Essential Videos
In this video from 1993, Bengt Nirje (one of the founders of the Normalization movement) discusses its origins. You may find it beneficial to use the subtitles (closed captions) function when watching this video. Please note, as this is an old video, some of the terminology used is outdated.
When seeking to adopt a person-centered approach, we maximize the choice and control that a client has over activities. Watch the following video from the Living with Disability Research Centre at La Trobe University, It provides tips for maximizing choice and control within the context of adult intellectual disability services:
The following video (also from La Trobe University) gives examples of support workers attempting to provide support in a person-centered manner. In these scenarios, they are working with individuals who have very impactful communication difficulties. It is important to note that the support workers are not necessarily trying to teach in these scenarios so their approach may slightly differ from what an RBT might do during similar activities. However, it is a good example of how we should seek to maximize choice and control when working with individuals who might have highly impactful physical difficulties and limited communication skills.
In this film from Open Future Learning, Beth Mount explains how Person-Centered work differs from System-Centered work.
Optional Reading
The following article from the Hong Kong Journal of Psychiatry provides an overview of social role valorization.
In the following article Quannah Parker-McGowan discusses the relationship between ABA and the person centered approach.
Emma and Alex are students in a class about intellectual disabilities. After a lecture on Normalization Theory, they’ve been asked to debate the merits of normalization theory. Below is a transcript of a debate between these two (fictional) students:
Emma: You know, I’ve been thinking about normalization theory and Social Role Valorization (SRV) quite a bit since last week, and I have some concerns. It seems to me that they might be at odds with using a neuroaffirmative approach when supporting individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities. By prioritizing assimilation into typical society, normalization theory might disregard the unique neurodivergent characteristics of these individuals. How do you see these two approaches being compatible, considering the emphasis on conformity and assimilation?
Alex: I hear your concerns, Emma. Let’s start by defining our terms. When I think of normalization, I see it as promoting opportunities for individuals with disabilities to have choices, autonomy, and access to the same roles and experiences as their neurotypical peers. It’s not about erasing neurodivergent characteristics, but rather ensuring inclusivity and equal participation. On the other hand, a neuroaffirmative approach appreciates and celebrates the diverse ways individuals engage with the world, acknowledging the value of their unique neurotypes. I believe these two approaches can complement each other.
Emma: I understand your perspective, Alex. But I worry that by focusing on assimilation, normalization theory may inadvertently create pressure for individuals to conform, which can be harmful to their well-being. It might also overlook the cultural and social values of different communities. How can we ensure that individuals with disabilities are not forced into a narrow definition of “ideal” or “typical,” but are instead supported in embracing their authentic selves?
Alex: Those are valid concerns, Emma. In my view, normalization theory is not about erasing differences or forcing conformity. It’s about reducing inequalities and creating opportunities for individuals with disabilities to participate fully in society, based on their goals and preferences. By providing access to education, employment, and leisure activities, we can empower them to lead fulfilling lives while respecting their individuality. While normalization theory does emphasize assimilation, it should also consider the importance of celebrating neurodivergent characteristics and promoting acceptance.
Emma: I appreciate your perspective, Alex. I think it’s crucial to strike a balance between assimilation and embracing neurodivergent characteristics. A neuroaffirmative approach, grounded in acceptance and celebration of diverse neurotypes, can create an environment that supports the unique strengths and abilities of individuals with disabilities without pressuring them to conform. By prioritizing their autonomy and well-being, we can nurture a sense of belonging and self-acceptance.
Alex: You make important points, Emma. I agree that a neuroaffirmative approach is valuable in ensuring the well-being and self-acceptance of individuals with disabilities. However, I believe that normalization theory, when applied appropriately, can provide a framework for reducing systemic barriers and inequalities, as well as promoting inclusion and participation in society. By combining both approaches, we can create an environment that acknowledges and celebrates neurodiversity while providing opportunities for growth and participation.
Emma: I appreciate the points Alex has made about normalization theory and the value it places on providing opportunities for neurodivergent individuals to participate in society. However, as we consider the implications of this theory from a social justice perspective, I believe it is important to critically examine the potential power dynamics at play.
Normalization theory, while aiming to promote social inclusion, often places the burden on neurodivergent individuals to conform and adapt to fit existing societal norms. This emphasis on assimilation can inadvertently perpetuate oppressive systems and reinforce the marginalization of those who do not fit within traditional frameworks.
From a social justice standpoint, we need to challenge the status quo and question why it is the neurodivergent person who must change, rather than society becoming more accommodating and accepting of diverse ways of being. It is crucial to advocate for a society that actively adjusts and embraces different ways of engaging with the world, rather than expecting neurodivergent individuals to conform to preconceived notions of what is deemed valuable or acceptable.
Normalization theory, as it stands, may inadvertently reinforce ableism by prioritizing the assimilation of neurodivergent individuals into mainstream society, often to the detriment of their valid and valuable diverse experiences. By focusing on making neurodivergent individuals more “normal,” we risk erasing their unique perspectives and contributions to society.
Instead, a social justice approach would emphasize inclusivity that values neurodiversity. This means creating environments and systems that actively accommodate and celebrate the diverse needs and experiences of neurodivergent individuals. It requires challenging existing norms, dismantling barriers, and working towards systemic changes that recognize and affirm the inherent worth and dignity of every individual.
By shifting our focus from assimilation to inclusivity, we can work towards dismantling barriers and creating an environment that values and affirms neurodivergent experiences. This approach acknowledges the importance of social inclusion while also challenging the underlying power dynamics that perpetuate inequality. It encourages society to adapt and accommodate to the diverse needs of all individuals, rather than expecting neurodivergent individuals to conform to societal expectations.
In summary, while normalization theory recognizes the importance of social inclusion, it is essential to approach it from a social justice perspective, keeping in mind the power dynamics at play. We should aim to create a society that actively embraces diversity and accommodates the unique needs and experiences of neurodivergent individuals. By valuing neurodiversity and advocating for systemic changes, we can strive towards a more equitable future for all.
Alex: Thank you for your thoughtful response, Emma. I understand your perspective and agree that society should strive for inclusivity that values neurodiversity. It is crucial to challenge existing norms and work towards systemic changes that encompass diverse ways of being.
Normalization theory may not be perfect and it?s open to misinterpretation, but it still holds value in promoting the social integration of neurodivergent individuals. By providing opportunities for participation, normalization theory aims to empower individuals and foster their sense of belonging within society. It recognizes the right of every individual to access education, employment, and personal growth opportunities, regardless of their neurodivergent status.
Normalization theory, when implemented ethically and with a focus on individual autonomy, can serve as a framework for positive change. It encourages society to adapt and accommodate the diverse needs and experiences of neurodivergent individuals, rather than expecting them to conform to existing societal norms. By challenging societal norms and advocating for inclusivity, we can ensure that neurodivergent individuals have a voice and that their unique contributions are recognized and valued.
It?s worth remembering that Normalization theory is probably most frequently used in planning how to deliver services for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities. In these contexts, it?s often very useful Social because normalization theory offer valuable guidance for intellectual disability service providers and support workers. Remember, it is usually used in conjunction with person-cantered planning so you?re not imposing goals on the person that they don?t want. The essence lies in understanding and applying principles that prioritize social inclusion and valued roles for individuals with intellectual disabilities. It should involve tailoring support to individual needs, fostering community integration, and advocating for rights. By promoting competence, collaborating with families and communities, and employing person-centered planning, service providers aim to enhance the overall quality of life for those they support. It can help to contribute to ethical and inclusive care and support. Ultimately, it’s about empowering individuals to lead fulfilling lives within their communities.
However, I fully acknowledge your concerns about the potential for normalization theory to unintentionally perpetuate oppressive systems and erase the diverse experiences of neurodivergent individuals. It is crucial to approach this theory with a critical lens and consider the power dynamics at play. An examination of power dynamics is part of the core of normalization theory. We must actively work towards creating a society that not only accepts neurodiversity but also celebrates and accommodates it in all its forms.
In summary, while normalization theory is not without its flaws, it can serve as a starting point for promoting social inclusion and equity. By continuously engaging in discussions, critically examining existing norms, and committing to societal change, we can create a future where neurodivergent individuals are accepted, supported, and given equal opportunities to thrive, without compromising their identity or unique experiences.
Conversation Exercise
In the bottom right-hand corner of your screen, you’ll see a conversation icon. Click on this to being the conversation exercise with FRED our AI-powered chatbot. Alternatively, click this link to open the chat interface directly.
If you have not already, read this article to learn how to get the most from your learning conversation with FRED.
You need to be registered and logged in to take this quiz. Log in or Register