A Dilemma For Neurodiversity

AbstractOne way to determine whether a mental condition should be considered a disorder is to first give necessary and sufficient conditions for something tobe a disorder and then see if it meets these conditions. But this approach has been criticized for begging normative questions. Concerning autism (and other conditions), aneurodiversity movement has arisen with essentially two aims: (1) advocate for the rights and interests of individuals with autism, and (2) de-pathologize autism. We argue that denying autism ’s disorder status could undermine autism’s exculpatory role in cases where individuals with autism are charged with a crime. Our argument raises a dilemma for the neurodiversity movement: advocating for the rights and interests of individuals with autism may require viewing autism as a conditio n that can be inherently disabling (at least for some individuals). If this is right, autism’s disorder status might be maintained (again, at least for some individuals)without deriving this result from any general account of disorder.
Source: Neuroethics - Category: Medical Ethics Source Type: research