The social impairments due to Autism are co-constructed and socially mediated ... ?

At a recent training event for a Leeds schools autism support service, during an open period of discussion, I offered a rather poorly articulated view about the nature of the social impairment experienced by people with autism. The thought, again rather inelegantly expressed here, goes along the lines of:

'If an act of communication is defined as a coordinated and co-constructed activity (between two people, with a sender, a receiver, a means of sharing information and a shared topic), then surely any communication breakdown must in some way also be co-constructed (through communicative acts of either omission – things we don’t do; or commission – things we do do) i.e. the social impairment itself is to some degree socially mediated'.

Also, in trying to clarify this view I think I said something like: 

'It has become my view that the social impairments due to the developmental impacts of Autism are to some degree socially constructed, and are therefore socially mediated in their form and degree i.e. a person’s social impairment is either made more severe, or less severe, depending on the social expectations and behaviours (responsive or otherwise) of the other people they socially encounter.'

To expand on this a bit: when attempting to socially engage with some people the social impairment of one individual with autism may be almost absolute (i.e. allowing for no social interactivity to take place), but with some other, more sensitively responsive people, the social impairment experienced by the same person may be much less evident, even at times seemingly negligible. So surely we must ask: ‘where does this social impairment lie?’ From this example, not entirely as an intrinsic and individual characteristic of the person with autism.

This is not an area I feel at all expert in, but this view has developed over many years using Intensive Interaction with people with autism (in my case generally also with a learning disability) i.e. that the social impairment caused by autism is something that sits between us, and that it is therefore at least partially socially co-constructed or mediated in from and degree (and is therefore not an absolute condition in and of itself – even when it is used as an individual condition defining, diagnostic criteria).

Indeed social environments, or more accurately the people in those social environments, can make that social environment potentially more attuned and therefore potentially more socially accessible to the individual with a social impairment (e.g. by the use of Intensive Interaction) or less attuned and less socially accessible, depending on the way the person reacts or responds to the person with a diagnosed social impairment.

To recap my initial contention: although autism is clearly a defined and diagnosable characteristic of an individual, the social impairment associated with autism is not a characteristic solely of the individual with autism; it is co-constructed, in the same way that any successful interaction between two (or more) people with, or without autism, is by its very nature co-constructed.

Again I must state that I have little real legitimacy to air this view from a personal perspective, but in my professional Intensive Interaction role, having seen the manifest social impairment suffered by many individuals with autism be significantly reduced through the use of Intensive interaction, this idea of the co-construction or mediation of either successful engagement or continued socially impairment and isolation, seems to me to have useful analytic (and potentially clinical) value.

It is not the responsibility therefore of the individual with autism to change (or be changed) in some manner, or for others to demand or effect change solely in that person (to overcome a diagnosed social impairment), but instead the responsibility lies with those potential social partners around the person to adapt their pro-social behaviour to be socially inclusive of the person with autism. 

If a social impairment lies in the space between people, then so does the responsibility to reduce the potentially socially isolating impact of this impairment. If there is something we can do to make a social environment generally more ‘person-centred’ in ways that allow social access to a person with autism, (i.e. via the use of Intensive Interaction) then we have a responsibility to act in ways that do just that.

Anyway, I can't decide if this general idea is something I should develop further and submit for publication in either the 'British Journal for Stating the Bl**ding Obvious' or the 'International Journal of things that are already widely known and accepted, apparently by everyone but you!'

Although just possibly it might be right at some time to submit it for publication in the 'Journal of potentially interesting ideas that are as yet only partially developed'  ...  Hhhmm, well I suppose that all depends on what other, more informed people, make of it!