Debate for and against:

Neurodiversity Affirming Practices

When disability is defined by behavior, researchers and clinicians struggle to identify appropriate measures to assess clinical progress. Some choose the reduction or elimination of diagnostic traits, implicitly defining typical appearance as the goal of service provision; this approach often interferes with more meaningful, person-centered goals; causes harm to people with disabilities; and is unnecessary for dealing with traits that are intrinsically harmful or personally distressing, such as self-injury. It has been suggested that disability stakeholders reevaluate outcome measures that seek to eliminate disability-related traits that are stigmatized but not harmful. Using autism and the emergent neurodiversity movement, explore ethical challenges in selecting outcome measures in behaviorally defined disability diagnoses.