Monthly Archives: December 2018

Launching Neurodivergent Labour

We are delighted to invite you to the launch of Neurodivergent Labour on 9th February, for all Labour Party members who are neurodivergent.

Following on from the successful development of a Labour Party Autism / Neurodiversity Manifesto, and in response to calls from many Labour members, we are setting up a new society within the Labour Party; Neurodivergent Labour.

All Labour Party members who are Neurodivergent are welcome to attend the launch meeting of Neurodivergent Labour. This new organisation aims to represent Autistic, Dyslexic, Dyspraxic and Dyscalculic people, and people with ADD (with or without Hyperactivity), Tourette’s or other developmental atypical neurological conditions.

We aim for this society to be democratically run by neurodivergent people for neurodivergent people, to make our voices heard in the Labour Party and wider society.

During this meeting we will agree on the main principles and structure of this organisation, in preparation for a founding AGM later in 2019.

Booking: You will need to book via Eventbrite to attend this event. Entry is by ticket only. Please use this link

When booking, please let us know of any accessibility needs you have.

The Diskus conference room is in the basement of the Unite building, with access via a lift and accessible lavatories on ground floor.

The Labour Party Autism / Neurodiversity Manifesto link:



10 Rhetorics of Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA)

ABA Controversy Autism Discussion

ABA Rhetoric #1: ABA interventions are the most evidence-based effective autism intervention

Actually evidence for ABA programmes is overwhelmingly poor and considered low/ very low and this was confirmed once again by a May 2018 Cochrane review.

You can also follow #ABAResearch on Twitter for other ABA related research we have been sharing.

Also, at the time of writing this, Ambitious about Autism, who run two ABA schools and an ABA college around London states on its website that “there is very little research about how ABA is applied in ABA schools” and they don’t know why or when ABA will help or harm.

This poor quality evidence is despite over 500 published studies and three decades of ABA research. No NHS guidance recommends ABA programmes, yet ABAers think having low standards for autistic people is OK.  How many more decades does the global $8 billion ABA industry deserve?


View original post 1,612 more words