Through the Glass Ceiling A Comparison of Autistics and Foreigners in Japan 宮 崎 康 支 ・ デキキス ジョー Yasushi Miyazaki and Joseph DeChicchis In this paper 1 we discuss the analogy between Autistic 2 people and foreigners in Japan. Using the metaphor of a glass ceiling, we discuss communication and employment. Thinking about the invisible obstacles facing Autistics, we focus on matters of communicative and other social interaction. Citing some experiences of Autistic people 3 in Japan, we discuss how high the glass ceiling may be for them, and we draw parallels with the case of foreigners in Japan. Key Words : Japan, Autism, advocacy, linguistic discrimination, glass ceiling 1. This paper is based on our workshop synopsis for Autreat 2007, which was held June 25-29, 2007, near Philadelphia, and which was organized by Autism Network International (ANI), a self-advocacy organization for Autistic people (http://www.ani.ac/). We thank Jim Sinclair, a coordinator of ANI, for encouraging our participation. This paper contains some modifications and additions to the earlier synopsis. 2. The authors are keen to use the terms “Autism” and “Autistic” with upper case “A” when showing respect for the culture of Autism. Similarly, the Deaf rights movement uses upper case “D” in laying claim to their culture, in opposition to scholars who use lower case “d” when discussing deafness solely as a medical condition. 3. In this paper, “Autistic people” means people with any type of Autism regardless of their Intelligence Quotient (I.Q.). In order to accentuate their group identity in this paper, we prefer to use the term “Autistic people” instead of “people with Autism”, an expression which might be encouraged by the American Psychological Association (APA). As we note on footnote 2, the authors respect Autism as a culture, rather as medical condition. Some Autistic activists and scholars have clearly stated their position not to use “person first” language regarding their identity. For instance, Sinclair (1999) states his reasons for his opposition to “person first” language as follows: 1) Saying “person with Autism” suggests that the Autism can be separated from the person.[…] 2) Saying “person with Autism” suggests that even if Autism is part of the person, it isn't a very important part.[…] 3) Saying “person with Autism” suggests that Autism is something bad--so bad that is isn't even consistent with being a person. […] Roberson & Ne’eman (2008) accepts Sinclair’s position and state in a footnote as follows: We have chosen to follow Sinclair (1999) with our usage of identity-first language (ex. Autistic people) rather than adopt person-first language (ex. people with autism). The American Psychological Association has recommended that academic authors “respect people’s preferences; call people what they prefer to be called” (APA, 2001, p. 63). Identity-first language is widely preferred by the international autistic self-advocacy community. Out of respect for the above precedents, in this paper, we are proposing an alternative view of the current status and policy for Autistic people in Japan, where such persons have heretofore been discussed mainly from a monocultural medical perspective. 論文（Article） brought to you by CORE View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk provided by Kwansei Gakuin University Repository