If you’re disabled, you have probably had to endure the process of proving your disability, usually to receive some form of support such as personal independence payments. If you’ve ever had to fill out one of these forms, amidst the obviousness of knowing you’re disabled, you’ll know exactly what I mean.
“Describe in precise detail the way your disability effects you”
“This depends weather you’re asking me at the moment or generally. In fact, the vast amount of sensory inputs I receive on a day to day basis mean my disability effects me differently at different times. Filling out this form for example can cause vast amounts of anxiety, and will likely affect me for the next few days, with the concern about the effect my answers will have. I find being asked for a nuanced view of my autism, which focuses solely on the negatives, quite reductionist. In order to deal with those emotions I will likely set a routine for myself and listen to music, which will allow me to comprehend how I’m feeling without having to understand all the ways autism has affected me…I hope that answers your question”
Okay…that’s the answer I dream of giving
This is how my mind genuinely jumps to answering questions like this: Why shouldn’t it? – a complicated answer for a non-specific question. After all, autism determines how I perceive absolutely everything and I’d personally argue that ‘absolutely everything’ is quite a wide spectrum to draw on when composing an opinion.
By answering questions in this way, I’d be using a form of ‘malicious compliance‘, whereby my analytical (and tongue in cheek) answer satarises the entire process, whilst actually demonstrating the way I see the world.
Most people, if they are asked to describe what thier day to day experiences look like will draw on memory and what they know about the world to sort all thier experiences into a few set categories, which they would then give a general overview of. Fair enough!
In this scenario they’re using, top down thinking i.e mental shortcuts to filter information, selecting what they feel is useful and confirming what they already assume. In a fast moving medical environment, a doctor will have little time to contemplate the complexities of who requires medical attention, and will base thier decisions on a range of ‘heuristic’ factors which allow them to make rapid decisions. On a less positive note, other aspects of top down thinking are ideology, law and order, the rules – those are not bad things in and of themselves, but can be ways for people to bypass the subtleties of problems and make biased assumptions based on how they already perceive the world.
By contrast Bottom-Up thinking is a details and analysis first way of thought. I’ve written before about ‘information overload’ and how I can become overwhelmed, yet also thrive off of sensory stimulants.
“Based on this comparison, it is logical to conclude, this act of processing multiple sensory data for an autistic person, becomes frontrunner to the act of logically formulating a memory-driven hypothesis. Wherein the typical-minded person is taking in the concept before the details, based on collective memories, the autistic mind, due to a bombardment of sensory cues, is taking in the details before the concept. This idea is a definer of the bottom-up process approach to thinking. An approach that is indispensable to innovative thinking“Samantha Craft, The innovative thinking style of the Aspergers mind
When I’m writing an opinion piece on how I see the world as an autistic person; I trawl through multiple sources and articles, soaking in the detail, looking for connections and using them to build up a distinct picture of the issue in my head. Data analysis is another issue where that in-depth details-first analysis is needed. A person writing a song or a book may have some preconcieved concepts or influences, but they will be multifarious and the final product will still be a new invention created from disparate elements and reflecting the persona of the writer.
Tradition and ‘Standard Practice’
So, while the answers that I have fantasied given on “proving your disability” forms, are malicious compliance, they’re also a demonstration of how I see the world at large…
One of the key experiences autistic people have to go through is proving thier disability. This includes through needs assessment, but also in day to day life where it can be difficult for others to understand how your needs are different from theirs – ‘you don’t look autistic’
“Since the original definition of ASDs, those on the spectrum and their families have been have been challenged by stereotypes. The numerous reasons for this associated stigma include the individualized nature of the syndrome, the associated different speech and actions, and the lack of understanding in its physical basis”Danielle N. Martin, East Carolina University
Needs assessments are a tick-box excersise where the individual must fullfill a set of criteria that has been pre-determined. The logic behind them is a very much a top down form of thinking, based off of what has already been assumed about the way autistic individuals think and act. An individuals experience or neuro-diversity is considered less important.
This mindset spans institutions. Any organisation that wishes to produce creative content will likely come up against a range of questions about the effect said content could have, usually to preserve an image of some sort. There’s nothing necessarily wrong with that, and it is standard editorial practice.
Its also worth pointing out that obsession with preconcieved ideas and biases often manifests in more sinister ways, such as cases where organisations turn down application forms of disabled applicants, based on preconceptions about thier ability.
I’m not advocating that you all fill out your PIP forms with essays on the state of how disabled people are treated, or that you use your next employee feedback forms to advocate for an overhaul of the existing economic order. There are always channels through which you can express yourselves creatively. Still, its important to realise that bottom-up thinking is a cornerstone of creativity, and besides – its always fun to think about malicious compliance.
An Atypical Perspective
Listen to those with something to say: Bottom-up is also a method of organising. Staying on autism, its important to listen to what autistic people say about thier experiences, and give them the opportunity to express themselves, without fear of economic reprisals. This will allow us to move away from ‘one size fits all’ solutions and assumptions about what autistic people need and towards one which creates disability-friendly systems. The same applies to questions of discrimination in race, sexuality, identity etc.
Ask ‘what can be achieved?’ more: This applies at an individual and orginisational level. Anyone or any institution looking to reach into areas such as data and new media may be held back by traditionalism or ‘standard practice’. A public service that aims to help those in need may benefit from technology to understand its impact. For instance, research bodies in the science or innovation sectors could benefit from podcasts and videos telling its story’s – developing these requires people to look beyond notions of how things have been done in the past, asking ‘what can be achieved?’
Brainstorming and networking: ‘Brainstorming’ is one of the most common examples of Bottom-Up thinking – forcing people to look at the bigger picture. If you’re trying to take a holistic view on a problem like homelessness, start with basic causes and branch out from there. Same applies to networking – an example of a scheme which started small and is now becoming widespread is ‘disability confident’. Its not perfect for different reasons – but its a step towards creating societies which accept disabled people, moving away from the strict individualism of ‘here are our disability guidelines’. These are effective ways of taking a well rounded view of complex problems.