Author: Jane Bringolf

Ableism in planning

Attempts to avoid catching COVID caused people to change their behaviour in many ways. Working from home and not being able to travel meant more people walked in their local neighbourhood. Open space was at a premium. This led to pop up cafes and parklets and a few more planter boxes to make places more appealing. Planners said “we can’t go back to the way things were”. In that case says Lisa Stafford, we have to discuss ableism in planning.

“Pop-up cafes and parklets used tape barriers and step-up platforms, while planter boxes or pallet seating were positioned to create what seemed like another obstacle course in getting about.”

A group of people, some wearing face masks, are crossing the road. They are walking a safe distance apart.

Lisa Safford says that ableism is an insidious, unspoken prejudice that favours an idealistic view of an “able body”. It is not just having negative views of people with disability, it is a way of thinking about bodies that rejects difference. It’s thinking that “normal” is a real thing.

Ableism is entrenched in walkability metrics such as walking speed, our ideas of liveability, and approaches to older people. Stafford claims that ableism is rampant in planning and design decisions. The misinformed catch cry is that it’s only for a small portion of the population.

“Time and again I have heard universal design omitted in the provision of social infrastructure, due to budget shortfalls or inclusivity being too hard…”

A child wearing a pink jacket sits on a stone wall. A pair of crutches are propped up next to her. They have red and blue handles. Footpaths are key for children.

Let’s talk about ableism

First, we do not lack literature, guides and other tools on the topics of disability, diversity, equity and inclusion. Planners need to talk about the issues with each other, welcome disabled planners and connect with disability communities and their expertise. Do some real co-design processes.

Ableism is just one lens and individual experience ableism and discrimination in different ways. Embracing diversity is critical for people with disability who are Indigenous, female, low income and LGBTIQA+

Planning can make social change – in shapes lives and livelihoods. If we want real change we must confront ableism and the idea of “normal” or “average”. The Australian Bureau of Statistics counts people with disability (18%) separately from people with a long term health condition that limits their daily activities (22%). It’s not a small portion of the population.

The title of Stafford’s book chapter is, Planners, We Need to Talk about Ableism. The chapter is open access in Disability Justice and Urban Planning.

Is a smart home a real home?

The sense of home is very personal, and as we age it is likely to become more personal as we spend more time at home. Younger people who build brand new homes are increasingly embracing smart technology. For older people, smart technology, especially that which collects data, disrupts the sense of home. So, from the lived experience perspective of older people, is a smart home a real home?

Older people want to stay in their own home. It is also the best place for people to manage the consequences of ageing such as dementia and physical conditions.

A living room with two couches and bookcase overlaid with a graphic of a smartphone with radiating lines indicating ambient monitoring of a smart home,

To age successfully and safely at home often means embracing a range of assistive technologies. They can be as simple as a raised toilet seat and using colour contrasts for interior design. But accepting these technologies is another thing. Grab bars are shunned because of the link with being disabled.

Assistive technologies impact on one’s sense of self – one’s identity. Assistive devices used outside the home feel particularly stigmatising and in too many cases these devices are abandoned. So can the same be said of digital assistive technology especially if it is monitoring your every move?

Tech and older people

Smart home technology in the age-related literature is more than a remote control for the window blinds. It is technology that collects monitoring data through sensors and wearables. The aim is to keep the person safe and improve their wellbeing. But who wants to have their life documented in a database?

A review of older people and the use of smart home technology looked at the issue of acceptance and use. The researchers wanted to find a way to make these technologies more acceptable to older people. They found that issues are not related to accessibility or usefulness but to an invasion of privacy and lack of human interaction.

Human-centred design solutions that take account of a person’s sense of familiarity and privacy at home could help overcome resistance. The researchers provide more detail about their research and the ethics of home monitoring devices.

A diagram of a two storey house with indications of the different types of smart technology that can be used and operated with a mobile phone.

The title of the article is, The smart home, a true home? How new technologies disrupt the experience of home for older persons.

From the abstract

Smart home technologies can support older persons to age in place, but adoption remains low in this age group. One reason is that they are not accustomed to having a home that is technologically enhanced. In this article, we focus on the older persons’ lived experience of “home” and show how this technology potentially disrupts it.

Humans rely on their physical body and they make decisions based on their perceptions of their physical body without the intervention of technologies. Smart home technologies potentially make the home seem unfamiliar and exposed.

By paying attention to the way smart home technology can disrupt the experience of home, the question of ethical use is brought into the frame. The design of these technologies has an important role to play in acceptance by older people.

Disability messaging guide

The Commons Social Change Library has a new guide for disability messaging. The guide has tips based on research which shows effective ways of building public support. The document was led by a steering committee of people with disability and messaging experts.

The guide is supported by Disability Action Network Australia (DANA), Centre for Australian Progress and Common Cause Australia. Access via The Commons Social Change Library or download in PDF.

Website banner for the disability messaging guide. Dark blue background with white text surrounded by a narrow yellow border.

Key content

The guide begins with a note about language and why they prefer the term “disabled people”. The introduction covers the messaging principles such as the audience and speaking from the frame of experience. The overarching themes for talking about disability are self-determination and diversity. This is followed by the 7 top tips.

  1. Story structure
  2. Design Frame
  3. Strengths language
  4. Our story, not theirs
  5. Bring NDIS back to values and benefits
  6. Build empathy with human stories
  7. Show change is possible
People on a fun run with two older adults being pushed in wheelchairs.

The guide has good examples to explain concepts and how to change old messages into ones that are more attuned to self determination. One example is to talk about being “led by disabled people” rather than “a seat at the table”. The reasoning is to replace inclusion and tokenism with self determination.

Another example is making passive sentences active. Rather than talk about how disabled people experience discrimination, say who is discriminating. And people like to be presented with solutions rather than problems so focus on these. 

The title is By Us, For Us: Disability Messaging Guide.

Disability organisations as social participation

Clubs and societies bring together members with a shared interest which also provides a platform for social participation. The same can be said for disability organisations – with some differences. Disability organisations are a hub of social activity, political activism, and a resource of lived experience for planners. A paper from Sweden looks at this concept focusing on rural communities.

Researchers found that interviewees have extensive social lives and that disability organizations act as a platform for many social interactions.

Two women sit under trees in an outdoor cafe. One sitting on a bench seat at a table and the other is using her rollator or wheelie walker as a seat.

Sometimes acquiring a disability such as rheumatism, prompts people to join groups such as the rheumatism association. Some disabilities cause people to leave paid work so this gives them time to channel their energies into these civic organisations. But it doesn’t end there. Members of these organisations also provide valuable lived experience for local authorities in planning.

There are three dimensions to disability organisations: social participation, political action, and a resource of lived experience. Just on the basis of participation, disability organisations provide good value for their government funding.

Protesters at a disability access rally. A woman is sitting in a wheelchair holding a sign saying access for all. She is wearing a blue jacket and wearing sunglasses.

Disability organisations, and the disability sector as a whole, provide inclusive spaces in which to socialise. The strength of inclusive spaces is they facilitate participation on equal terms. On the other hand, disability-specific places are potentially more flexible and adapted to individual needs. Disability organisations are a form of a disability-specific space which form a base for recognition and a political voice.

Living rural with disability

Living with disability in rural areas is viewed as more of a problem than in urban areas. According to the researchers this is a simplification of how people relate to their environment. Rurality and disability are two different concepts which are not complicated when put together.

The article is titled, “I am a very active person”: Disability organizations as platforms for participation in rural Sweden. The link provides an extended abstract and the full paper is available via institutional access.

A rural road with homes on each side. The homes are painted dark red with white windows.

From the abstract

Disability organizations are places for social interactions and for the accumulation of knowledge about disabilities as lived experiences. They also form a platform for dialogues and political influence work in the local community.

Participation means being included in societal activities in a way that suits the individual’s capacities and ambitions. The role of the public sector also enables participation. That’s because, in Sweden, it supports disability organizations and opens up opportunities to influence local planning.

If more support is given and more disability-specific arenas are created, there will be more open arenas for possible participation. What counts as participation must begin with individuals’ own experiences and values of what they appreciate and need in their daily lives.

Mandatory vs non-mandatory

Is there such a thing as non-mandatory when it comes to the Disability Discrimination Act? Access consultant Bryce Tolliday writes a thoughtful piece in Access Insight on this topic. He bemoans the way building certifiers, designers and others who request design changes. This is because, they believe the consultant’s design advice is non-mandatory. They just think it is “nice to have”. However, in the mandatory vs non-mandatory debate, it’s the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA) they should be thinking about.

There is a misunderstanding of the laws affecting new building work as well as the value a good access consultant can bring to the project.

Front page of the Access to Premises Standard.

A mandatory requirement is something you must to do and is non-negotiable. Tolliday argues that it’s not possible to have a non-mandatory outcome under the DDA. That’s because the objects of the law are to eliminate, as far as possible, discrimination on the grounds of disability.

Which law comes first?

It’s the mix of different laws, standards and regulations that confuse people. Some are enacted at a federal level and some are enacted by states and territories. Federal laws always trump state and territory laws.

People who want to press the non-mandatory argument rely on the NCC being the primary building regulation in Australia. But this is not the case. Each state and territory has to adopt the NCC elements into their respective building codes. Consequently, the Commonwealth law, the DDA together withe Disability Standards, becomes the law to follow.

The problem for designers and certifiers is that the DDA does not specify design standards or outcomes in the same way as the NCC. How can one know whether a design feature will discriminate or disadvantage a person with disability? Tolliday’s response is:

If they cannot provide an evidence-based reason demonstrating that disadvantage will not occur then what the access consultant is proposing is a mandatory requirement under the DDA.

A screenshot of part of the Australian Human Rights Commission's overview of disability discrimination.

The outcomes expected by the DDA are not covered by Australian Standards related to disability access. This is due to the minimal requirements of the Standards that do not cover the full diversity of disability.

Case study confirms what’s mandatory

In the case of Ryan v the Sunshine Coast Hospital and Health Service the mandatory requirements went beyond the NCC, the Premises Standards and AS1428. The late Peter Ryan who was blind brought the action. He argued he was disadvantaged by the design of the Hospital. Shorelines, glare, and luminance contrast were not covered by the NCC but covered by other design guidelines and international standards. Tactile and braille signage for the entire hospital was not covered by the NCC or AS1428 either.

Ryan frequently got lost when he visited as an outpatient. He posthumously won the case and it will cost the Hospital millions to address the 17 breaches of the design.

External view of Sunshine Coast University Hospital.

The Judge found Peter Ryan and been indirectly discriminated against. The Hospital had not considered key features that could impact patients who were blind or had low vision.

The key issue for Tolliday is that the Australian Building Codes Board, which looks after the NCC, has said it will not regulate internal fitouts. Office buildings, for example, are not fitted out at completion, so that is reasonable. However, schools, hotels and hospitals are fitted out at completion.

The title of Bryce Tolliday’s article is Mandatory vs Non-Mandatory published in Access Insight.

Accessible Events Guide

The Queensland Government has produced an accessible events guide for organisers that covers everything from conception through to the finale. As indicated by the title, the focus is specifically on disability access. However, to be accessible and inclusive, other underrepresented groups also need to be considered. So this post has a list of other event guides as well.

“A successful, accessible and inclusive event is one where all attendees have an opportunity to access and experience every aspect of the event and leave with a sense of enjoyment, togetherness and satisfaction.”

Front cover of the Accessible Events Guide showing four seated speakers on a stage and a man standing signing Auslan.

Universal design principles underpin the guide

The guide begins with the usual introductory sections including definitions of disability, and design principles of universal design and co-design. The seven principles of universal design are listed with examples of where each principle might apply. However, these principles are not intended as a checklist. Rather, they are concepts to consider in all designs. The key to designing universally is to co-design with users.

“Consultation is key to the universal design process. Without it, designers and creators are limited by their personal experiences and imagination.”

An international group of adults stand behind a big board. It says, Make Things Happen. There are lots of coloured post it notes on the board.

The Communication section covers all the details – everything from Easy English and colour contrast to using CamelCase in social media. The next section of the Guide outlines the practical steps for accessible events – major and minor. It covers indoor and outdoor events from registration through to transport, catering and exiting the event.

Online events

The online environment is good if transport is an issue or the attendee needs to feel safe in a familiar environment such as the office or home. Online events include award ceremonies, seminars, meetings and workshops. Commonly used software is best especially if it has in-built accessibility tools such as captioning. This section of the guide has a case study that explains the key elements of a successful event.

The full title of the guide is, Queensland Government Accessible Events Guide and there is a list of resources at the end.

Accessible Events checklist

Queensland Government Accessible Events checklist is a comprehensive and a great supplement to the guidelines. The checklist has sections on:

  • Event planning for platform and online events
  • Venue and location considerations
  • Getting to the event: transport and parking
  • The event itself: seating, staff, supplies
  • Ending the event
  • Getting feedback afterwards
Image from the Accessible Events Guide showing an older man and woman walking under a canopy of open umbrellas with rainbow colours. The woman has a black guide dog with her.

Other guides to accessible events

The City of Sydney Inclusive and accessible event guidelines includes information on why events should be inclusive. It has information on the different types of disability people experience. It has four sections covering indoor and outdoor events and a set of checklists:

  • Accessible venues and spaces
  • Opportunities for inclusive participation
  • Accessible materials and information
  • Staff awareness and attitudes
Front cover of City of Sydney guidelines.

The Victorian Government has an accessible event guideline and checklist which is downloadable in Word. However this is looking a little dated. The Brisbane City Council has a webpage with basic information which is a good place to start. 

The New South Wales Government has an Event Starter Guide webpage which includes a section on accessibility. The guide covers transportation, parking, signage, and communicating access features, and more. The 2023 Toolkit for accessible and inclusive events has a checklist and accessibility symbols. 

It is New Year's Eve on Sydney Harbour. A man is standing in front of people seated. He is audio-describing the harbour and the fireworks.

The Zero Project guidelines are based on real experience of running conferences. The Canadian guide is detailed, and explains the development of the guidelines. 

Front cover of Zero Conference Accessibility Guidelines.

Accessible conferences: Why you should care!

Aerial view of a crowded conference scene where the session has finished and people are standing, sitting and walking about.

A Pulse article posted on Linked In by Nicholas Steenhout covers the basics. His personal experiences have made him acutely aware of how the little details count for so much. He covers websites, name badges, venue, registration desk, conference rooms, amphitheater, bathrooms, carpets, hallway, dining halls, presentation, cabaret style seating, interpreters, slide designs and font sizes, handouts, social events, and transportation.

Good for a quick grab for the essentials – you never know who you might be missing out on and that means both speakers and delegates. 

Are architectural competitions a good thing?

Architectural “products” involve many stakeholders which makes a complex process even more difficult. So where do architectural competitions fit in and do the winning designs reflect the diversity of society? A group of Austrian researchers checked out 15 competitions with 76 entries to see if they included universal design concepts.

A major finding is that there is room for better consideration of universal design in the early phase of the building process.

Almost all people spend a large part of their lives in a built environment whether their home, their work or leisure activities. Therefore architecture concerns everyone, not just architects and interior designers. An inclusive approach should be a necessity – a non-negotiable principle. But is it?

In the German speaking area of Europe the construction industry is highly regulated. To get attractive and economically viable designs, the competition method has evolved. Competition is an integral part of the the project as well as the tendering process. Once the competition process is over, a new process begins to realise the design. The aim of this method is to provide transparency in decision-making as well as good design.

Researchers found that at the competition stage of the process, universal design was reduced to wheelchair users. Also, while the term “accessibility” is used in documents, it is not reflected in graphic representation. Indeed, many graphics showed barriers to access. Accessibility emphasis, where it existed, was on entrances and sanitary facilities.

Another issue was found in jury statements which focused on specific architecture aspects without addressing diversity or disability. Accessibility is reduced to minimum standards such as the number of designated parking places.

Are competitions a good thing?

The overarching question of this research was whether architectural competitions are a good way to consider the diversity of disability. On a superficial level, organisers and participants deal with some basic access features. However, there is little space in competition entries to flesh out the detail beyond that of wheelchair users.

In summary: “Fundamentally, the term accessibility is considered important, but is very often only used as a superficial buzzword.”

A work table is filled with paper and folders and a woman is cutting a piece of paper with scissors. It looks like a group of people are working on a design.

The title is, The Built Environment and Universal Design: Are Architectural Competitions a Qualified Instrument to a Better Consideration of the Diversity Dimension Impairment? The writing style of the paper indicates that English is not the authors’ first language.

Architecture competitions for universal design

picture of a modern building Norway Opera House. Architecture competitions.

How juries assess universal design in architectural school competitions is critical to the level of innovation that can be expected. Norwegian Leif D Houck gives an excellent analysis of the way competitions are run and improvements for the future.

Houck says the reason to organize an architectural competition is to achieve maximum quality in a project. The idea is not to have a competition to see if anyone manages to comply the regulations, building codes and the competition brief. The idea is to achieve qualities beyond the regulations.

As Houck says, an architectural competition will likely result in different designs and solutions. In addition, the whole process from design through to the building stage has stages where the project has opportunities for improvement.

The title of the article is, How Juries Assess UD in Norwegian Architectural School Competitions. The article was published in Universal Design 2016: Learning from the Past, Designing for the Future H. Petrie et al. (Eds.) © 2016  

The picture is of the Oslo Opera House

Urban planning competitions

People sit around round tables discussing questions. There are four round tables shown in this picture

It’s time for planning competitions to have residents involved in design decisions and planning solutions. A select panel of judges are not looking for the same things. Planning competitions are used as a way to determine alternatives and promote innovative solutions in the early phase of urban planning.

The book  New Approaches, Methods, and Tools in Urban E-Planning, has an interesting chapter that outlines the findings of how e-participation can be implemented in urban planning competitions. You will need institutional access for a free read. The chapter is “Enhancing E-Participation in Urban Planning Competitions”.

From the abstract

Front cover of the book New Approaches methods and Tools in Urban E Planning

This chapter describes how web-based public participation tools are utilized in urban planning competitions. Public opinion is included alongside the expert view given by the jury. This chapter focuses on how public participation can be arranged in competition processes. It shows how the contestants use the information produced, and how it has been utilized in further planning of the area.

Based on two Finnish case studies, web-based tools can augment public participation in the competition process. However, the results indicate that the impact of participation on selecting the winner is weak.

Co-design in research: shifting the power

People with disability are often left out at the beginning of the research process when organisations want research done quickly. This reduces the level of power they have as members of the research team. For co-design in research to be effective, people with disability must be in decision-making positions before research proposals are developed.

People with disability are expected to be involved as researchers and decision-makers in research projects. But co-design methods require respect for the process from the outset.

A man in a blue check shirt is sitting in front of a laptop on a desk and is writing with his left hand in a notebook.

Researchers have to navigate tensions inherent within research institutions when involving people with disability from the beginning of the process. Improving the quality of the research is one of the aims of co-designing with people with disability. It also gives an opportunity to employ people who might not otherwise find a job.

A research team led by Flinders University use a case study to show how to engage with prospective co-designers. They looked at the different factors or conditions that enable or constrain co-design work, and how they relate to each other. The funding of commissioned work has an effect on the internal dynamics and relations within the team. They also found that authority and power can shift and change depending on how these components interact.

Clearly there is more to simply gathering a group of people with disability within a research team and thinking co-design will just happen. Factors such as institutional requirements, and authoritarian hierarchies can have a significant impact on co-design processes.

The title of the article is, Shifting power to people with disability in co-designed research.

People with and without disability need to work together to resist when co-design work is not treated with respect by people or systems.

Two pairs of women sit at a table with paper and pens. One of the pair looks to be explaining something to the other.

From the abstract

This paper explores tensions navigated by researchers and project leaders when involving people with disability as experts in co-design and in the core team. Part of an evaluation aiming to improve paid employment of people with intellectual disability is used to consider this work.

Structural conditions of funding and institutional support were foundational to the co-design. These included accessible practices, core roles for people with disability and resolving ableist conditions.

Power shifts were easily undermined by institutionalised norms that disrespected the co-design contributions. The value of co-designing research was centre to articulating key issues, methodology and analysis.

Co-research with Experts with Disability

The following abstract is from a paper that requires institutional access for a free read.

The title of the paper is Inclusive Co-research with Experts with Disabilities.

Abstract

Existing co-research methods often limit participation and perpetuate exclusion of highly diverse populations. This chapter introduces an approach to co-design research that is inclusive and supports full participation of individuals with unique or diverse needs.

Co-research has moved from the “design for” perspective to the “design with” perspective, and more recently to the “design by” perspective. Design by means that the population most impacted by the design is supported in creating the design.

Inclusive co-design is a mindset that is applied in three ways: appreciating, scaffolding, and keeping (the ASK approach). Appreciating involves recognition of co-researchers as experts in their lived experience. Through scaffolding, co-researchers are supported and given the means to participate fully in the research process.

Keeping gives ownership and builds capacity within the co-researchers and their communities in the research process and outcomes. Each of these three aspects are described in detail, building on our own experience from over one hundred inclusive co-design research activities, to provide guidance and approaches to other researchers who want to engage in inclusive co-design research.

Driveways are part of the footpath

Is the driveway to the shopping centre carpark part of the road or is it part of the footpath? Most people – motorists and pedestrians – don’t realise that driveways are part of the footpath. And what about crossing side streets adjoining main roads? Who should give way to whom?

Sometimes it’s difficult to tell because the visual cues are confusing. If the footpath section has a steep camber towards the roadway it looks like the road. And sometimes there are hazard warning tactile markers where the driveway goes over the footpath. So it looks like the road. Also, the colour of the driveway is often different to the adjoining footpath.

Augustus Brown discusses the issues in his article about continuous footpaths at driveways and side streets. Drivers crossing the footpath to or from a driveway must give way to people walking. Drivers must also give way to people crossing the road when turning at intersections.

To highlight the priority for people walking, footpaths should be designed to give a clear visual cue that drivers need to slow and give way.

Image from the article

A wide driveway uses the same colour concrete as the footpath. It is level and not cambered towards the road. Vehicles must slow to negotiate the short kerb ramp.

Design principles of continuous footpaths

  • Footpaths should be visually uninterrupted at the crossing point
  • Footpath pavement material should be consistent
  • Footpath pavement should remain level at the crossing
  • Narrow kerb ramps should lift crossing vehicles to the height of the footpath

Images from the article

A side street roadway is painted to indicate that pedestrians are on a footway, not a roadway.

Clearly marked continuous footpaths and cycle lanes give priority to both cyclists and pedestrians.

A footpath and cycle lane are side by side and receive the same continuous treatment across a side street.

Brown’s article has several examples of well designed treatments of footpaths across driveways and side streets and some drawings with more information. The title of the article is, Continuous Footpaths at Driveways & Side Streets.

Queensland has a technical guideline for path users and driveways.


Designing with autism in mind

Architects play a critical role in creating environments that are aesthetically pleasing and also sensory-friendly. But how can architects design and organise elements such as acoustics, lighting, colour and space planning to make this possible? A magazine article on designing with autism in mind has some answers.

Architects can design clear circulation paths, minimise clutter and visual distractions. Distinct zones for quiet reflection provides comfort when needed.

A long corridor with blue flooring in a large building with natural light from above and bright paintings on the walls white walls.

The article begins with an overview of some of the current thinking about autism and autistic people. However, there is debate over whether it is a disorder, as in Autism Spectrum Disorder, or just a different way of being.

The article briefly covers acoustics, lighting, colour, and space planning and distribution. There is an image of an autism friendly group home describing the common areas. This information is applicable in any building and the features are welcoming for everyone.

The article concludes with two videos, one featuring an interior designer, and another featuring an architect. The title of the article is Designing for Autistic Users: Creating Inclusive Spaces.

Autism: Is it a disorder?

A young woman sits on a boardwalk next to water. She has her knees drawn up and is resting her head on her arms and knees. It depicts a level of loneliness or sadness. Autism and the social model of disability. People who are neurodiverse often struggle to shed the the idea that they have some kind of disorder. A medical diagnosis is part of the problem – they become a category, a label. This is particularly the case for people with autism. And there are no two people alike. But what they do share in common is a relatively high suicide rate. Why would this be the case?

Richard Woods explores how the social model of disability can be, and should be, applied to this group. But it might not be enough. Negative language is a major barrier to inclusion based on the medical diagnosis label. Woods argues that the social model fails to explain how any disability is experienced by individuals.

Categorisation under a label is limiting and does little to shift community attitudes and improve individuals’ mental health. In conclusion, the paper calls for the “full emancipation of the autistic population”.

The title of the paper is, Exploring how the social model of disability can be reinvigorated: in response to Jonathan Levitt. 

Autism isn’t a disorder

A graphic and logo for Autism Awareness. Autism and the social model of disability. Designing with autism in mind.Neurodiverse advocate Siena Castellon, wrote a book for teenage girls based on her own experiences. In a New Scientist article Siena relates the common misconception that she should look different in some way. Because she doesn’t, most people think that she can’t be autistic. This is not a compliment. You can see more of Siena’s story in the New Scientist article, Autism isn’t a defect – here’s why we should embrace neurodiversity. There are more links in the article for further reading. 

Voices of autism in a book

Front cover of the text book.The autism research field has changed a lot in the last 20 years. We now know the impact the research process itself has on people with autism. With this in mind, a new version of a text book has sections written by autistic contributors from all walks of life. 

There is a separate link to the discussion on how the authors went about including people with the lived experience of autism. This link also gives a short chapter by chapter review of the book’s content.

The title of the book is, Autism: A new introduction to psychological theory and current debate. It’s by Sue Fletcher-Watson and Francesca Happe.