Not Neurodiversity, but Neuroharmony

Peter Vermuelen

Source: Autism in Context

This post is part 2 of a series of interviews with people working in European neurodiversity advocacy in response to a damning UN report on disability in the Netherlands.

Peter Vermeulen is a leading expert in European disability rights, known for his long-time work in autism education and support, particularly through his organization, Autism in Context. He has written extensively and lectured around the world about his theories of "neuroharmony," which is an acceptance and advocation for neurodivergent differences in order to achieve full societal inclusion.

Erik: I want to begin going over some main differences between the United States and Europe in terms of disability. I see Europe as perhaps focused more on welfare and the United States on civil rights. You've worked extensively in both. What are your reflections on that, and do you see those ideas ever converging?

Peter: Well, for me, civil rights are inherently about human rights. And isn't the most fundamental human right the chance at a good and happy life? But I think that goes beyond just providing support; it means being fully included in society. That's where I see a potential gap on both sides of the Atlantic.

Erik: What do you see as missing in each side's approach?

Peter: In the United States, there's a strong emphasis on therapies like ABA [applied behavior analysis] to teach people skills to fit in. In Europe, maybe we're sometimes too focused on just ensuring someone is happy, without necessarily pushing for that deeper societal inclusion. I believe we need to combine those two, because, as I see it, a big part of happiness comes from feeling your life is meaningful because you're contributing something others need. And that simply isn't possible if you're not truly part of society.

Erik: You mentioned working with ambassadors for autism. That resonates with the UN Convention's principle of "Nothing about us, without us," doesn't it?

Peter: That principle is central to my work now. Here in Belgium, through our inclusion embassy, we work hand-in-hand with autistic ambassadors. It's all about co-creation, and it aligns perfectly with the UN Convention's emphasis on involving persons with disabilities in decisions that affect them. This collaborative approach isn't just here in Belgium; it's how I work in the Netherlands and the United States, as well. I really feel that this "us versus them" mentality needs to go. When we talk about civil rights, it's not about “us versus them” but about all of us being citizens with the same rights.

Erik: It’s interesting that you bring up the civil rights aspect. You mentioned that Belgium doesn't have specific disability legislation like the United States has the Americans with Disabilities Act because nondiscrimination is part of your constitutional law.

Peter: Unfortunately, those legal protections don't always translate into real-world change and are sometimes just lip service. That's why the focus needs to shift from a “diagnosis" or a “handicap” to just asking, "What do you need?”

Erik: You also mentioned a "citizenship model," or "burgerschapsmodel" in Dutch or “the citizenship model” in English. The citizen's model includes:

1. Quality of life: a person’s ability to independently shape and direct their life across all areas. In this process, the "normal" is implemented as much as possible, while the "exceptional" is offered as a complement.
2. Emancipation: focuses on optimizing the citizen's development and striving for an equal position within society.
3. Support: involves implementing resources and strategies aimed at promoting development, enhancing well-being and interests, and strengthening the citizen's functioning ability in society.
4. Empowerment: is a process of reinforcement in which individuals, organizations, and communities gain control over their own situation and environment.

Peter: The citizenship model is actually from the Netherlands and takes us a step beyond just thinking about the medical or social aspects of disability. It starts with the idea that individuals with disabilities are citizens, just like everyone else, with both rights and responsibilities. The right to an accessible environment is absolutely necessary if they are to have the same opportunities. And the responsibility part means recognizing that people can contribute to society in various ways when given the chance. It really helps reframe the debate in a broader sense.

Erik: Thinking about the different societal attitudes you've seen, how important do you think a shift in mindset is for the UN Convention's goals for disability to be truly realized?

Peter: Laws and conventions like the UN Convention provide the crucial framework, but real inclusion and the enjoyment of rights on a day-to-day basis depend so much on how people think about and interact with individuals with disabilities. The UN Convention envisions a society that values diversity and treats everyone with dignity and respect. Without a corresponding change in hearts and minds, even the best laws will only go so far.

Neurodiversity Essential Reads

Why Your Teams Aren't Clicking: The Neurodiversity Factor

Beyond Awareness and Inclusion: Declaring NeuroDignity

Erik: I’ve noticed that how one society accepts autistic individuals differs from another. For example, in New Jersey, where my son is, people see him talking to himself and immediately understand that he is autistic and adjust their response, whereas, in Amsterdam, his self-talk generally leads to negative reactions. Given your extensive research, what are your conclusions on these cultural differences in attitude?

Peter: While we have legal frameworks like the Americans with Disabilities Act in the United States and antidiscrimination laws in places like Belgium and the Netherlands, the day-to-day reality of inclusion really hinges on how society thinks and feels. It's also worth noting that even within a country like the Netherlands, there can be challenges. I’ve seen discussions and even documentaries, like My Journey for Education, highlighting how the education system, for example, doesn't always embrace neurodiversity and can sometimes feel exclusionary. This all ties back to the core aims of neuroharmony, which emphasizes the importance of changing societal attitudes to ensure full participation for everyone.