CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 8Disability Rights and RepresentationAutism Spectrum Disorder ResearchFamily and Disability Support Research

Autistic Adult and Non-Autistic Parent Advocates: Bridging the Divide

Open access
Rottier, Helen, Gernsbacher, Morton Ann·2020·Disability Alliances and Allies
DOI 10.1108/s1479-354720200000012011

Published version of a preprint

Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

Abstract Purpose: Due to the developmental nature of autism, which is often diagnosed in preschool or elementary school-aged children, non-autistic parents of autistic children typically play a prominent role in autism advocacy. However, as autistic children become adults and adult diagnoses of autism continue to rise, autistic adults have played a more prominent role in advocacy. The purpose of this chapter is to explore the histories of adult and non-autistic parent advocacy in the United States and to examine the points of divergence and convergence. Approach: Because of their different perspectives and experiences, advocacy by autistic adults and non-autistic parents can have distinctive goals and conflicting priorities. Therefore, the approach we take in the current chapter is a collaboration between an autistic adult and a non-autistic parent, both of whom are research scholars. Findings: The authors explore the divergence of goals and discourse between autistic self-advocates and non-autistic parent advocates and offer three principles for building future alliances to bridge the divide between autistic adults and non-autistic parents. Implications: The chapter ends with optimism that US national priorities can bridge previous gulfs, creating space for autistic adult and non-autistic parent advocates to work together in establishing policies and practices that improve life for autistic people and their families and communities.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1108/s1479-354720200000012011

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • That change is reflected in advocacy, in the media and public debate, and in arguments about the nature of autism science itself.

    “That change is reflected in advocacy (e.g. Ne’eman & Bascom, 2020; Rottier & Gernsbacher, 2020), in the media and public debate (e.g. Silberman, 2015), and in arguments about the nature of autism science itself (e.g. Milton, 2014a; Pellicano, 2020; Raymaker, 2020).”

    From Annual Research Review: Shifting from ‘normal science’ to neurodiversity in autism science (2022) · cites this paper as Rottier & Gernsbacher, 2020

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 46 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Rottier, H., & Gernsbacher, M. A.
ORCID
Venue
Disability Alliances and Allies
Publisher
Emerald Publishing Limited
Published
2020-11-09
Pages
155-166
DOI
10.1108/s1479-354720200000012011
OpenAlex
W3095147563
Cited by
8
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1
FWCI
3.15
Type
book chapter
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Emerald Group Publishing Limited eBooks (publishedVersion)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • PsyArXiv (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Safety Research › Disability Rights and Representation
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Autism Spectrum Disorder Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Family and Disability Support Research
Keywords
autism advocacy, autistic adults, parental advocacy, adult autism diagnosis, autism policy, family support

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review