Promotion of Communication Access, Choice, and Agency for Autistic Students

Moving Toward Anti-Ableist Practices in Aphasia Rehabilitation and Research: A Viewpoint

PURPOSE

Ableism is a pervasive set of beliefs that regard nondisabled bodies and minds as ideal and necessary to live a full life. Ableism manifests for people with aphasia as stigma and discrimination based on their language ability. We assert that ableism contributes to decreased quality of life for people with aphasia and should be actively challenged and disrupted by clinicians and researchers in the field.

METHOD

We applied the Health Stigma and Discrimination Framework (HSDF) to outline how stigma and discrimination are perpetuated against people with aphasia on the basis of language ability and their downstream health and social consequences. We presented this framework at the Clinical Aphasiology Conference in 2023 and share themes and challenges that arose from this discussion and from our ongoing learning.

DISCUSSION

Applying the HSDF to aphasia outlined potential sequelae of ableism. We identified preliminary foci of future initiatives aimed at challenging ableist beliefs and practices and means to monitor the effectiveness of such interventions. Furthermore, we draw attention to the seeming tension between anti-ableist practices and traditional language rehabilitation goals. We assert that this tension may be a catalyst for fruitful discourse on how clinicians and researchers can resist ableism while honoring the lived experiences of people with aphasia and their goals for language rehabilitation. These discussions may be facilitated by existing models in disability studies (e.g., the political/relational model).

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians and researchers are well positioned to challenge ableism and minimize the resultant health and social impacts for people living with aphasia. Anti-ableist practices are not antithetical to aphasia rehabilitation and can be thoughtfully integrated into rehabilitation practices and discourse.

Measuring and validating autistic burnout

Researchers have begun to explore the characteristics and risk factors for autistic burnout, but assessment tools are lacking. Our study comprehensively examined and compared the psychometric properties of the unpublished 27-item AASPIRE Autistic Burnout Measure (ABM), and personal and work scales of the Copenhagen Burnout Inventory (CBI) to evaluate their efficacy as screening measures for autistic burnout, with a group of 238 autistic adults. Exploratory factor analyses (EFA) revealed a 4-factor structure for the ABM and a 2-factor structure for the CBI personal scale (CBI-P). Factorial validity and dimensionality were examined with four exploratory models which indicated a unidimensional structure for the ABM with an overarching 'Autistic Burnout' construct, and multidimensional CBI-P structure comprising two subscales and overarching 'Personal Burnout' construct. Other reliability and validity indicators included Spearman correlations, analysis of variance, receiver operating characteristics, sensitivity, specificity, and intra-class correlations (ICC). The ABM and CBI-P were strongly correlated with depression, anxiety, stress, and fatigue. Unexpectedly, correlations between the burnout measures and camouflaging, and wellbeing measures were moderate. Potential overlap between burnout and depression and fatigue was examined through EFA, which supported convergent validity of the ABM and depression measure, while correlations and ICC analyses revealed mixed results. We concluded that the ABM and the CBI-P Emotional Exhaustion subscale were valid preliminary screening tools for autistic burnout. Testing with larger and more diverse autistic samples is required to further examine the psychometric properties of the ABM, and to understand the relationships between autistic burnout and depression, and masking.

A commentary on children's books about autism: What messages do they send about neurodiversity?

The past three decades have seen an exponential increase in the publication of children's books about autism. This increased availability of children's books is exciting because they have the power to promote understanding, acceptance, and appreciation of neurodiversity. However, growing concerns have been raised by both autistic and non-autistic people that some children's books about autism may work against neurodiversity, rather than promoting it. This Commentary discusses the strikingly different ways in which children's books about autism portray key concepts related to neurodiversity, including autistic differences, agency, abilities, and communication. We present concrete examples (including books by autistic authors); highlight the views of autistic and non-autistic parents of autistic children; and discuss how different books may leave readers with different impressions of autism and neurodiversity. Given the vastly different themes that emerge across different books, we conclude that it is important for educators, families, and other members of the autism community to make informed and individualized choices about what books they use for what purpose. We emphasize the need for systematic, high-quality research on children's books about autism, including content analyses and studies that determine what messages these books send to their intended audience: children. It is vital that autistic people continue to shape this conversation, contributing unique insights that inform research priorities and the methodological approaches used to investigate them.