I know what autism looks like, probably better than most people. I grew up going to a special school where there were quite a few kids with severe autism and Profound and Multiple Learning Difficulties. Then, a few years ago, I spent some time volunteering at Charlton Park Academy, working with kids with various neurological conditions, including autism. I know what it looks like: it is a profoundly debilitating condition where people barely comprehend the world around them, how to communicate or how to look after their selves. It is nothing to be joked about or laughed at.
These days, however, the term is being used more and more flippantly. Claiming to be autistic seems to be some kind of craze or fashion. In the last couple of weeks, for example, we have heard both Boris Johnson and Elon Musk claim to be on the autistic spectrum, as if that somehow explains or excuses their behaviour. I obviously have severe problems with this. Medical conditions are medical conditions: they aren’t something you can just claim to have, when it becomes politically or socially fashionable. Nobody could suddenly claim to have Cerebral Palsy or Muscular Dystrophy, out of the blue.
Yet with Autism, the definitions seem to have become so vague that just about anyone can now claim to be on the autistic spectrum; any kind of antisocial or selfish behaviour can be excused by adopting the label. Parents seem to now do it in order to make excuses for their unruly children; individuals now do it in order to feel different or special. Behaviours which were quite recently perceived as perfectly normal, if slightly antisocial, now fall under the autism umbrella, frankly making a nonsense of the entire condition. Whereas CP and MD have clear, fixed definitions and causes, the definition of autism seems to be deliberately being made wider and wider.
The problem is, as I’m sure many others are pointing out, once you start labelling and pathologising behaviours or groups of behaviours in this way, they become ingrained or reinforced. Once someone starts thinking they are autistic or ‘special’, consciously or unconsciously they start to make such behaviours even more overt. Behaving in such a way has earned them attention, a niche, label, or some other form of gratification, so it becomes more obvious. The behaviour thus becomes more pronounced, so it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. It would be far better, in my opinion, to let these behaviours remain undiagnosed and uncategorised; to continue to see them as perfectly normal, if slightly flamboyant or eccentric, ways to behave. As soon as a label is attached to a set of behaviours which had previously been seen as normal, they becomes something else: something which people now seem to be wanting to attach themselves to, for social and political reasons. Frankly, having undergone a lifetime of social ostracisation and being treated as abnormal or different, I can’t see how it wouldn’t be preferable for people to want to continue to perceive themselves – and be perceived by others – as normal.
Autism is a very serious, profoundly debilitating medical condition. I am no expert in it, but I know enough to say that it is now being made a mockery of: people seem to be announcing they are autistic with very little understanding of what that really means. It’s part of the issue I started to outline here: When people choose to ascribe labels to themselves without understanding what that label means, that label gradually becomes meaningless; just as the wider the definition of a neurological condition becomes, the less intellectual or academic precision it has. My mind goes back to the profoundly autistic kids I knew at school: they couldn’t stick up for theirselves, so perhaps I should.