Another essay turned in for a requirement in school. These arguments could be applied to other groups of people, such as the blind and deaf populations, and though I've never been diagnosed with the disorder this paper was written about, I can say with honesty that I've experienced the same things described below when people have prevented me from stimming.
***
September 21, 2016.
A 4 year old child stands alone in a room, flapping his arms as if he’s flying. The door is opened, and an adult walks in and says, “Quiet hands, Andrew.” When the child ignores her prompt, the woman comes to him, holds his hands to his sides for a count of three, and then turns her back on him, ignoring him when he tries to get her attention. He doesn’t resume the flapping, even after she leaves the room. He knows he will be punished if he does. He resists his tears, resists the signals of his body telling him to move. He knows that to move would take from him the things he enjoys, like the air plane his father gave him for his birthday, and the train set given to him by his mother. This child, then, forced into stillness, tells himself, “I must suffer, because it pleases the others.”
Autistic brains are wired differently than someone who develops in a typical way. That is undeniable scientific fact, backed up by MRI scans and studies. Obviously, this different wiring causes actions and reactions that are typical to the person affected, but atypical for a non-autistic person. When changing behavior, it is important to be sure, through communication with the child if at all possible, and through observation, that the behavior is not in fact serving a purpose and that you wouldn’t be better served by first changing the child’s surroundings in some way. Often, autistic people have various sensory difficulties and compensate by unusual behavior to try to handle them. For example, a child who finds a certain situation overwhelming may resort to any number of repetitive actions to try to manage the information being thrown at them. These repetitive actions are stimming, and in this situation could save a child from going into a meltdown (a loss of control resulting from internal or external overload.) A child doesn’t enjoy having a meltdown and neither do those who are around them. It won’t be good for your child’s future if they’re spending so much time in a meltdown because of being unable to handle overload that they lose opportunities to learn, play and be a child. Suppression of stimming would do exactly that, limit your child’s resources to handle stress and increase their risk of chronic stress-related disorders later in life. Is this the future you want for your already disadvantaged child?
Stimming is a form of self-expression. In America, we are given the freedom of expression. While certain things are frowned upon for obvious reasons, for example cursing because it implies that the person is uneducated, stimming is frowned upon for no other reason than looking odd. When the people who stare are asked why they do this, they’ll most likely give an answer such as, “well, my child doesn’t do that.” But just as the taboo on cursing is falling away, so too should the one on stimming. Autistic children already have enough difficulty getting into conversation, and taking away their stims closes one of the few doors they have to interacting with the world. It’s just like telling a non-autistic person to not smile when they’re happy, or to not laugh when they find something funny. It makes no sense and would probably, over time, crush their spirit.
Inhibition of stimming leads to inhibition of learning and focus. An autistic child who is unable to give much of their attention to learning, like any other child, will suffer in that part of their life as a result. Stop reading this for a moment and put yourself in this situation: you’re in school and you have an itch that you’re told not to scratch. The people who told you not to scratch it don’t care about how it makes you feel; their only concern is that scratching that itch will keep you from learning. Ask yourself, “What would inhibit my learning more, scratching the itch or not scratching the itch? If stimming for autistic people is like an itch, who are we to tell them to put themselves through the struggle of not scratching their itch?”
In conclusion, the stimming of autistic children and adults should not be suppressed for the following reasons: Stimming could save an autistic child or adult from a total loss of control resulting from overwhelm and serve as a form of self-expression for people who are disadvantaged in social situations. Suppression of non-harmful stims can inhibit focus and learning, and is like telling someone never to scratch their itches. Clearly, harmful stims should not be let go on, but in that case a replacement for the harmful stim should be found. But non-harmful stimming is natural for these people and should be supported whenever possible. It’s time the non-autistic population opened their eyes to the ‘why’ behind the actions of their autistic coworkers, classmates, children, friends, and so on, instead of just slapping a bandage on the action and calling it ‘a bad behavior’. We are the ones whose behavior needs to be corrected. I think if we did what we do to autistic children to their non-autistic counterparts, we’d be getting lawsuits left and right from angry parents and traumatized children as adults. The change needs to be on us, not them, and that change starts with the lifted ban on stimming. Thank you for reading.