Understanding the polyvocality of autism discourse : a critical autoethnographic approach

Currently, much of the autism literature supports the notion that Pervasive Developmental Disorder (PDD) is a deviation from what is considered "normal" and, accordingly, that it is in need of early remediation. This thesis explored alternative constructions of autism and pathology by drawing on theorists from other disciplines, such as cultural studies (Deleuze & Guattari, 1987, 1965, 1972, 1975,1980, 2003), critical psychology (Parker, 1995, 2002, 2005, 2007), disability studies (Danforth,1997, 1999, 2000; Skrtic, 1995, 1996) and anti-psychiatry (Basaglia, 1987). In an attempt to show how our accounts of the world encompass constructions rooted in language and our own histories of thinking about topics that interest us, this research took an autoethnographic approach to understanding autism discourse. Instead of denying the researcher's existence and personal investment in the research, the author attempted to implicate "the self in the research by acknowledging her own assumptions, biases and ideologies about autism discourse and practice. Thus, tensions between the self and other, personal and political become woven into the fabric, creating a personal, subjective, and partial account of the phenomenon. This research was intended to explicate and interrogate some of the taken-for-granted Truths which guide our practices with people with autism. This alternative critical framework focused on understanding autism as a discourse and explored the way these dominant autism constructions function in society. Furthermore, positioning "the self in the research was meant to illustrate the fundamental need for self-reflective practice in the social sciences.

An assessment of autism knowledge in the medical field

Once thought to be rare, pervasive developmental disorders (PDDs) are now recognized as the most common neurological disorders affecting children and one of the most common developmental disabilities (DD) in Canada (Autism Society of Canada, 2006). Recent reports indicate that PDDs currently affect 1 in 150 children (Centre for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007). The purpose of this research was to provide an understanding of medical resident and practicing physicians' basic knowledge regarding PDDs. With a population of children with PDDs who present with varying symptoms, the ability for medical professionals to provide general information, diagnosis, appropriate referrals, and medical care can be quite complex. A basic knowledge of the disorder is only a first step in providing adequate medical care to individuals with autism and their families. An updated version of Stone's (1987) Autism survey was administered to medical residents at four medical schools in Canada and currently practicing physicians at three medical schools and one community health network. As well, a group of professionals specializing in the field ofPDDs, participating in research and clinical practice, were surveyed as an 'expert' group to act as a control measure. Expert responses were consistent with current research in the field. General findings indicated few differences in overall knowledge between residents and physicians, with misconceptions evident in areas such as the nature of the disorder, qualitative characteristics of autism, and effective interventions. Results were also examined by specialty and, while pediatricians demonstrated additional accurate 11 knowledge regarding the nature of the disorder and select qualitative impairments, both residents and practicing physicians demonstrated misconceptions about PDDs. This preliminary study replicated the findings of Stone (1987) and Heidgerken (2005) concerning several misconceptions of PDDs held by residents and practicing physicians. Future research should focus on additional replications with validated measures as well as the gathering of qualitative information, in order to inform the medical profession of the need for education in PDDs at training and professional levels.

Bridging the Conceptualization of Youth with Intellectual Disabilities to Sentencing under the YCJA

The current study examined how disability and the concepts of risk, need and responsivity are understood by criminal justice professionals and inform their perceptions of young offenders with ID at sentencing under the ‘different but equal’ philosophy. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 11 lawyers and 8 mental health workers across 6 major urban areas in Ontario. Participants primarily perceived ID through a medical discourse, overlooking social and structural barriers that, in some cases, may hinder adherence to sentencing dispositions. Specifically, participants discussed balancing the reduced culpability of offenders (e.g., intent) – justifying lenient sentencing – with public safety concerns (i.e., ID viewed as a barrier to rehabilitation) – justifying increasing the severity of sentences. Participants assessed clients with ID and their risks, needs and responsivity within the context of other legal factors: criminal history, severity of the offence, and YCJA objectives. Participants articulated the importance of tailored courthouse identification programs, services/funding, and education/training.