What does it mean to be neuroaffirming?
In a world where neurodiversity is such a broad word that encompasses autism and ADHD, but also much, much more, I’m writing this post with a focus on autism.
People ask me what the best way to be autism-affirming is, and every time, I think about this one scene from the kdrama Jewel in the Palace (2003) .
[Spoilers from this 2003 drama ahead]
In this period drama, there’s a food competition.
One contestant uses the best water, the best herbs to make the best rice. But, all of the panel judges voted for the second contestant.
Why is that?
The other contestant painstakingly made different rice based on panelist preferences. Judge 1 liked soft rice, judge 2 liked chewy rice.
And I think this metaphor means a lot to me when we modify for an autistic audience. We could produce a set of guidelines that work for many autistic people, but there is so much diversity in autism that what works for one person will be the very thing that another autistic person really struggles with. What might be sensory soothing for one person might be a sensory trigger to another.
Instead, guidelines are recipes. They’re questions that ask about specific areas to be aware of that are invisible in most therapy contexts:
is the therapy room comfortable?
does silence have the same role as it does for non-autistic clients as it does for autistic clients?
is structure guiding or suffocating?
do open-ended questions help broaden horizons or does it evoke a sense of panic?
is what you’re reading nonverbally accurate?
So, I don’t have answers for what being autism-affirming is. But I do have questions. Will you ask those questions in your work? What questions have been helpful to reflect on in your own work?