Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong
Tweet- Image via Wikipedia
I recently read ‘Neurodiversity: discovering the extraordinary gifts of Autism, ADHD, Dyslexia and other brain differences‘ (you can read a mini review here) by Dr. Thomas Armstrong and came away impressed. In the book Dr Armstrong makes a strong case for viewing the traditional disabilities from a differences perspective and to focus on the different strengths and abilities of the neurodiverse people. A recurring theme of this blog has been that autism and schizophrenia/psychosis are opposites on a continuum model as proposed amongst others by Christopher Badcock and Beranard Crespi. Dr Armstrong touches on this model in his chapter on autism, though that not central to his theis .
Dr Armstrong, was kind enough to answer a few questions for the benefit of our readers and these are reproduced below:
[SG] You have written a wonderful book on neurodiversity. Could you explain in brief, for the benefit of our readers, why neurodiversity has become so important in today’s context and why the focus on neurodiversity now when the differences that underlie the neurodiverse spectrum themselves are age-old?
[TA] I think neurodiversity is, as I’ve suggested in my book, “a concept whose time has come” because of the disability culture we live in. Almost half of us will have mental disorders sometime during our lifetime according to the National Institute of Mental Health, and even more will have “shadow syndromes” or minor versions of those disorders. When we get to the point where virtually everyone is seen as having a mental disorder to one degree or another, I think it’s time that we shift paradigms and use a diversity model instead of a disability model to account for those differences.
[SG] How much does neurodiversity owe to the Autistic advocacy movement and whether those beginnings are productive or counterproductive when one wants to bring other differences like mood or anxiety differences in the fold and talk about them as well?
[TA] I believe that the autistic advocacy movement deserves a great deal of credit for coining and developing the idea of neurodiversity. It’s rather amazing that a group of people who are known for their non-social attributes have made this contribution to our social understanding of brain differences. My hope is that my book Neurodiversity will help to broaden the concept of neurodiversity to include a wider range of abilities/disabilities. As far as I can see from looking at many sites online, there is an openness in the autism community to expanding the definition of neurodiversity beyond simply autism and Asperger’s syndrome.
[SG] Positive Psychology shares some of the same concerns as that of the Neurodiverse movement- the focus on strengths and what works and skepticism about the disease and pathology model- yet why hasn’t, in your opinion neurodiversity become center stage like the positive psychology movement has? Is it because in neurodiversity we are swinging the pendulum too much to the other side and perhaps blinding ourselves to underlying pathologies by claiming everything as differences?
[TA] No, I think it has to do with the credibility of the leadership of the Positive Psychology movement – spearheaded by a former president of the American Psychological Association and other famous professors of psychology. It’s essentially a top-down movement, whereas neurodiversity seems to me to be a bottom-up or “grass roots” movement that is coming from the people who are actually themselves neurodiverse. I don’t think of the neurodiversity movement as saying “we’re all different so leave us alone” I believe that attention needs to be given to ameliorating the disability part of neurodiversity, even as we focus the spotlight on the abilities.
[SG] For the benefit of our readers, if you could highlight the differences between the dimensional and categorical model of pathologies/differences. I believe neurodviversity leans towards the dimensional (continuum ) model. What can DSM V learn form the findings you have discussed in the Neurodiversity book? is a dimensional model of pathology a better one as compared to the categorical one? a necessary evil? or can the DSM mentality be done away with altogether?
[TA] One of the eight principles that I discuss in my book Neurodiversity is that everyone exists along “continuums of competence” with respect to a range of human processes including sociability, literacy, intelligence(s), attention, mood, and so forth. This is very similar to the DSM-V’s embracing of a dimensional perspective, and to that extent, I think the DSM-V is moving in the right direction. The problem is that the DSM-V will be a high stakes publication, and if people are put on a continuum from normal to pathological, the fuzzy line where normal becomes pathological (and vice versa) becomes very important, and may determine whether a person will be labeled with a disorder, given a drug treatment, and perhaps even stigmatized as a result. There’s a danger that many so-called normal people will be added to the ranks of the mentally disordered. Also, what’s missing from the DSM (in all its versions) is any kind of discussion of the positive dimensions of each of the disability categories.
[SG] Just like DSM, positive psychologists have come up with a list of character strengths and virtues as for ex can be seen on VIA signature strength website. Do you think those lists are sufficiently inclusive and give equal weighting to the special abilities found in neurodiverse individuals?
[TA] I think the VIA-IS (or Values in Action Inventory of Strengths) is a positive contribution to our understanding of human personality. It would be good to see someone take this inventory and map it onto the various pathologies taken up in the DSM-V. Wedding the two manuals would be a definite step in the right direction.
[SG] How much yours and your fathers experience of depression has been a driving force in your passion for psychology and especially instrumental in your focusing energies on the neurodiverse people.
[TA] I think it’s been very much a contributory factor. Seeing how my father’s depression affected our family’s functioning while growing up, and how my own depression has shaped my adult life, has been extremely influential in leading me to the field of psychology, and in trying to find the silver lining beyond the dark cloud.
[SG] People who are on extremes of the neurodiverse spectrum face immense stigma in our society. Your chapter on neurodiverstity in classroom talks about inclusive classrooms as you believe special classrooms for special ed programs end up labeling children. How practical you think is the concept of a neurodiverse classroom, esp in developing countries like India. Is a special ed class, even if it ends up labeling a child, better than no intervention at all and traditional classroom education only?
[TA] In a system based on traditional classroom learning, I believe that special education programs outside of the traditional classroom have a place, especially if they are using cutting-edge techniques for helping kids with special needs. But as an educational reformer, I am always pressing educators to expand beyond traditional learning environments for all kids, and when we utilize teaching methods that are good for all kids, we end up helping kids with special needs in the process.
[SG] Niche construction appears to be one of the special focus of your book. would you support or recommended special reservations in jobs/academics for neurodiverse people who may do especially well in those particular niches? For ex. would you favor a legislation that mandated for reservation for autistic people in computer testing industry. I’m thinking of cultural diversity guidelines in colleges, should we have similar neurodiversity guidelines too?
[TA] Are you talking about affirmative action for neurodiverse people? If so, then I believe there might be some merit in exploring how this might work. ([SG] note: yes, I was indeed talking about affirmative action; in India we typically refer to the issue as that of reservations!)
[SG] How did the writing of Neurodiversity enrich you as an individual. wWat can readers hope to take away from the book?
[TA] I wrote Neurodiversity while in the midst of a major depressive episode. At times I could hear myself saying “why are you looking at the strengths of these disorders, for God’s sake, when you know that they’re hell to deal with?” But there was another part of me, an intuitive part I believe, that instinctively believed it was important for me to bring strengths into the discourse about mental disabilities. I hope that readers will see this book as a supplementary guide to all the other books on disabilities that focus on the negatives. It’s important that we see both sides of the issue. We are, after all, whole human beings, with a great deal of complexity and richness. I hope that readers will take away a sense of this richness in the diversity of minds that make up humanity.
I would like to thank Dr Armstrong for taking some time off for the interview and would recommended the readers to read up some of his books, many of which focus on the special abilities and aptitudes of the neurodiverse people.
More From TheMouseTrap
- The epigenetics of Autism: Oxytocin factor and implications for schizophrenia
- Mind perception of others: opposing effects of having Autism/Psychosis
- Logos Vs Mythos: Autism Vs Schizophrenia
TheMouseTrap Recommends
loading...
Effecient Related Posts:
| Print article | This entry was posted by sandygautam on July 31, 2010 at 10:01 AM, and is filed under autism. Follow any responses to this post through RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback from your own site. |
Facebook comments:
- Tweets that mention Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong | The Mouse Trap — Topsy.com
- Late Night Ruminations | Autism Experts Blog
- “Loving Lampposts,” A Groundbreaking Documentary About Autism, Love, and Acceptance | NeuroTribes
- Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong | Child Psychology | Scoop.it
Additional comments powered by BackType












about 1 year ago
“Almost half of us will have mental disorders sometime during our lifetime according to the National Institute of Mental Health, and even more will have “shadow syndromes” or minor versions of those disorders. When we get to the point where virtually everyone is seen as having a mental disorder to one degree or another, I think it’s time that we shift paradigms and use a diversity model instead of a disability model to account for those differences.”
Just because our model is inadequate to be extremely precise we cannot just through it out. Statistically what the above suggests is to go from a “deterministic model” to a “statistical model”. In other words, from symptom->diagnosis to a more statistical model.
I do not understand how that will help…
about 1 year ago
Hi Partap,
sometimes labeling something becomes self-fulfilling and leads to the undesirable outcomes. If our science is not advanced enough to go beyond symptoms to aetiology, prognosis and causes, perhaps diagnosing with labels, especially kids who are in developmental critical periods, does more harm than good.
Perhaps a continuum (or statistical model as you put is) model is more appropriate – it leaves scope for change and less stigma. If one conceives of differences as deviations against a statistical mean, perhaps abnormality loses it sheen, and outliers are perhaps juts that -outliers rather than abnormals.
about 6 months ago
That is great post.sometimes labeling something becomes self-fulfilling and leads to the undesirable outcomes.
about 4 months ago
great post what can i say
about 1 year ago
New Mouse Trap post Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong http://goo.gl/fb/eyYne #autism
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
about 1 year ago
Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong | The Mouse Trap: … this blog will be aware of my concepti… http://bit.ly/cF7l5Y
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
about 1 year ago
Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong | The Mouse Trap http://bit.ly/aUaegO
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
about 1 year ago
Neurodiversity: http://bit.ly/9wsn2m
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
about 1 year ago
Neurodiversity:an interview with Dr. Thomas Armstrong:
Image via Wikipedia
I recently read ‘Neurodive… http://bit.ly/drkfJ1
This comment was originally posted on Twitter
about 1 year ago
Ahh…our favorite. The spectrum/threshold debate.
I will grant you that these spectrums exist. And every individual is on pretty much every spectrum, including those you named at the end of your post. However, on these spectrums, there are thresholds at which you would classify an individual to be "autistic" or "not autistic" or even just "displaying some characteristics of autism". For example, to be diagnosed with autism from the DSM you need to display six or more items on the list, with specific ones from each category. If you only have 4 or 5, you do not classify as "autistic", and essentially have not reached that "threshold" so to speak. So yes, you are on an autistic spectrum, where you might display more characteristics than an individual further left on that spectrum, but a threshold must exist at which you can conclude something about the individual.
Your genomics example is an interesting one. I think it’s a much fuzzier line because certain genes might interact with one another, and the roles of such genes are still not completely understood. However, while some genes DO make you more likely to develop a specific disease, they either must be turned on by an environmental or other genetic factor. Therefore, again, I believe you have a threshold that is activated once that gene, or genes, are transcripted/translated into functional proteins. Just because you have genes that give you a propensity to act a specific way does not mean that you’re acting on a spectrum of whatever characteristic that it codes for. Whether or not that gene, or set of genes, is turned on or off determines whether or not you display that phenotype. So I guess while I do agree that "a bunch of little SNPs shift your tendencies", there is one or a few that when activated, make you function one way or the other. I believe that there are no discrete steps outlined now because we still do not have a completely clear understanding of how exactly they work in relation to one another.
This comment was originally posted on Andy McKenzie: The Blog
about 1 year ago
OK, I am a huge nerd and my comment was too long for blogger, so I’m putting it here: https://sites.google.com/site/amckenz/spectrums-threshold
Jesus.
This comment was originally posted on Andy McKenzie: The Blog
about 1 year ago
Brainodiversity interview. http://bit.ly/btTKQ0 @sandygautam
This comment was originally posted on Twitter