Societies

Research

Jump to: Other

16 pages, 597 KB

Open AccessArticle

Do the Police See Individuals with Intellectual and/or Developmental Disabilities as Dangerous?

by Danielle Wallace and Isabella E. Castillo

Societies 2026, 16(4), 121; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16040121 - 2 Apr 2026

Viewed by 1177

Abstract

In police culture, the danger imperative is the idea that the most important part of policing is to “come home at the end of the night.” Neurodivergence brings uncertainty to police encounters; because of the danger imperative, police officers may respond to that [...] Read more.

In police culture, the danger imperative is the idea that the most important part of policing is to “come home at the end of the night.” Neurodivergence brings uncertainty to police encounters; because of the danger imperative, police officers may respond to that uncertainly with increased use of force. We examine the likelihood of being handcuffed and detained (low levels of use of force) for individuals with intellectual/developmental disabilities (I/DDs) (i.e., neurodiverse diagnoses) during discretionary stops using data from police stops in California (n = 3,300,671) and doubly-robust inverse-propensity weighted regression. Results show that the average effect of being I/DD on the likelihood of being handcuffed is nearly 6.5% percentage points higher than people without I/DD; similarly, the average effect of being I/DD on the likelihood of being detained is also nearly 7.5% percentage points higher than people without I/DD. Our findings point to officers’ perceptions of danger and safety (i.e., the danger imperative) during encounters with individuals with I/DD, creating disparate experiences with low levels of use for force for this population. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

► Show Figures

Figure 1

17 pages, 294 KB

Open AccessArticle

Unheard but Uncompromising: Quiet Politics and Parental Resistance Among Chinese Immigrant Families of Autistic Children in the U.S

by Yue Xu, Liya Lin and Yu-Shiuan Sun

Societies 2026, 16(4), 108; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16040108 - 26 Mar 2026

Viewed by 1243

Abstract

Background: Chinese immigrant families of autistic children in the United States face intersecting barriers related to language, culture, immigration, and fragmented service systems. Yet little is known about how Chinese immigrant parents engage in advocacy or how such efforts relate to disability and [...] Read more.

Background: Chinese immigrant families of autistic children in the United States face intersecting barriers related to language, culture, immigration, and fragmented service systems. Yet little is known about how Chinese immigrant parents engage in advocacy or how such efforts relate to disability and human rights. Methods: This qualitative study draws on in-depth interviews with fourteen Chinese immigrant parents of autistic children across multiple U.S. regions. Data were triangulated with analyses of publicly recorded advocacy events and parent-produced textual materials. Reflexive thematic analysis was used to examine motivations for advocacy, advocacy practices, and structural, linguistic, and cultural constraints. Results: Advocacy rarely emerged as an intentional or identity-driven pursuit. Instead, parents were compelled into advocacy through institutional exclusion, service denial, and unmet care needs. Parents engaged in diverse forms of advocacy, including migration, negotiation within institutions, information translation, community-building, and grassroots organizational leadership. Cultural norms shaped advocacy strategies, producing quiet, relational, and collective forms of action often overlooked in dominant rights-based models. Conclusions: Interpreted through a disability justice lens, parental advocacy functions as burdened and unequally distributed labor compensating for systemic failures. Findings underscore the need for institutional reforms that reduce reliance on families’ capacity to fight for access, dignity, and care. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

16 pages, 256 KB

Open AccessArticle

The Experiences of Justice-Involved Neurodiverse Children in England and Wales: How Can We Close the Rights Gap?

by Anne-Marie Day

Societies 2026, 16(3), 84; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16030084 - 2 Mar 2026

Viewed by 2178

Abstract

Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and those defined as ‘neurodiverse’ are significantly over-represented in the English and Welsh youth (juvenile) justice system (YJS). Evidence points to a number of significant challenges in neurodiverse children’s lives before entering the justice system [...] Read more.

Children with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND) and those defined as ‘neurodiverse’ are significantly over-represented in the English and Welsh youth (juvenile) justice system (YJS). Evidence points to a number of significant challenges in neurodiverse children’s lives before entering the justice system that increase the likelihood of criminalisation. Then, once in the youth justice system, they encounter further challenges that are both harmful and arguably inconsistent with their human rights. This paper discusses research showing that neurodiverse children often have their rights compromised both prior to and throughout their involvement with the youth justice system. The concluding section of the paper will focus on best practices and recent developments in England and Wales that seek to close the rights gap for this group of children. It is hoped that, by considering both the advances and challenges in England and Wales, the paper will provide a useful case study for international jurisdictions seeking to close this gap for neurodiverse children in youth justice systems. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

11 pages, 207 KB

Open AccessArticle

Justice Beyond the Courts: The Role of Knowledge in Securing the Rights of Families with Neurodivergent Children

by Connor B. S. Strobel

Societies 2026, 16(2), 68; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16020068 - 17 Feb 2026

Viewed by 1598

Abstract

Access to justice (A2J) has been a prominent area of sociolegal scholarship, and its findings have significantly informed legal reform efforts. A2J scholarship has focused on disparities in court proceedings and has argued that the navigability of the legal system explains unequal access [...] Read more.

Access to justice (A2J) has been a prominent area of sociolegal scholarship, and its findings have significantly informed legal reform efforts. A2J scholarship has focused on disparities in court proceedings and has argued that the navigability of the legal system explains unequal access to the law more than knowledge of the law itself. However, courts are not the only venue for securing rights, and most rights disputes never reach them. In the United States, neurodivergent children possess legal entitlements and protections that are inconsistently and diffusely administered. This study tests the durability of A2J’s core findings by examining how knowledge disparities affect access to justice beyond the pursuit of remedies. Based on surveys and interviews with parents of neurodivergent children in Arizona, this study examines how knowledge disparities shape families’ ability to secure their rights and entitlements before engaging the courts. Substantive expertise explains rights inequality as families begin to actualize their rights and entitlements, while relational expertise remains significant in legal and non-legal rights contestation. The results add greater dynamism to A2J research, open new lines of inquiry, and demonstrate that reform efforts must look beyond improving remedial pathways to more equitably promote human rights. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

16 pages, 240 KB

Open AccessArticle

Neurodivergence & Gender (Mis)Recognition: Addressing Inequity Through Neuroqueer Knowing

by Jessica Penwell Barnett

Societies 2026, 16(1), 31; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16010031 - 16 Jan 2026

Viewed by 1918

Abstract

There is an established association between neurodivergence and gender variance, with growing documentation of the challenges and inequities faced by those who exist at this intersection. This paper contributes a critical analysis of interviews with 24 autistic adults in the U.S. about their [...] Read more.

There is an established association between neurodivergence and gender variance, with growing documentation of the challenges and inequities faced by those who exist at this intersection. This paper contributes a critical analysis of interviews with 24 autistic adults in the U.S. about their gender experience; yielding three themes: “gender divergence?”, “gender socialization on crip time”, and “either/or: whose intolerance for ambiguity?”. Results suggest that gender variance—if it is best understood as such—among those on the spectrum emerges through a complex set of relationships between participants’ bodyminds (e.g., sensory and cognitive styles); dominant cultural concepts of gender; and ableist and heterocissexist social relations. Neuronormative ways of knowing gender, institutionalized through biomedical research, healthcare, and social policy, emerge as a normalizing discourse contributing to the oppression and marginalization of participants as neurodivergent people. Justice implications of accounting for the epistemology of the neurodivergent bodymind and decentering neuronormative ways of knowing are discussed. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

Other

Jump to: Research

17 pages, 255 KB

Open AccessConcept Paper

Beyond One-Way Adaptation: Reciprocal Assimilation Through the Lens of Autism

by Elliott J. Alvarado and Gabriel Alvarez

Societies 2026, 16(5), 156; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16050156 - 10 May 2026

Viewed by 813

Abstract

This paper revisits assimilation theory—developed to explain immigrant incorporation into U.S. society—and advances a reformulation centered on reciprocal assimilation. Classical models describe a linear convergence toward dominant Anglo-American norms, while segmented assimilation highlights multiple pathways shaped by context, race, and class. Both, however, [...] Read more.

This paper revisits assimilation theory—developed to explain immigrant incorporation into U.S. society—and advances a reformulation centered on reciprocal assimilation. Classical models describe a linear convergence toward dominant Anglo-American norms, while segmented assimilation highlights multiple pathways shaped by context, race, and class. Both, however, tend to frame incorporation as a directional process in which minority groups adapt to dominant institutions. Drawing on contemporary autism scholarship, this paper brings assimilation theory into dialogue with neurodiversity to examine how its core assumptions extend beyond immigrant contexts. Using autism as a critical case, we show that social adaptation often occurs through camouflaging (masking, compensation, and behavioral adjustment), producing outward conformity without changing underlying neurological differences and often carrying psychological costs. These dynamics suggest that inclusion is frequently conditional on sustained performance of normative behavior rather than true structural incorporation. We identify an underlying assumption of universal assimilability within assimilation research and show how engaging with disability calls for a broader conception of incorporation. In response, we propose reciprocal assimilation as a framework in which adaptation emerges through dynamic interaction among individuals, institutions, and social structures. Integrating life-course concepts—turning points, cumulative (dis)advantage, agency, and social bonds—we illustrate how participation trajectories are shaped by accessibility, accommodations, stigma, and support over time. We conclude that a reciprocal model shifts emphasis from cultural convergence to meaningful participation, offering a more flexible framework for understanding incorporation across diverse populations, with implications for research, measurement, and policy. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

12 pages, 209 KB

Open AccessConcept Paper

Autism and Political Careers: Navigating Political Leadership

by Sally Friedman, Kennedy Cox and Richard K. Scotch

Societies 2026, 16(2), 67; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16020067 - 16 Feb 2026

Viewed by 2858

Abstract

Individuals on the autism spectrum have been stigmatized as not being expected to engage in certain activities, such as interpersonal interaction and communication, which are related to the capacity to exercise leadership and may have implications for their capacity to effectively function in [...] Read more.

Individuals on the autism spectrum have been stigmatized as not being expected to engage in certain activities, such as interpersonal interaction and communication, which are related to the capacity to exercise leadership and may have implications for their capacity to effectively function in political roles. In this paper, we profile four politicians (who happen to be state legislators) with autism who have beaten the odds with electoral success. We examine their routes to office, their range of activities, including how they represent autism, and the intersectionalities (in addition to autism) that impact their lives. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

17 pages, 248 KB

Open AccessConcept Paper

The Precarity of Disability Rights Historically and in the Trump Administration

by Allison C. Carey

Societies 2026, 16(1), 37; https://doi.org/10.3390/soc16010037 - 21 Jan 2026

Viewed by 3559

Abstract

The United States is experiencing an attack on disability rights unprecedented since the emergence of the modern Disability Rights Movement. This paper examines the various ways in which disability rights have been undercut in 2025. To do so, I provide a theoretical framework [...] Read more.

The United States is experiencing an attack on disability rights unprecedented since the emergence of the modern Disability Rights Movement. This paper examines the various ways in which disability rights have been undercut in 2025. To do so, I provide a theoretical framework based in rights theory to reveal the precarity of disability rights and the strategy behind the actions taken by the Trump administration. I examine four key strategies to undercut disability rights: constructing disabled people as unworthy of the status of rights-bearer, constructing threats and conflicts across rights, dismantling the infrastructure of positive rights, and rejecting the value of disability rights across relational sites. Moreover, I argue that in part the effectiveness of contemporary attacks are deeply related to American history, because disability rights have always been contentious and left vulnerable to attack. Full article

(This article belongs to the Special Issue Neurodivergence and Human Rights)

Journal Menu

Journal Browser

Neurodivergence and Human Rights

Share This Special Issue

Editors

Special Issue Information

Keywords

Benefits of Publishing in a Special Issue

Published Papers (8 papers)

Research

Other

Further Information

Guidelines

MDPI Initiatives

Follow MDPI