Abstract:
Currently, much of the autism literature supports the notion that Pervasive Developmental
Disorder (PDD) is a deviation from what is considered "normal" and, accordingly, that it is in
need of early remediation. This thesis explored alternative constructions of autism and pathology
by drawing on theorists from other disciplines, such as cultural studies (Deleuze & Guattari,
1987, 1965, 1972, 1975,1980, 2003), critical psychology (Parker, 1995, 2002, 2005, 2007),
disability studies (Danforth,1997, 1999, 2000; Skrtic, 1995, 1996) and anti-psychiatry (Basaglia,
1987).
In an attempt to show how our accounts of the world encompass constructions rooted in
language and our own histories of thinking about topics that interest us, this research took an
autoethnographic approach to understanding autism discourse. Instead of denying the
researcher's existence and personal investment in the research, the author attempted to implicate
"the self in the research by acknowledging her own assumptions, biases and ideologies about
autism discourse and practice. Thus, tensions between the self and other, personal and political
become woven into the fabric, creating a personal, subjective, and partial account of the
phenomenon.
This research was intended to explicate and interrogate some of the taken-for-granted Truths
which guide our practices with people with autism. This alternative critical framework focused
on understanding autism as a discourse and explored the way these dominant autism
constructions function in society. Furthermore, positioning "the self in the research was meant
to illustrate the fundamental need for self-reflective practice in the social sciences.
