I was very much involved in autism advocacy in the late 1990s. Autism awareness drastically differed then from what exists now. And so was the reality in which I lived absent the needed services and supports for community living as compared to now.
Neurodiversity is a neologism popularized in the late 1990s by Australian sociologist Judy Singer and American journalist Harvey Blume to refer to variation in the human brain regarding sociability, learning, attention, mood and other mental functions in a non-pathological sense. Wikipedia
Systems communicate internally, within their policies and practices and as politicians have demanded as originally designed by means of the pathologists. The use of language uses classifications so as to determine who will be helped. Support services have their check boxes that if they do not fill out can’t be funded or if they are audited may find themselves in trouble if they fail to check those boxes. Absent this language exists no formal support system because supports are defined by needs based upon the pathologists and the politicians that entice the regulations and then on into the service system policies for intake.
It’s not fair, it’s not anywhere universally dignified nor is it honoring individuals in who it is they are and choose to think. In fact it is common for law to ensure actions and behaviors of mandated entities not only harbor but progress an individuals dignity. Systemic language is indifferent when it comes to those check boxes and this can result or even require in face of the human mind of another, a harsh indifference and apparent horrible pathology in thinking itself. Yes I said it. Pathology can be quite pathological and I’d even add emotionally cruel and that which lacks apparent empathy in formal settings.
Who would in their right mind tell someone to their face you’re defective in anyway. Yet that information which depersonalizes born difference as something pathological can easily be found online as evidence of this. If it were not expressions of science but in most any other inferior modality of expression, it could be easily defined and within society agreed as hate speech.
There has been a growing equilibrium toward that of social justice and the honoring of the individuals right to human dignity. The AMA Journal of Ethics as an example had allowed the authorship of an article which finds scientific positives concerning those who have opposed the pathological frameworks.
..there lies a piece of metal that has been secured since 1889 in an environmentally controlled chamber under three bell jars. It represents the world standard for the kilogram, and all other kilo measurements around the world must be compared and calibrated to this one prototype. There is no such standard for the human brain.The Myth of the Normal Brain: Embracing Neurodiversity by Thomas Armstrong, PhD
The human mind is undeniably scientifically the result of the predominately neurological manifestation. It is in of itself concrete evidence that human thoughts and feelings do exist as a phenomenon. This substance known as the neuronal and biological brain has feelings. So it would be beyond simple theory but have concrete basis that communication from the pathologists of this world can and may often alter directly or indirectly in their intellectual grander and center of the universe definitions of “normal” the very subjects they profess to know so much about.
I will conclude in saying that the science of the reality which concerns the psychopathology of the pathologist is still yet quite a mystery. They are equally as diverse. The more they are readily influenced by one another the more intellectual compartmentalization appears to take place between them- as can be seen in peer reviewed social behaviors. This can be found within the very scope of their journals that too influence the collective consciousness within the domains of science and it’s participant human species. They do appear to be human as well. There seems to be evidence of this at least.