Nevrorazlični beremo 6.
Diskurzi* o avtizmu so različni.
* diskurz je okvir, prizmatični drobec kulture, način govora, ki je način razmišljanja (to je tudi način nerazmišljanja).
Avtizem, razvojno oviranost, je mogoče obravnavati s stališča medicinskega modela oviranosti ali z nove perspektive imenovane nevrorazličnost (nevroraznolikost), ki jo je ustvarila avtistična skupnost in je v skladu s socialnim modelom.
Foucault
je diskurz dojemal kot ločeno telo družbenega znanja (McHoul in Grace 1993). Če
so drugi namigovali, da je diskurz zgolj jezik, ki ima temeljne skrite pomene,
je Foucault razumeval, da diskurz dejansko nadomesti jezik (Dreyfus in Rabinow
1982; McHoul in Grace 1993). Jezik jezikoslovci mislijo (dojemajo) kot na
sistem predstavljanja, sistem, kjer njegovi elementi predstavljajo nekaj
(McHoul in Grace 1993). Foucault trdi, da je diskurz, ki je nadomestil jezik,
resnično sredstvo, s katerim nekaj vemo (McHoul in Grace, 1993). Zato diskurz ljudem dejansko nekaj naredi; vpliva
nanje.
Foucault je bil prepričan, da je splošna funkcija
znanstvenega diskurza ustvarjanje ljudi kot predmetov preučevanja z namenom
pridobiti znanje o naravi človeštva (Smart 2002). Kakšen je bil diskurz, pa je
bilo odvisno od zgodovinske dobe, v kateri se je diskurz pojavil.
Za Foucaulta ni dovolj zgolj razumevanje diskurza, da bi razumeli, kako se oblikujeta človek in človeštvo; človek je moral razumeti zgodovino, zato, ker v določenih zgodovinskih obdobjih prevladujejo različni politični režimi, ki omogočajo nastanek določenih diskurzov (Foucault 1980, 1995).
Asperger’s Children: The Origins of Autism in Nazi Vienna
What is the difference between a butterfly and a fly? “The butterfly does not grow up in the room as the fly does,” said Harro. This was his intelligence test. Harro chose to talk about the fly: It has a completely different development!
The fly mother lays many, many eggs in a gap in the floorboards and then a few days later the maggots crawl out. I have read this once in a book, where the floor talks —I could die laughing when I think of it—what is looking out of this little tub? A giant head with a tiny body and a trunk like an elephant?
And then a few days later they cocoon themselves in and then suddenly there are some dear little flies crawling out. Harro and other children were growing up in a room, too, cocooned at Hans Asperger’s Curative Education Clinic at the University of Vienna Children’s Hospital. Like the curiously shaped larvae, they stuck out.
Differences such as theirs had become more objectionable in the Third Reich, and the doctors and nurses on the ward were working to develop the children. Asperger held that with proper “understanding, love and guidance” they could find “their place in the organism of the social community.”
Asperger said he valued the unique characters of the children he treated, tailoring his approach to their individual needs. He had a holistic approach. Children at the elegant and open Widerhofer Pavilion engaged in a range of activities, from sports to drama to music.
Asperger sat with the children, his tall frame hunched over to connect with them at their level. With his intent gaze, he noted all realms of their behavior in his postdoctoral thesis. Harro was one of the case studies for his new diagnosis: autistic psychopathy. Harro’s school had referred the boy to Asperger’s Curative Education Clinic for evaluation.
Its report stated that the eight and a half year old seldom did as he was told. Harro talked back, did not do his homework, and complained his lessons were “far too stupid.” He was ridiculed by his classmates, and hit and injured other boys over petty issues. Harro was even said to crawl on all fours during lessons and commit “homosexual acts.”
His teachers maintained that the boy could succeed “if he wanted to.” But Harro had failed every subject and was repeating a grade. He was difficult to test, often uncooperative and unsuccessful in conventional tasks. In certain areas, Harro demonstrated skills beyond his age. With math, for example, he came to solutions in his own way. What is 47 minus 15? 32 —“either add 3 and also add 3 to that which should be taken away, or first take away 7 and then 8.” Asperger saw such “exceptional originality” as evidence of “special abilities” in many boys.
The problem, as Asperger saw it, was that Harro did not have social feeling. Asperger said Harro went his own way in a group, and “never became warm, trusting or cheerful” in the ward. Harro resisted the “important social habits of daily life.” He did not play with other children, but spent much of his time reading in a corner, indifferent. When teased, Asperger held that Harro “lacked any sense of humor.” He had a “lost gaze” and “few facial expressions and gestures.”
Asperger decided that Harro demonstrated autistic psychopathy. But because of his intelligence, Harro was on the “favorable” end of the autistic “range.” That meant he was capable of remediation and joining the community. Children such as Harro could be taught “social integration” and be of “social value” in specialized technical professions.
What these promising children needed, Asperger wrote, was individualized care to nurture their cognitive and emotional growth. He sympathized with their challenges, advocated their potential, and celebrated their uniqueness. This is the benevolent image of Asperger today. But it represents only one side of Asperger’s work. While Asperger did support children he believed to be teachable, defending their disabilities, he was dismissive about those he believed to be more disabled. Deprecatory pronouncements could be a death sentence in the Third Reich. And in fact, some of Asperger’s judgments were death sentences.
Ni komentarjev: