Autism Employment Questions We Should Not Have to Ask in 2016?

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

Lately there has been much interest in autism employment (some suggest as low as 15-35%) and what makes autistics good employees but what many still don’t discuss is why all the positives of autism do not translate into more paid employment. Personally I would argue that we need to consider  disability, accessibility and autism-friendly workplace specific questions again in 2016 to see if answers change or emerge. Potential questions include:

1. If employers are discovering autism employee benefits for themselves*, why are specialist autism recruiters still hiring more autistic people for STEM (Science Technology Engineering and Maths) positions?
2. Assuming that no selection bias is occurring, why are online psychometrics and paper-based applications still being used rather than alternative application mediums (scenario/problem solving tasks, personal projects, skills portfolios or brainstorming presentations etc.)?
3. Is inclusive recruiting really as unbiased as assumed or more synonymous with exclusion and correcting divisions?
4. If employers know what environments disadvantage physically impaired people, why are workplace adjustments not considered for hidden impairments until hiring or interview stages?
5. How do disability and equal opportunity employment laws actually affect autistics seeking employment, based upon the success numbers only?
6. Why are more autism employment pathways (mentors, job trials, alternative assessments, internships etc.) still not exist outside STEM fields, if autistic individuals are such valuable assets?

For once I thought it might more helpful to let others consider how they might answer such questions (either as comments or ponderences) as employers, colleagues, recruiters, managers or as employees.

*Autism positive traits may include: consciousness, attention to detail, unique problem solving abilities, extended memory, inclinations to keep re-training on specialist topics, autonomous working, structured thinking, time management.

As always I welcome comments, personal stories, re-sharing, Tweeting or direct conversations (either by email or social media).

If interested in reading more of my autism articles please follow updates, subscribe to email notifications or view comment on any topics missed.

The Power Of The Autistic Voice?

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

Something I wish to discuss is ‘the paradox of the responsible adult’ which can relate both to Autism/Aspergers and mental health (I will briefly discuss the latter later). This turn of phrase is not one I use lightly when discussing autism spectrum conditions, since it typically denotes judgement about whether someone is capable of voicing their own needs or if they actually require an advocate (Latin derived from the words ad- to add and vox-voice ) to speak on their behalf.

Some might ask the key question, where is the paradox in advocacy? Or isn’t it as binary as self advocacy or being advocated for?

Personally I would argue no, not so clear-cut since stereotypes and assumptions precede the term autism* – before DSM IV-becoming DSM V  autism was characterised (by many and the media) as synonymous with intellectual disabilities (IQ <70) and ‘uncontrollable aggressive behaviour’, until the public better understood autistic overwhelm (‘meltdowns’) and why structured routines are helpful for many autistics, to function in society at average-above average intellectual levels. *Why Aspergers was removed seems unclear.

Sadly many (government employees and receptionist staff especially) still assume that autism is so one-dimensional, perpetuating situations where self advocacy occurs and needs or requests get ignored as though ‘out of context’ (even if an individual has full emotional and intellectual faculties). As expected, on cue, an advocate, friend or supporter (the ‘responsible adult’) offers social support to convey what is clearly being ignored or not being understood, only to create ‘a self fulfilling prophecy’ that validates the intolerant world view that an autistic person ‘cannot think for themselves’ or is ‘not making themselves understood properly’, when in reality the other person has already decided (based upon a label ‘definition’) that the autistic person must be incapable or ‘socially incoherent’, even if they are not!

Case in point: only yesterday I was registering with a new community doctor (GP) – being treated as a name and number already, telling the receptionist that I was becoming socially overwhelmed and needed to write down her spoken information requested, making reference to my own autism information processing-pause needs – as expected her tone and manner changed to one of assumed listening difficulties (fortunately I don’t have many bad dealings with receptionist staff and know how to deal with this), thus perpetuating the paradox (as someone with many qualifications and no support staff/aides).

Finally to answer the question of how mental health and autism spectrum conditions may appear interlinked to some – being seen as highly emotional (overwhelmed), needing more time to formulate ideas verbally (more so when anxious) and socially or emotionally frustrated (if rushed) can be akin to ‘lacking mental faculties’ or ‘incapable’, hence the misguided link between mental capacity (medically speaking) and autism expressions.

Personally I am not against advocacy, what I am against is pernicious stereotypes that dehumanise the autistic experience by assuming that every autist has the same needs and difficulties.

As always I welcome comments, insights, personal stories, re-sharing, Tweeting and Ping-backs if people find my content interesting.

Why Autism Employment Stereotypes Harmful

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

From an autistic perspective the notion of affirmative action (more autism inclusion in organisations), stereotypes and disabling attitudes is a hot topic – clearly there is a need to provide equal opportunities to autistic/Aspergic individuals but sometimes the questions remains at what cost?

Personally I am not against improving autism representation in organisations, places of education and as basic service users, what I am against is stereotypes and able-ism that occur daily when people define an individual by ‘jobs they should be good at’.

Some of the most pernicious autism stereotypes include:

1) Autistic individuals often need support staff or advocates to gain employment – not always untrue but for those with Aspergers self advocacy skills may already exist.

This one can be a slippery slope; autism is a spectrumed condition with intellectual and emotional abilities that are not simply rated at high, low or medium (a less perfect continuum) – to assume that every individual will have the same difficulties or need can disadvantage not just the current job applicant but the one(s) after them too. More specifically greater awareness of impairments, advocacy and self advocacy requirements (reasonable adjustments, health needs, work styles etc) benefits everyone – many are capable of expressing their own needs and reasonable adjustments but may get ignored until another wiser ‘more responsible adult’ speaks on their behalf (something to consider in terms of disability awareness raising!).

2) The assumption that ASC individuals are perfect job fits based upon ‘autistic idiosyncrasies’.

Not always untrue (i.e. in STEM fields) however there is still a need to consider that Autism is a condition not a measure of competency or ‘likely proficiency’. At times affirmative action is very noticeable (almost cloying) in how job adverts are marketed towards autistic individuals, for example how many recruiters assume that IT and Technology are ‘perfect autism jobs’ – this in itself can perpetuate the myth that autistic individuals prefer computers and working alone rather than socialising in teams (the old ‘computer nerd’ stereotype).

Not always true, autism alone does not define career interests or ‘best-fit job aptitudes’ – realistically an impairment may influence career choices but Not define choices!

3) They seem so quiet, clearly something must be wrong  (they don’t socialise with peers enough/appear to dislike colleagues).

Intense focus for very long periods and attention to detail can be both a blessing and a ‘curse’ in some work environments. The positive: higher quality work, not easily distracted, improved problem-solving abilities, the ability to finish tasks quickly.

The negatives: less time available for small talk, over-focusing on tasks at tthe expense of other priorities, workplace politics or unplanned socialising that may be more disorientating, thus increasing the risk that peers will marginalise and exclude an ‘overly busy’ autistic colleague or notice more negative quirks than positives (impatience, less time for out of work team bonding or ‘weirdness’ if someone does not wish to socialise so often).

4) They seem too smart and capable (rarely seeking support; so independent).

Again not always false, but certainly a risk factor for ‘meltdowns’ (sudden intense bouts of anger, crying or prolonged rudeness when overwhelmed) and disciplinary action – a subtopic by itself. Over time every new employee should find a balancing point for independent and team working, however this assumed timeline (say 1-3 months for arguments sake) can be misleading with autistic individuals that may learn to mimic others, conform to social norms or ‘not want to trouble others with issues’ seeming to become ‘a liability’ after many smaller difficulties build up and remain unaddressed until a critical mass point. If anything it is often advisable to provide early access to a mentor or explicitly state that questions are advisable with no need to bottle-up concerns that can be addressed earlier.

5) But autistic people can be so violent, aggressive and hard to manage.

This point refers to autistic overwhelm (noted above) and how literal autistic interpretation of language can be (instructions, grapevine conversation taken as fact, and rigid adherence to rules). The point that colleagues and managers may forget is the fact that few things happen in isolation – in the case of autism too many changes, overly ambiguous information and absence of change notice may result in emotional overwhelm, not actually becoming physical until colleagues try to touch, shoo away from public areas or scold them (overload is very real, seek advice or wait until calm if unsure how to offer support).

The key point here is to assess, question, facilitate positive routines, contrast current behaviour against known history and assist where possible, not assuming that anger or rudeness for example must always necessitate malicious intent or abusive behaviour.

Final thoughts: Not all autism stereotypes and assumptions are bad (honesty, rule-keeping, efficiency, pride in own work etc.) but it is my honest opinion that there is a greater need for the mantra ‘decisions made with us, not without us’ and ‘once you have met one person with autism, you have met only one autistic person’ to avoid shoehorning, objectifying based upon autism traits and pre-judging others based upon a normative career path (yours or theirs?).

As always I welcome insights, personal stories, discussion and any feedback people may have. Feel free to share, Tweet, Ping, re-share or contact me if there are points you wish to discuss further.

Why The Universal Credit System May Be A Poor Fit For Autism

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

N.B., The following article is based upon the UK benefits/ welfare system only.

As an unemployed ‘Aspergers service user’ the benefit/welfare system has always felt too dichotomous – either someone is ‘fit for work’ or they are ‘disabled with a need to justify’ impairments. This distinction in itself poses real challenges because of how Autism Spectrum Conditions have no ‘one sizes fits all’ – people can simultaneously be highly intelligent and yet unable to live independently or they can ‘function independently’ irrespective of place on the spectrum (severe, moderate, minor and major support needs) since there is no guarantee that intellectual capacity or social functioning will even be completely affected at debilitating levels.

This absence of defining boundaries dovetails with my next concern; if people are truly honest what can an employment advisor or ‘job coach’ be expected to offer in terms of support for such atypical autism challenges (social impairments, forming routines and emotional regulation challenges for example) when so few have more than a cursory knowledge of ASC’s, often not even trained in active listening skills or how to correctly interpret ‘excuses and barriers’. As someone that has been unemployed in three different Job Centres across the country, the picture is often no better in the North-West or South-East of England; even designated disability advisor’s training (since phased out in Job Centres) is mostly experiential or limited by employment mandates and funding available (i.e. x amount of people off unemployment benefits each quarter).

If I am honest, the question few Job Centre staff ever answer is what effect limited (and often insufficient) coach support even has on those seeking employment or the right to contribute to society in some way. In the past being referred for employment support programmes* but in reality finding that 2 of 3 tried struggled to support my ‘autistic, yet degree educated’ needs, leaving me with a new set of problems: ‘seeming too capable’ and being more educated than supporting staff, as someone that learns things quickly but struggles to fit job titles.

*The Shaw Trust, an approved 8 week internship and questioned about my desire to join the Work Choice Programme – all intended to facilitate paid employment or decrease employment barriers.

Leading onto my next point – if someone seems ‘too capable’ or their challenges are not directly visible what safeguards exist to stop advisory employment staff’ from applying excessive pressure, ascribing their own definitions of ‘job suitability’ or downplaying immediate needs such as continuity and needing advanced notice, sensory intolerances or preventing overwhelm (‘meltdowns’) that can seem ‘abusive or aggressive’ to the uninformed. More so, in light of how financial penalties are applied for missing appointments, not meeting allocated job searching hours, failing to meet key job seeking commitments prescribed and how advisor’s can (but should not!) request in-person meetings at short notice, according to Universal Credit (housing benefit and unemployment benefits combined) and Job Seekers Allowance guidelines.

From an autism perspective there is a great deal of room for possible abuse of power and ‘helpful support provisions’ if staff do not (or choose not to) consider that autistics’ may need structure NOT ‘timekeeping help’, have genuine reasons why retail, industrial or healthcare roles may be unsuitable and may need more time to express themselves more clearly. Another challenge of the Universal Credit benefit is the three tier group allocations* with some autistic individuals that may seem like they require no adjustment or job preparation support (even though they can access it immediately rather in the typical 6-12 months), but in reality this ‘excess of capability’ can lead to a greater risks of unemployment and covert discrimination from employment advisors.

*The 3 groups: work-preparation group (preparing for but not actively seeking employment, plus attending JCP meetings), limited to no work capability (no pre-employment tasks or JCP meetings), and employment-ready (applying for jobs and preparing for employment) –  and similar levels for physical incapability

Personally I am inclined to argue that more people could work (paid or unpaid) if more specialist support existed; if the gatekeeper system of accessing job support was more user needs-led, and if people were given more choices than the present (be seen as ‘sick and incapable’, struggling but unsupported or ‘fit for work’ after phased adjustment time). If anything every time I have volunteered in the past an ‘elephant in the room’ remains unvoiced; why are people still providing light admin, retail or group facilitation skills free of charge – should they not too be paid for 1-10+ hours of labour each week?

A parting question: why in 2015 (and beyond) are autism employment needs still not being met, worse yet why are untrained [disability-aware] employment advisors still deciding employment support needs without consulting autistic groups?

10 Key Reasons Why Autism Unemployment So high

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

By now it should be clear that autism is a developmental disorder affecting the senses (perceived more strongly or much weaker), the way language is processed (more literally), how autistic people understand verbal and non-verbal communication, with potential difficulties understanding ambiguous or less explicit instructions.

Before exploring the 10 main autism unemployment factors (as I perceive them) I will preface with a quote:

“autistic (and ‘being less employable’) is not who I am, it is what others choose to define me as when ‘being difficult’, more cautious and requiring more structure and certainty in advance, so I can function better, in accordance with my own unique talents.’

Job specifications are perceived and interpreted differently by autistics

The typical ‘essential, desirables and ideal/preferred’ competences format is often so ambiguously ill-defined – a non-autistic individual may be better at cherry picking skills or experiences they actually have (or could learn later/indirectly know) but for autistics prone to focusing on small pieces of information it can be harder to see the bigger picture (i.e. what they know and can demonstrate). In particular job descriptions that don’t even match job titles assigned can be very problematic for autistic individuals seeing such groupings as illogical, with a greater risk of missing actual job opportunities.

Autistic individuals may not seek further confirmation or easily misinterpret information

Some might suggest this is a Theory of Mind challenge (difficulties interpreting intentions or meaning implied behind communication), resulting in language being taken literally with employment opportunities being missed because key information is misunderstood. Personally as an autistic individual I find that just two words misplaced or absent can be very costly, affecting how I interpret my own potential suitability for roles, influencing perceived suitablity for 60% of a job description – anything official or of consequence just gets read more literally for me.

Autistic people becoming self taught ‘experts’ in a subjects with less easily measurable experience

Many people with autism are known to ‘fixate’ or ‘obsess’ over special-interest topics, spending 10’s and 100’s of hours just reading about one topic (or practising one interest), compared to non-autistic people that may lose interest quickly or only learn what is necessary.

Within the STEM fields this single-minded focus contributes to success, however for those (like myself) that change career interests suddenly and (for examples sake) start reading advanced legislations and vast amounts of Psychology before applying for jobs we fall into the category of ‘paper experts with no experience’ – thus finding suitable employment becomes harder (many employers don’t like taking risks unfortunately!).

Difficulty knowing whether to disclose an autism diagnosis

Some might say that this only matters at the interview stage but in reality it can be daunting (and disheartening) to keep applying for jobs and be questioned about possible reasonable adjustments we may seek – often before even being offered an interview or as a ‘diversity and inclusion initiative’ where we in essence get interviewed twice (by cell-phone and in-person).

A related point – processing information by phone can be difficult for autistics

Even for the most empathic or emotionally aware autistic individuals, interpreting nuances of unseen non-verbal communication can be exhausting with a risk of disadvantaging individuals, that may otherwise thrive if interviewed in person. In such an artificial context so much information is conveyed rapidlyincluding pitch (volume) changes to denote mood or interest levels, active or passive language used for emphasis, threads of information, speaker energy levels, likelihood that someone is frowning or smiling, likeability, passion and even attitudes that convey key information (much more information conveyed in a 5-20 minute conversation).

As ‘more rigid thinkers’ autistics may not realise their skills are unsuitable/outdated – until told

Anecdotally speaking, I once knew an autistic engineer that had spent over 10 years learning one technology, then one day his company closed his department, (too late) realising that his knowledge had become obsolete and unmarketable in its current form – but for him his specialist interest had become his reality. Sometimes it is this straight-line focus that can stop autistic people re-skilling when all the signs are there, plainly seen by others (cost vs. efficiency, peers that distance themselves, declining tasks allocated or low team morale etc.).

Managing social expectations is less precise if autistic

This is related to social rules and following instructions. Some autistic individuals may take instructions or words literally, suddenly appearing aggressive, overly affectionate or reckless (a common example may include: ‘use your own initiative’ or ‘tell me exactly what you think’), not always knowing how to manage personal boundaries or needing more explicit guidelines to respond appropriately (i.e. correct emotional responses or understanding business etiquette).

Finding truly disability inclusive employers can be difficult

Many hiring companies are not as autism-friendly as required (yet!). From an autism perspective cramped office spaces, flickering bright lights, poor ventilation, noise, needing more time or spaces to decompress (de-stress or take mini breaks to recover) and needing more concise information (with advanced notice) seems to be a self evident truth but for some employers these reasonable adjustments may be too cumbersome, either being ignored or becoming exclusionary, causing the autist to ‘resign unexpectedly.’

A fine line between advising, training and forewarning employers

Just because an autistic person has informed a potential employer about their condition in advance there is no guarantee that prejudices, stereotypes and assumptions about autism will be addressed – some do become workplace autism/disability advocates with great success but for others cultures of indifference can exist at management levels. Recalling my own past experience of autism disclosure and attempts to raise staff awareness – efforts fell upon deaf ears being ‘positively discriminated’ told that I am paid to do a job nothing more – 6 weeks off for stress sickness and no changes until I left (some may not be so aware of illnesses triggers).

Not being supported or offered autism-specific careers advice

A complex topic in its own entirety, likely to create controversies and confusion for many. Ideally more teenage-adulthood transitioning services should exist to facilitate, support and encourage autistics into paid employment, at their actual mental and emotional level, in reality paths into paid employment are far less precise and structured if autistic.

This can be the case for any number of reasons such as mismatched industry-autism passions and interests, a need for greater understanding of owncompetencies, never learning how to market own talents properly, a need for more networking skills, no infrastructure in place to support study-adult life changes, the idea of too many ‘experts’ and not enough experience or simply poor skills matching with fewer mentors and less aware employers available.

As always I welcome others thoughts, insights, comments or further discussion (I may expand on this very abridged topic in the future if this post is popular enough).

Please feel free to share, Tweet, re-post, suggest new host locations or follow my blog.

Autism, Empathy, Altruism, What We Still Don’t Know!

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

(Post written for discussion purposes only – continued from post: empathy so simple?), based upon descriptive data from my Master of Science in Psychology dissertation.)

Before discussing the main topic of whether empathy differs in autistic vs. non-autistic individuals it is necessary to set the scene by explaining my original dissertation topic briefly. My M.Sc. in Psychology dissertation was keen to find out if autistic traits predict willingness to donate (WTD) to charitable causes. In particular whether it was autistic scores*, measures of empathy (both self-reported and tested)*, sympathy or something else that predicted likelihood of donating (hypothetical) charitable support to refugee children (I may answer this at the end…) – based upon limited information from viewing either: sad images only, a very sad personal refugee story or a combination of sad images plus stories.

*Measured using The Mind in The Eyes Test and The Autism Quotient 10.

This was the actual data from 14 autistic male participants and 31 gender-matched non-autistics (story only data omitted to save space; autistics rated almost 50% lower than non-autistics scoring in the 20’s vs. 50+’s ):

Originally I struggled to explain this preliminary data wondering how both groups could score so similarly (statistically speaking) for emotional empathy, while clearly being motivated to consider donating support for different reasons – image information only favoured for autistics versus combined information for control-matched group. However it occurred to me that this may relate to how the emotion was conveyed and how information is processed differently in autism – I originally hypothesised that both groups would score highest on WTD and empathy for the combined condition only. Only realising afterwards that I had unintentionally defined research expectations according to my own subjective experience of autism and empathy, forgetting that some autistic people are less able to read social and emotional cues from text or text and images together (cognitive empathy) compared to more simple image emotions that are sometimes simplest to read (sadness being a less researched recognised emotion in autism). I also come to realise that there is a finer line between distress and sympathy for autistic individuals than non-autistic individuals, with the former emotional state that can impair the ability to recognise (empathise) emotions and the latter that can encourage action (i.e. WTD) if aware of correct emotional responses (and how to offer support). Post-script thought: autistic distress and reduced sympathy may reflect autistic propensity to over-empathise – but struggle to convey why negative emotions felt so strongly.

Overall what I found most surprising during my research was the fact that there was so little research done about philanthropy, altruism, factors affecting charitable donations and pro-socially motivated behaviour in autistic’ (less than 10 papers!), compared to autism studies of emotions, psychopathy in autism (dis-proven) and ‘how autistic people should act’ according to the deficit model of thinking.

 

(For those interested in ‘what seemed to predict WTD’ in both groups, it was how well people scored on the Mind in The Eyes Test – designed to test the ability to read emotional states based upon the eye area only – I am still sceptical about this limited research finding but time will tell if it bears any truth.)

(Please feel free to re-post, share this elsewhere – I am always open to suggestions about suitable websites.)

Is Empathy Really So Straight-forward If Autistic?

Written by Steve Thomas, M.Sc.

Even in 2015 (and beyond) the myth that autistic people lack empathy is still very pervasive, requiring further analysis to explore what truth actually exists in such a statement (agreeably an old well-worn topic for both autistics and people that know someone with autism).

According to Oxford Dictionary empathy is defined as ‘the ability to understand and share the feelings of another’ with empathy typically categorised as either cognitive or emotionally motivated. Cognitive empathy has been suggested to be necessary to interpret and understand emotions (and their motivations), compared to affective (emotional) empathy that is more concerned with responding to the feelings of others, based upon verbal or non-verbal cues (facial expressions or body language for example) of another – typically requiring the same or similar emotions to be felt as another. From an academic perspective it is well-known that autistic people score badly on cognitive empathy tests for many years (ToM issues link), but somehow it has escaped the public’s awareness that autistic people are no less capable of feeling and expressing empathic concern for others (affective empathy) with research from 2008 supporting this.

Common questions many non-autistic people still ask include: why does James – or Mary (with autism) seem clueless about when Friend A clearly seems sad? I honestly can’t tell why Mary seems so cold and disinterested [after a difficult story was shared], do they even care about me? Is emotional aloofness just a part of James’ nature or have I upset him somehow? Why does Mary seem so unhappy about me giving her a pay rise? Does James actually realise that I feel [insert emotion]? Why does Mary’s expression seem so static?

From a personal perspective, as someone with autism such questions can be confusing or self evident, especially when factoring in social rule contradictions – at times I still have no idea if I should hug or verbally support someone verbally expressing disappointment and sadness. (so many nuances; ‘you can offer physical support if in place A but not in place B’, ‘does person X just want to vent’?’, ‘should I agree, ignore or problem solve’? etc.) At times I can feel conflicted to the point of ‘indifference’ and inaction because it is harder for autistic people to judge others physical and emotional boundaries, actual versus ‘likely needs’ and whether someone seeks support, simply wants to air grievances or is expecting people in the vicinity to ‘just know what they feel’ in advance (theory of mind).

If I am honest, as an autistic person that is highly aware of others emotions it is not always emotional understanding or an inability to vicariously feel others emotions (personal difficulties mirroring them though) that is the lacking, rather it is the absence of social cues awareness and difficulties figuring out social rules for each situation, while others ‘just know correct responses.’ However based upon outward responses others may incorrectly assume autistic people to be ‘indifferent’, ‘unemotional’, ‘disinterested’ or ‘cold’ without actually considering if it is an excess or ‘deficit’ of empathy that is the main issue (something to ponder further next time you meet some with autism perhaps?).

In the next entry I will briefly summarise findings from my own Masters of Psychology thesis (available here) interested in finding out how autism may affect empathy and (imagined) willingness to donate support to current refugee crisis’s, compared to non-autistic individuals.

(Please feel free to re-post, share this elsewhere or to cite pieces of this article – I would hope that the source is acknowledged though.)