Four years ago, Sesame Street enriched its neighborhood with Julia, a groundbreaking Muppet and the first autistic character on the beloved show in over a decade. Initially introduced in an online picture book, We’re Amazing, 1, 2, 3!, Julia quickly transitioned to the television series, becoming a vibrant part of Elmo and Abby Cadabby’s playful world. This sunshine-yellow Muppet, always accompanied by her cherished rabbit, Fluffster, was carefully developed with input from autism advocates and researchers, marking a significant step forward in representation. Julia’s presence even extended to the Macy’s Thanksgiving Day Parade, solidifying her status as a symbol of progress for the autistic community. For many, including autistic individuals themselves, Julia represented a long-awaited and deeply meaningful portrayal of neurodiversity.
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/15858799/GettyImages-652481388.0.jpg)
However, this positive image became complicated when Julia’s likeness began to be used to promote resources from Autism Speaks, specifically their 100 Day Kit for Young Children. This kit, intended for parents of newly diagnosed autistic children, presents a deeply concerning narrative. It suggests parents will experience the five stages of grief in response to their child’s diagnosis, framing autism as a tragedy. This approach clashes sharply with the message of acceptance and inclusion that Julia embodies, raising serious concerns within the autism community.
As an autistic individual, the introduction of Julia was personally resonant. Growing up, experiences of social rejection and isolation were common. Julia, in contrast, offered a vision of a more accepting world. Sesame Street showcased a reality where Julia’s differences were understood and celebrated by her friends, where efforts were made to include and support her. The show’s anthem for autism acceptance, “The Amazing Song,” with its simple yet powerful message “We all can feel happy, we all can feel mad,” was profoundly moving. It challenged the outdated and harmful misconception that autistic individuals lack emotions.
Sesame Street characters singing
The core issue lies in the stark contrast between Julia’s positive representation and the messaging within the Autism Speaks’ 100 Day Kit. The 100 Day Kit fundamentally equates having an autistic child, like Julia or myself, with experiencing a loss, akin to the death of a child. This narrative is not only inaccurate but deeply damaging.
A crucial element in Julia’s creation was the involvement of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN). This organization, uniquely led by and for autistic people, played a vital role in shaping Julia’s character and storylines. Sesame Street‘s collaboration with autistic individuals to tell autistic stories was groundbreaking. For too long, narratives about autism have been dominated by sensationalized or negative portrayals, often lacking authentic autistic voices. Julia stood out as a rare exception – a positive, informed, and realistic representation brought to life by a felt puppet.
The partnership between Sesame Street and Autism Speaks, however, led ASAN to sever ties with the show. This decision, though initially surprising given Julia’s positive image, stemmed directly from Sesame Street‘s decision to promote the Autism Speaks 100 Day Kit, a resource widely criticized by autistic advocates for its harmful and outdated perspectives.
Autism Speaks’ 100 Day Kit, while presented as “a tool designed to help assist families of children recently diagnosed with autism,” contains a mix of helpful and harmful information. While it includes resources on advocating for inclusive education and managing appointments, it simultaneously promotes damaging narratives.
The public service announcements (PSAs) featuring Julia and promoting the 100 Day Kit initially appear innocuous, focusing on acceptance and celebrating diversity. However, closer examination reveals the problematic nature of the associated resources.
These PSAs encourage autism screening and direct viewers to Autism Speaks’ website, which prominently features the M-CHAT-R (Modified Checklist for Autism in Toddlers, Revised). While early diagnosis can be beneficial for some, the subsequent recommendation of the 100 Day Kit raises serious red flags.
The 100 Day Kit’s most damaging aspect is its persistent comparison of autism to death and disease. It dedicates an entire section to the Kübler-Ross stages of grief, suggesting parents will grieve the diagnosis of their autistic child. Furthermore, it includes anecdotes that trivialize the challenges faced by autistic children, even comparing them unfavorably to children with cancer. This narrative pathologizes autism and ignores the lived experiences of autistic individuals who lead fulfilling lives.
Beyond the grief narrative, the kit promotes unsubstantiated and potentially harmful interventions, such as restrictive gluten-free, dairy-free diets for autistic children. These recommendations are presented alongside evidence-based therapies like occupational therapy, blurring the lines between validated and disproven approaches. Despite Autism Speaks’ claims that the kit is not medical advice, its inclusion of such recommendations is irresponsible and misleading.
Autism Speaks has faced long-standing criticism for its focus on cure-based research and its portrayal of autism as a tragedy. While the organization removed the word “cure” from its mission statement, the 100 Day Kit directly contradicts this, repeatedly stating Autism Speaks’ dedication to finding a “cure for autism.” This discrepancy highlights the organization’s continued adherence to outdated and harmful perspectives, making Sesame Street‘s partnership deeply problematic.
The Autistic Self Advocacy Network’s decision to end its partnership with Sesame Street underscores the severity of the issue. Despite acknowledging the harmful nature of the Autism Speaks resources, Sesame Street persisted in promoting them. This decision prioritized a partnership with a controversial organization over the well-being and representation of the autistic community they initially sought to uplift.
The language and narratives surrounding autism have a profound impact. Julia’s character was so impactful precisely because she was portrayed as a child first and foremost – a child who plays, has friends, and is loved by her family. Her differences are presented as just that – differences, not deficits, and are met with understanding and acceptance. The Autism Speaks PSAs, by promoting the 100 Day Kit, undermine this positive message, pushing a narrative that is diametrically opposed to the spirit of Julia and the progress she represents.
It is crucial for Sesame Workshop to reconsider its decision to promote harmful narratives about autism. After years of waiting for authentic and positive representation, autistic individuals deserve to embrace Julia without reservation, knowing that her image is not being used to promote harmful and outdated ideas about neurodiversity. Sesame Street has the opportunity to reaffirm its commitment to autism acceptance and inclusion by distancing itself from Autism Speaks and resources like the 100 Day Kit, ensuring that Julia’s legacy remains one of genuine understanding and celebration of autistic lives.
