held today are at least somewhat a product of history. Historically, autism has been a mystery and today there is still much we do not know about how it functions or where it comes from. However, when research first began to circulate surrounding autism, much of that information was inaccurate and ultimately harmed future understandings of autism, repercussions we are still feeling today despite advancements. The history of autism research can be seen as the driving force behind the apprehension parents have surrounding communicating with and building a relationship with their autistic child. As a result of early acclaimed researchers pointing a finger at the parents of autistic children to blame them for the condition, there has since been a culture which fears raising the autistic child and pushes for a ‘cure’ to end a presumed suffering.

Psychologists Leo Kanner and Bruno Bettelheim’s widely regarded ideas have laid the foundation for a problematic understanding of how autism functions and where it comes from. Up until the 1960’s, Kanner asserted the belief that parents are responsible for their child’s autism. Kanner once said in an interview that autistic children were a product of, “parents cold and rational who just happened to defrost long enough to produce a child” (Murray, 54). He believed that the parents of autistic children were cold and distant, thus producing similar traits in the form of their autistic child. Bettleheim held a similar viewpoint, asserting that autistic children “withdraw from the world” as a product of parents who are unable to bond with their child, and that often development was stunted in autistic children due to the parents’ own “inadequacies” (Murray 56-57). Given autism was largely unstudied and therefore not understood, Bettleheim and his work were regarded highly by the public and his opinions were taken as fact (Murray). The blame that was placed on parents by these researchers has heavily influenced the way parents today understand autism, and consequently, the apprehension they feel about building a relationship with their autistic child.

The responsibility placed on parents for causing their child’s autism coupled with the idea that a child is ‘trapped’ within their autism lead parents to push for the cure. The fact alone that blame or responsibility was placed at all reinforces that autism is not a positive presence, as if someone must be punished for its existence. And according to Kanner and Bettleheim, the blame lied with the parents. It is natural for parents to want to fix things for their child, to rid them of any suffering. Since there are inherent ideas of pain and suffering tied to disability and difference, including autism, parents have a tendency to focus on how they can end that suffering and return their child to normal. Murray writes, “For some, accepting that they were to blame was a price worth paying if it meant that their child could be ‘rescued’ from autism” (Murray, 58).The idea held that with therapy, the “lost” child could be “brought back” (Murray, 57). Of course this belief is harmful and inaccurate, as there is no “normal” child trapped within the autism, however the popularity of that notion leads parents to feel urgent about curing their child’s autism rather than trying to understand it as an inseparable piece of their identity.

The history of autism and the belief in the cure have made it easier for parents to focus their energy on who their child isn’t rather than who he/she is. Autism, much like other neurodiverse perspectives, is seen for its deficits first and foremost. Nonverbal and atypical communication is rarely seen positively, but rather as though something is lacking from the individual. This expectation of normalcy hinders parents amongst others from trying to understand autistic communication and build a relationship with the autistic child. Writers and advocates such as Jim Sinclair are helping to rewrite this history and alter the way we understand the autistic child. First, it is especially important that parents understand the inseparability of autism from the autistic child. Jim Sinclair importantly notes in Don’t Mourn For Us, “when parents say, I wish my child did not have autism, what they’re really saying is, I wish the autistic child I have did not exist, and I had a different (non-autistic) child instead” (Sinclair, 1993). Although these parents might not understand the implication behind their words, it does not change the fact that they are implying they would rather have a ‘normal’ child than try to understand and relate to their autistic son or daughter. Furthermore, it is important that parents are willing to forgo their own expectations of ‘normalcy’ in order to venture into their autistic child’s territory. He notes, “You’re going to have to give up the certainty that comes of being on your own familiar territory, of knowing you’re in charge, and let your child teach you a little of her language, guide you a little way into his world” (Sinclair,1993).

It is impossible to completely rewrite the history that is responsible for inaccurate information and ideas about autism, but we can learn to put what we think we know aside and step into the autistic perspective. Historically, parents have been blamed for what was presumed as a condition that caused their child to suffer and lack normal social and communication skills. There is no question that this past has been a catalyst for the apprehension parents still hold today about connecting and communicating with their autistic child. The belief in the normal child being ‘trapped’ and the cure have made it possible for parents to focus attention on autism as a deficit rather than a benefit. However, with more insight into the autistic perspective as shared by those on the spectrum such as Jim Sinclair, parents may be able to take agency and find the courage to meet their child where they are at. As noted, difference is not an “impenetrable wall” (Sinclair,1993), but communication can happen and relationships are more than possible.

Works Cited:

Murray, S. (2012). Autism (The Routledge series integrating science and culture). New York: Routledge.

Sinclair, J. Don’t Mourn For Us. Autism Network International newsletter, Our Voice, Volume 1, Number 3, 199.

word count: 1020

I pledge, Madison Moyer.

The Use of Literary Devices and Synchronization in dePack’s Troubleshooting

Understanding the thought process of people with disabilities is something that neurotypical people often struggle greatly with. It makes disables people seem alien to them, and often ignorance causes intolerance, which leads to people with disabilities being isolated from society and shunned as though they are less than human. Autism is a disability that many people do not know about, as well as one that many do not care to know about due to the nature of it, and how different autistic people act compared to the norm. People write them off as less intelligent or strange simply because it is something they cannot understand, nor do they often take the time to try. Because people with autism have such a different way of processing the world around them, it is easy to assume that there is no chance of understanding them, which can lead people to not even try, but the more time people spend with someone, the easier it is to figure them out and work with them. Selene dePackh’s novel, Troubleshooting throws the reader into the mind of an autistic character, Dax, with an auditory processing lag, and the writing style, use of context, and dialogue mimics the way that she must synchronize with people in order to be able to understand them.

The writing style that dePackh uses in Troubleshooting has an interesting way of jumping around timeframes in a way that causes a reader to be confused about where and when the scenes of the book take place, which mimics the confusion Dax must feel before she has processed what someone has said. It almost gives the reader a literary whiplash, switching back and forth from past to present, scene to scene, so quickly that the reader is only able to process what has happened about halfway through the page. Immediately upon opening the book with chapter one, the reader is put into the middle of a conversation between Dax and Chill, Angela Dark’s brother. They are playing some sort of game that the reader is given no context to. Before anything is fully explained, the narrator, Dax, then continues on to say that the conversation happened “a couple of decades ago” (dePackh 1). Dax implies that she is somewhere different in present, but instead of giving the reader any information about that, she starts to tell the reader about the past again, and how she came to meet Chill Dark instead. Then, from chapter two to chapter three, the narration skips from Dax telling Angela her background and how she got to Thunderbird to an explicit sex scene in chapter three, which shocks the reader, and seemingly comes forth with little warning to it happening. Just as the reader is starting to somewhat understand Dax and be solid in a scene with her and Angela talking, they are immediately thrown into something else with these same characters, but a completely different scene with a very different done. This sort of mimics the way that someone with an auditory processing lag may experience conversation—just as they process something that was said to them and tune back in, the conversation has gone completely elsewhere, and the process starts again.

Similar to the way the novel’s jumping around causes confusion, dePackh introduces information without context, which makes it impossible for the reader to understand, but as the novel progresses, more insight is provided as though the reader is getting synchronized with the book and can more easily understand things that are happening. On page two, we are given a few proper nouns with no context or backstory, as though these bits of information are important to the worldbuilding of the futuristic world this takes place in, but the reader is not clued into the significance of them. The “Dark family” is mentioned, but the reader does not yet know why they are important, as only two members of the Dark family have been mentioned. They are spoken about like they are infamous, but at this point in time, the reader does not know why. The nations “Haudenosaunee” and “Anishinaabe” are mentioned, but the reader is given no information as to what they are or told that they are nations of indigenous people, aside from them being near the Canadian border. The reader is left to their own devices, with the choice of either remaining in the dark or looking up the information themselves, which helps the reader to understand how it may feel like for Dax since she is unable to make sense of words upon first hearing them (dePackh 7). At the beginning of chapter two, the reader is introduced to Chill’s Uncle Gabriel, who is fixing Angela’s hair, but the reader is not given any information to why or how he is there, nor are they given any information about the setting they are in until halfway through the paragraph when the fence is mentioned to show that they’re in the yard, and then on the next page, the reader is informed that Uncle Gabriel is allowed regular visits. This creates a lag in understanding because the information is presented, and then explained with a sort of delay, creating a small window of confusion similar to what Dax may experience. However, as the novel progresses, we are given explanations of information sooner. One example of this is at the beginning of chapter eleven, with the phrases: “I was supposed to meet her at nine, and it was still a couple of minutes to, but it appeared she’d been there a while. I was learning Petra was a heavy drinker. She didn’t drink hard every day, but when she did, she meant business” (dePackh 93). Here, Dax is forthright with information and explaining the characters, even giving information that the reader may not necessarily need. The mention of Petra being a heavy drinker as well as Dax’s love interest at the time is even foreshadowing to her relationship with “The Mistake”, an abusive alcoholic who takes over her life for a while. Up until this point, the reader is thrown around through Dax’s life with little context or explanation to what’s happening, but here, there is a very noticeable change in the writing. Not only is the reader given a full explanation of the setting and characters in the scene, but there is also a hint to what is coming next, which had not happened, at least not noticeably, before this point, as though after reading the book for this long and struggling to process it, they are finally getting “synchronized” (dePackh 5).

Literary devices can be a powerful tool in writing. They can create all different tones and moods and bring the reader on a specific journey that is unique to each and every book. The way that dePackh uses these literary devices is important because it gives the narrator a voice that is specific to how she processes as a person with autism, and it helps the reader to understand that voice and gives them insight into her brain. Books like this show people that autism is not something that makes someone alien, but only something that makes them process a little differently, and it shows them that if enough time is spent with someone, then they are not so difficult to understand after all.

Word Count: 1223

I pledge I did not give or receive unauthorized help on this assignment

WORKS CITED:

dePackh, Selene. Troubleshooting: Book One, Glitch in the System. Reclamation
Press, 2018.

Tori Percherke’s Take-Home Final on Jim Sinclair’s “Don’t Mourn For Us”

Don’t Mourn For Us

In the literary text, “Don’t Mourn For Us”, is based on the perspective of somebody with autism, Jim Sinclair. Sinclair’s idea for this essay was to broadcast feelings to non-austic’s about the idea of a “normal child”. Reading this essay, I came to the conclusion that those who choose to have children, should be thankful for the child they bring into this world. If they aren’t, they weren’t made to be parents in the first place. Parents should not create expectations for their unborn baby, or feel at loss over what is real. Autism is a real, and beautiful thing.

Sinclair states in the beginning of this essay, that according to “non-autistic” people, autism is the “most traumatic thing to ever happen” to parents (1). However, parents who create all these expectations in their minds, is the real traumatic thing here. Although bonding and creating that relationship with your child will be different than most, it’s the parent’s job to form ways to bond with their kid instead of resentment. In the text, Sinclair responds to this sort of frustration by saying, “the child isn’t incapable of relating at all. It only means [the parent is] assuming a shared system, a shared understanding of signals and meanings, that the child in fact does not share” (1). Just like treating those with autism like somebody who speaks a different language, there are ways to communicate and relate. Parents just have to be open-minded to forming those different ways. If the parent is successful, and is patient with their son or daughter, the reality of their child getting a drivers licence or moving away to college is very likely. But, parents can not push their process with the child. It isn’t the job of the child to be a certain way for other people. And if the parent has a mindset of bitterness, anger, and negativity toward a child, it can create resentment against the parent. At the end of the day, a child is only a child. The kid cannot control what they were born with, let alone, what makes them, them! “Autism is a way of being” (1). Autism is different, and has too many negative connotations for this world: ignorance, disrespect, and the willingness to learn more about it. Instead of grieving about autism, express and explore the world in which autism gives. By providing that information toward the child, the child will learn how to be proud and happy of who they are! It’s understandable to be stressed, as there are always new things to be anxious about. But, if a parent feels as if they cannot hide those doubts, and significant emotions toward their child, they were not fit to be parents in the beginning. A parent is kind, and accepting toward their baby.

So, what does it mean to be a parent?: A parent takes care of their child physically and emotionally, a parent provides, a parent protects and keeps the child safe from harm, a parent loves, a parent teaches and helps their child when in need, and a parent is the role-model to their child (2). The definition of a parent is more than just giving birth and the passing of genes. It’s a role that the world has given them, and the world should expect the parent to treat their child or any child, with love and respect. Sinclair says that “[autistic children] need and deserve families who can see us and value us for ourselves, not families whose vision of us is obscured by the ghosts of children who never lived. Grieve if you must, for your own lost dreams. But don’t mourn for us. We are alive. We are real. And we’re here waiting for you” (1). The child in which has autism will help guide the parent in any confusion they might have. But, it’s the parent’s job to get connected in a community that supports autism. In order to help maintain a connection with an autistic child, the parent must learn to embrace the culture their child and family is involved in. Embrace the differences that the world has given!

In Sinclair’s final paragraphs, he tells the readers to “learn to let go” (1). Which is such a peaceful statement but also, a command. Having autism isn’t the same as losing a child. Because your child is alive, and real. The idea of having a normal child never existed. Having autism is what makes up a child to be unique and different from the rest. If those differences within a parent’s kid isn’t uplifted, how does a parent expect their kid to live a happy life? Or feel as if they can be loved by the world, if their own parents can’t? Sinclair shares that, “[Those with autism] need you. We need your help and your understanding. Your world is not very open to us, and we won’t make it without your strong support. Yes, there is tragedy that comes with autism: not because of what we are, but because of the things that happen to us. Be sad about that” (1). If parents need to rant about their emotions toward autism, there are support groups for that. The groups are meant to embrace what has happened, and what won’t change. Enrolling into support groups, and counseling will only benefit relationships with those of autism. Having a child that is on the spectrum, is more than a diagnosis, it’s an “adventure of a lifetime.” The parent’s duty is to be as involved as they possibly can, and to also love what they brought into the universe.

To conclude this analysis, I believe that after reading, “Don’t Mourn For Us”, parents who feel negatively toward their autistic child are in no place of being a parent at all. Parent’s are supposed to accept the child that they brought into this world, and treat them with the love and respect they deserve. I also believe that people should know what it means to be a parent before conceiving a baby. And finally, if a parent has an autistic child, it’s the families’ job to make sure that that culture is embraced and celebrated. Those with autism, unfortunately experience those families too often that aren’t loved equally as other children. The world needs to create a brighter and more positive connotation than the one it has today. If somebody wants to be a parent, they need to be thankful, and embraceful for the child they get. As Sinclair says, “Don’t mourn for us. Autism is alive, and real” (1).

“I hereby declare upon my word of honor that I have neither given nor received unauthorized help on this work.”

X Tori Percherke

Word Count: 1089

Work Cited:

(1) Sinclair, Jim. “DON’T MOURN FOR US.” Don’t Mourn For Us, www.autreat.com/dont_mourn.html.

(2) “What Does It Mean to Be a Parent: Gerber Life Insurance Blog.” Gerber Life Insurance Parenting Blog, 16 Jan. 2019, www.gerberlife.com/blog/what-it-means-to-be-a-parent/.

“What Is Autism?” Autism Society, www.autism-society.org/what-is/.

To Kill a Mockingbird: The Frailty of Disability

To Kill a Mockingbird contains a lot of themes regarding the issue of discrimination in regards to disability. In an attempt to demonstrate the struggle that many disabled people go through, Lee’s narrative focuses on a disabled African American man struggling to find his way through a trial of a crime he didn’t commit. This has especially been apparent by the fact that he was both African American and disabled. To Kill a Mockingbird centers on themes of the present discrimination within disability as seen in Tom’s discrimination, Boo Radley’s struggle to unveil himself, and the treatment Atticus receives for supporting Tom.

For the bulk of the book, Tom ultimately is the one that receives the most amount of discrimination for being African American. This is shown most clearly through the trial that he is forced to be a part of. Throughout the trial, Tom finds that he is treated unfairly, most of the evidence being against him. In one of the arguments that is made against him, “Tom Robinson hesitated , searching for an answer, ‘Looked like she didn’t have anybody to help her, I says’” (Lee 204). In this scene, the pressure that Tom feels shows how much of the court is biased against him. This is further exemplified through some of the names that the judge calls him, such as “But you weren’t in a fix—you testified you were resisting miss Ewell. Were you so scared that she’d hurt you, a big buck like you?” (Lee 225). The derogatory term of “big buck” demonstrates how Tom was judged by his appearance. Tom’s race and disability prevented him from getting fair treatment. Ultimately it is sad that these were the defining traits that the judge saw, preventing him from becoming more acquainted with Tom. It shows the extra weight that race holds with disability.

Another aspect that Harper Lee tries to put a lot of emphasis on is the isolation disabled people go through. This exhibits itself through the life of Boo Radley. In the beginning of the book, Scout described “the Radley’s kept to themselves, a predilection unforgivable in Maycomb” (Lee 14). Considering that isolation was an unforgivable predilection, it shows how Boo Radley was discriminated based on a mental illness that he had. Lee uses Boo to show the struggles he had with his disability interfered with his communication with the people in the society. After some time, Boo comes out and Scout come to have a more mutual understanding towards him, especially after he took care of Jem. With this, Scout says “The Radley’s place had ceased to terrify me, but it was no less gloomy” (Lee 247). This goes to show that she has overcome her initial fears and speculations she had of Boo Radley. Ultimately she came to have a more mutual understanding for Boo because she came to know him as a person. Unfortunately, based on the fact she still saw gloom on the house, the rest of society probably would never come to accept Boo Radley for who he really was. No matter how hard he tried, he would always be alienated for his disability by the greater society. This shows that the disability he had will always leave a mark on his social standing. The development of Scout’s understanding towards Boo Radley demonstrates how misunderstood many people with disabilities are.

Finally, Lee tries to expose how the insults of one individual can affect the welfare of the other. Through the character of Atticus Finch, it is seen that he is insulted because he does not believe that Tom did any wrong. When he is talking to Jem and Scout about how he was insulted by two other men for his defense of Tom, he states “‘There’s something in our world that makes men lose their heads—they couldn’t be fair if they tried’” (Lee 238). In this sense, he is saying that people exist within their own independent selves, unable to understand anything that is outside of it. This applies to Lee’s theme of the stigmatization of disability because the reason most of the disabled characters are misunderstood has to do with the fact that people do not want to comprehend an individual that is different. The reason people like Tom received an unfair trial without good evidence had to do with how they refused to understand his status as a disabled and African American person. Because Atticus was the only person that was willing to understand Tom, he too becomes stigmatized since they view that he is sympathizing with someone that is otherwise considered a disgrace to their society. Atticus goes further with this when he states “ ‘There is nothing more sickening than a low-grade white man who’ll take advantage of a negro’s ignorance’” (Lee 252). In this statement, Atticus is saying that a lot of white people seem to assume that African Americans are not that smart and easy to take advantage of. However, because Atticus is the only one that is able to understand that this is just a presumption, he gets made fun of for it because he has grown to see the holes within the white individual’s thinking. In this case, popular thinking tends to blind people because it is not based upon reasonable facts or logic. Instead, a lot of it is based on myth and unreliable data. The reason that Tom Robinson is accused of rape in the first place has a lot to do with the nature of his social standing over anything that he has done in the past. In the same vein, because Atticus is able to overcome these falsehoods, he is able to see the truth; however, it is not without the cost of losing the respect others once had of him.

To conclude, To Kill a Mockingbird carries many of the same weight that other literary works involving disability do. Many of the characters within the book find themselves becoming ostracized and being social outcasts because they do not have the means necessary to recover form the plight they are in. Most of the social woes that the characters of Boo Radley and Tom Robinson suffer from is because of their disability. All in all, To Kill a Mockingbird is very insightful with how it handles the frailties of disability.

Work Cited

Lee, Harper. To Kill a Mockingbird. Harperprennial. New York, New York. Modern Classics,

2002. Print.

Words: 1071

I pledge-

Daniel