Whereas the international movement is a social movement against the medical model of autism, the French-speaking association aims to help autistic persons and their families.
Thus, the members of the French-speaking association, Satedi, have accepted the notion of handicap and the need for cooperation with the public authorities. The study of the French case puts other views in evidence. Generally, the activist movements define autism as a different mode of functioning, and stress the positive and creative features associated with neurodiversity.
Drawing on interviews with advocates in Canada and the US, this article highlights these contending perspectives and argues that both pose fundamental challenges to how we view the redistributive aims of the welfare state in Canada and beyond.Īt the international level, the study of the historical dynamics of the mobilization of the autistic persons’ organizations shows that they refuse the representation of autism as a disease. In contrast to parent-led advocacy groups, there has been a flurry of civil society activity waged by autistic self-advocates who decry the focus on curing autistic people and press instead for the recognition of neurological difference. British Columbia-that pitted parents of autistic children against the BC government, which was unwilling to cover the costs of behavioural treatment for autistic children. In Canada, this culminated in 2004 with a much-publicized Supreme Court decision-Auton v.
From debates about the role of vaccines to the efficacy of therapeutic interventions, a range of civil society actors has been advocating for policy and societal change in the field, with mixed success. In the last decade, autism has become one of the most hotly contested health policy issues in North America and beyond.
0 kommentar(er)
