What is it for something to be a disability? Elizabeth Barnes, focusing on physical disabilities, argues that disability is a social category. It depends on the rules undergirding the judgements of the disability rights movement. Barnes’ account may strike many as implausible. I articulate the unease, in the form of three worries about Barnes’ account. It does not fully explain why the disability rights movement is constituted in such a way that it only picks out paradigmatic disability traits, nor why (...) only the traits identified by the movement as constituting experiences of social and political constraint count as disability. It also leaves out the contribution of people other than disability activists, to the definition of disability. I develop Barnes’ account. On my account, a person is disabled if she is in some state which is constitutive of some constraint on her legitimate interests. This state must be the subject of legitimate medical interest and be picked out by the disability rights movement as among the traits for which they are seeking to promote progress and change. My account addresses the worries about Barnes’ account. It is also able to include all disabilities, rather than only physical ones. (shrink)

I attempt to adjudicate the disagreement between those who seek to reconceptualize disability as mere difference and their opponents. I do so by reviewing a central conviction motivating the resistance, concerning the relationship between disability and well-being. I argue that the conviction depends on further considerations about the costs and extent of change involved in accommodating individuals with a particular disability trait. I conclude by considering three pay-offs of this clarification.

As social perceptions of diversity become more nuanced, awareness of the prevalence of autism has grown. But how do we accommodate natural human neurodiversity within the juvenile justice system? And what are the consequences for young people? Law and Neurodiversity offers invaluable guidance on how autism research can inform and improve juvenile justice policies in Canada and the United States. Both countries rely on decentralized systems of governance to craft and implement law and policy, but their treatment of detained youth (...) with autism differs substantively. This perceptive book examines the history of institutionalization, the evolution of disability rights, and advances in juvenile justice that explicitly incorporate considerations of neurological difference into court practice. In Canada, the diversion of delinquent autistic youth away from formal processing has fostered community-based strategies for them under state authority in its place. US policies rely more heavily on formal responses, often employing detention in juvenile custody facilities. These differing approaches profoundly affect how crucial services such as education are delivered to youth on the autism spectrum. Building on a rigorous exploration of how assessment tools, rehabilitation programs, and community re-entry plans differ between the two countries, Law and Neurodiversity offers a much-needed comparative analysis of autism and juvenile justice policies on both sides of the forty-ninth parallel. (shrink)

As the diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) becomes more prevalent in society and an autistic culture develops and moves forward, colleges and universities are in the position of supporting students with similar differences but opposing views about how to address those differences. The autism acceptance movement emphasizes the need for change by educational institutions and society at large, while the medical model perspective seeks to understand cause and believes autistic people need treatment and even need to be cured of (...) autism. This article uses a disability identity development model to explore the potential impact of autism acceptance and medical model perspectives at different stages of development. Postsecondary program elements that emphasize neurodiversity, understanding strengths, and the building of academic strategies for success that support students who are in the process of identity development are recommended. (shrink)

-/- It is commonly believed that the etiology of autism is at least partly explained through genetics. Given the complexity of autism and the variability of the autistic phenotype, genetic research and counseling in this field are also complex and associated with specific ethical questions. Although the ethics of autism genetics, especially with regard to reproductive choices, has been widely discussed on the public fora, an in depth philosophical or bioethical reflection on all aspects of the theme seems to be (...) missing. With this literature review we wanted to map the basic questions and answers that exist in the bioethical literature on autism genetics, research, counseling and reproduction, and provide suggestions as to how the discussion can proceed. We found 19 papers that fitted the description of “bioethics literature focusing on autism genetics,” and analyzed their content to distill arguments and themes. We concluded that because of the complexity of autism, and the uncertainty with regard to its status, more ethical reflection is needed before definite conclusions and recommendations can be drawn. Moreover, there is a dearth of bioethical empirical studies querying the opinions of all parties, including people with autism themselves. Such empirical bioethical studies should be urgently done before bioethical conclusions regarding the aims and desirability of research into autism genes can be done. Also, fundamental philosophical reflection on concepts of disease should accompany research into the etiology of autism. © 2016 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. (shrink)