February 2010
·
4 Reads
Disability Studies Quarterly
This page lists works of an author who doesn't have a ResearchGate profile or hasn't added the works to their profile yet. It is automatically generated from public (personal) data to further our legitimate goal of comprehensive and accurate scientific recordkeeping. If you are this author and want this page removed, please let us know.
February 2010
·
4 Reads
Disability Studies Quarterly
February 2010
·
13 Reads
·
19 Citations
Disability Studies Quarterly
December 2009
·
2 Reads
·
7 Citations
Disability Studies Quarterly
December 2009
·
16 Reads
·
29 Citations
Disability Studies Quarterly
... 23,38,39 Autistic adults, in contrast, have long challenged the viewpoint that casts autism as the barrier to relationships, rejecting the damaging stereotypes of not wanting companionship 40,41 or not feeling empathy. [42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53][54] They are supported by researchers who have demonstrated heightened affective empathy and a desire for social relationships in autistic people, [55][56][57][58][59][60][61] drawing attention to repeated interpersonal trauma as the primary factor for some autistic adults' hesitancy on entering new relationships. [62][63][64] Epistemic injustice, 65 diagnostic overshadowing, 66 and the double empathy problem 67 may be at the root of this discrepancy between viewpoints. ...
February 2010
Disability Studies Quarterly
... For autistic adults, interventions are already increasingly modelled on neurodiversity claims of acceptance of difference and accommodation of the environment, such as generating adapted workplaces and sensitizing colleagues about autism (Lai et al., 2020). With some notable exceptions (Fletcher-Watson, 2018;Leadbitter et al., 2021;Schuck et al., 2022), applications of the neurodiversity paradigm are, however, still largely unexplored terrain when it comes to young children and the sphere of early detection and intervention (Savarese, 2010). ...
December 2009
Disability Studies Quarterly
... The main critique against the neurodiversity paradigm is that it expresses the interests and needs only of the so-called high-functioning autistics and not of the low-functioning ones, as well as that it ignores the suffering described by some autistics themselves. A number of scholars, however, have taken more flexible, combined approaches that subvert the hard-and-fast oppositions between the biodeterministic and the social constructivist concepts, between the need for therapy and respect for difference, while bearing in mind the mixing of normative models at the everyday level, including in parental care (Savarese and Savarese, 2010;Cascio, 2012;Kapp et al., 2013;Hart, 2014). ...
December 2009
Disability Studies Quarterly