by RACHEL ROBERTSON
As the (proud) parent of an autistic child who is not “normal”, I want to respond to the article “Is my child normal?” In this post mothers were invited to share their children’s unusual behaviour so that other mothers can reassure them that this behaviour is “normal”. Over five hundred people posted a comment on this story within the first few days.
I think that sharing stories within a community is important and even healing. What I do want to add though, is that I think the Mamamia community should also use this opportunity to spearhead a re-think about the concept of “normality”.
This would be a fantastic initiative because it would help those of us living with difference and disability to feel less excluded from mainstream society. And I think it would also help all mothers feel more comfortable with how they and their children are expressing themselves.
There has always been a huge range of variation in all aspects of the human being (and other species too). In the past, this variation was acknowledged and expected; only gods were perfect or ideal and humans were expected to exhibit variation.
As Lennard Davis has described, with the growth of scientific measurement and particularly the development of the normal or norm curve as a mapping tool, social scientists started describing something called “normal”. This “normal” was basically those people who fell into the middle of the norm curve. People on the outside edges became suddenly non-normal or “abnormal”. A shift occurred where the norm was then amalgamated with the ideal to create “normality”, which then became not only expected but also preferred.
Top Comments
I think normal means no more or less than the meaning that comes from the norm curve. I agree that the concept produces useful instruments such as charts of expected development.
I also agree that it should not be a value judgement. As others have said, life would be pretty boring if *everyone* was 'normal'.
I also recall a few years ago reading a (possibly fictional) objection from a parent, upon reading 'average' on their child's report. Their child was most certainly not average, thank you very much! :)
I agree with that kind of sentiment. I'd say it is *probable* that most people are 'abnormal' in some aspect of their abilities or personality. It's those things that make life interesting. Yes, the more extreme differences can present substantial challenges.
This is related to the whole question of labels - good or bad? My opinion is very pragmatic on this point. If labels get you resources, great, use them! If they get you discrimination, exclusion and unhelpful 'advice', pretend they don't exist. :)
Thanks for your comments, everyone! All really interesting.
I must admit, I was taken aback by the title for my piece. I suggested "Deconstructing normality" - not very attractive, I guess, so no surprises it wasn't used!
BTW, I don't think we should necessarily avoid using the terms normal and abnormal in daily life (though I myself prefer not to use them much). My suggestion is that we should re-consider our notions of what we mean by normality and the judgements we sometimes make on that basis.