Visit of the Ambassador of Nepal to Brazil to the Embassy of Autistan in Brasília

Brasília, 26 May 2026. The Embassy of Autistan in Brasília had the honour of receiving His Excellency Nirmal Raj Kafle, Ambassador of Nepal to Brazil, accompanied by Mr. Tejendra Regmi, diplomat at the Embassy of Nepal in Brasília, for a detailed presentation of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization’s non-defectological approach to autism and a possible future dialogue with the competent authorities in Nepal.

This visit was particularly important for the Autistan Diplomatic Organization, which had long wished to receive representatives of the Embassy of Nepal at the Embassy of Autistan in Brasília, in order to open a human, institutional and useful dialogue around autism, the real needs of autistic people, and the possible contribution of the Organization to the development of autism-related public policies in Nepal.

One of the main ideas that the Autistan Diplomatic Organization tried to present during this meeting was that its approach may be particularly well adapted to Nepal’s own realities and qualities. Many Nepalese families may have limited financial or material resources, and reaching specialized urban services can be difficult, costly or tiring because of distance, roads and transportation. For this reason, it would be especially important not to lock autism policy into imported, expensive, centralized or “ready-made” models that require repeated travel, professionalized systems and attempts to make autistic people conform. The Organization tried to show a possible convergence between Nepal’s human capital — kindness, patience, subtle intelligence, attention to others, helpfulness and delicacy — and an approach based on accessibility, social adaptation, correct understanding and the reduction of attitudinal barriers rather than on money, force, institutional power or normalization.

The meeting took place at the Embassy of Autistan in Brasília, in a reception space specially prepared for this visit, with the presence of the flag of Nepal, the plaque of the Embassy of Autistan / Embaixada do Autistão, the small table flags of Autistan and Nepal, and a screen setup for the presentation.

1. A first official visit in a symbolic and human setting

The location of the Embassy of Autistan in Brasília, close to the ministries, the National Congress and other Brazilian public institutions, is consistent with the purpose of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization: to develop dialogue with public authorities and institutions, in order to provide precise explanations, analyses and proposals regarding autism and the real needs of autistic people.

The reception was prepared in a spirit that was both diplomatic and human, in order to create a real human contact as well as a formal meeting.

Before the main presentation, there was also a brief remote exchange with Mr. Shree Ram Dangal, who joined from Nepal. He greeted the Ambassador and the participants and expressed his encouragement for the meeting. The representative of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization recalled the importance of Shree Ram in the path that made this relationship with Nepal possible, and thanked him warmly.

2. A presentation prepared for the Ambassador of Nepal

The representative of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization had prepared a presentation especially for His Excellency the Ambassador of Nepal. The presentation was entitled:

Opening presentation to His Excellency the Ambassador of Nepal — Embassy of Autistan in Brasília — 26 May 2026

Listen to the presentation

The presentation was prepared as a text read aloud and displayed on screen. Its purpose was to explain why Nepal may have a special opportunity regarding autism, and how the Embassy of Nepal could help create a useful and concrete dialogue with the competent authorities in Kathmandu.

The Organization clarified that it was not asking the Embassy of Nepal to become specialized in autism. Rather, it hoped that the Embassy could play the role of a human and institutional bridge, helping the Nepalese authorities to understand that a dialogue with the Autistan Diplomatic Organization could be useful for their own work.

3. Why the current moment may be important for Nepal

The Autistan Diplomatic Organization explained that the moment appears especially important because Nepal seems to be in a phase of preparation of texts, structures and projects related to autism.

According to public information found before the meeting, a draft National Autism Guideline appears to have been prepared or submitted to the Ministry of Health and Population of Nepal. It was also mentioned that the government had announced autism-related model schools in the seven provinces, and that a technical committee had reportedly been formed to work on the concept and structure of these schools.

These elements suggest that Nepal is not merely at an abstract or theoretical stage. Texts, structures and models seem to be in preparation or under discussion. This makes the moment particularly important, because the first concepts, the first words and the first practical choices can guide an entire public policy for many years.

If the initial framework reduces autism to disorders, treatments, specialized services or normalization, then it may later become much more difficult to correct that orientation. But if the initial framework is based on accessibility, the correct consideration of autism, the acceptance of autistic people and of autism itself, and respect for autistic nature, then Nepal could build its autism policy on foundations that are fairer, simpler, more human and more useful.

This is why the Autistan Diplomatic Organization considered it important to present its approach at this stage, before the main orientations become too fixed.

This question is not only conceptual. It is also practical for Nepalese families. If the first orientation favours expensive specialized approaches concentrated in cities, many families may remain unable to use them in real life because of cost, distance, roads, transportation and time. A policy based first on accessibility, attitudinal changes, local understanding and simple low-cost adjustments could be much more reachable in daily life.

4. The fundamental distinction between autism and ASD

The first central conceptual point presented to the Ambassador was the distinction between autism itself and autism-specific disorders or difficulties, often called ASD.

The Organization explained that almost everywhere, the words “autism” and “ASD” are used as if they meant the same thing. This confusion has very serious consequences. If autism itself is reduced to disorders, then autism is automatically treated as a defect, a disease, a deficiency or an inferiority.

This confusion also makes it incoherent to speak about “autistic qualities”. If autism were only a disorder, then speaking about the qualities of autism would mean speaking about the qualities of a disorder, which makes no sense. Yet autistic qualities do exist. This shows that autism itself cannot be reduced to a disorder, a pathology or a defect.

The Organization insisted that this distinction does not deny the existence of difficulties. Autistic people may have real support needs, real learning needs and sometimes significant difficulties. But these difficulties must not be confused with autism itself.

In other words, the existence of autism-specific difficulties does not justify describing the whole autistic nature as a disorder. The difficulty, the support need or the disabling situation is not the same thing as autism itself.

The Organization also mentioned that this distinction had been explained in 2023 to Chiara Servili, autism specialist at the headquarters of the World Health Organization in Geneva, during a long video-conference meeting. According to the Organization, she understood this distinction and recognized its usefulness.

During the meeting, the Ambassador reacted positively to this point and identified the distinction between autism and ASD as one of the important elements that helped him better understand the subject.

5. The main conceptual position presented by the Autistan Diplomatic Organization

The main conceptual position presented by the Autistan Diplomatic Organization was the following:

Autistic people do not suffer from autism. Autistic people suffer from the consequences of the absence of correct consideration of autism throughout the social system, and these consequences are socio-generated sensory, mental or other harms which, in the end, are violations of natural harmony.

This position means that the problem is not located only “inside” the autistic person. It is also found in the environment, in attitudes, in communication, in organization, in social expectations, in imposed rhythms, in relationships, and in the absence of natural and respectful opportunities.

From this perspective, accessibility is not a luxury, a secondary issue or a privilege. It is the direct response to a large part of the suffering experienced by autistic people.

The Organization explained that many difficulties are increased, created or maintained by the way the social system is organized: misunderstanding, fear, rejection, excessive complexity, sensory aggression, incoherent expectations, and automatic attempts to normalize autistic people.

It also explained that some autistic reactions can be understood as signals. When an autistic person suffers, blocks, withdraws or reacts strongly, the correct response should not be only to silence the reaction, correct the person, or make the autistic person appear more normal. It is also necessary to ask what, in the environment, communication, attitude, organization or expectation, is producing the socio-generated sensory, mental or other harm.

An image used during the presentation was that of an alarm. If an alarm rings, the intelligent response is not to break the alarm or disconnect the siren. The intelligent response is to find out what danger, incoherence or aggression activated it.

Autistic reactions can therefore help reveal defects of the social system. A good autism policy should not begin by asking only how to correct autistic people. It should also ask how society can become accessible enough for autistic people to live, learn, participate, develop and express their autistic qualities without being damaged.

6. A model based on accessibility, accommodations, assistance and individualized support

The Autistan Diplomatic Organization presented a model based on several layers, from the most general to the most individualized.

The first layer is general accessibility for autistic people, based as much as possible on universal design. Society, services, procedures, communication and attitudes should be made accessible in a general way before an autistic person is already in difficulty.

The second layer is reasonable accommodations in the presence of autism. When general accessibility is not enough for a particular situation or person, specific adjustments must be identified, implemented, checked and corrected if necessary.

The third layer is general autism assistance, accessible as much as possible, including remotely. This assistance could be useful not only for autistic people and their families, but also for schools, public services, professionals, emergency services, workplaces, shops and ordinary settings facing situations involving autism.

Such assistance could also use digital tools and artificial intelligence to connect practical guidance, education, statistics, recurring problems and possible solutions. The idea is not to replace human responsibility, but to make guidance more accessible and more useful in ordinary situations where people do not know how to react to autism-related difficulties.

The fourth layer is individualized autism support, for autistic people and families who need more precise, personal and continuous support.

The logic is not to begin with costly individualized systems for everyone. The logic is subsidiarity: first make society generally more accessible, then add reasonable accommodations where needed, then provide general autism assistance for many situations, and finally provide individualized support for those who need it.

This approach may be especially relevant for a country where resources, specialists and access to urban services may be limited. It does not deny the usefulness of specialized support, but it avoids making specialized and individualized systems the only possible answer.

It also avoids placing the whole burden on families who may not have the money, time or transportation capacity to repeatedly reach specialized urban services. The first response should therefore not be a costly system that only a minority can access, but a broad correction of environments, attitudes and ordinary situations wherever autistic people actually live.

7. Attitudinal accessibility: one of the most decisive dimensions

A major part of the presentation concerned attitudinal accessibility.

The obstacles faced by autistic people are not only sensory or material. They are also found in attitudes: fear, judgment, rejection, wrong interpretations, ego reactions, misunderstanding of autistic behaviors, automatic attempts to normalize, mockery and exclusion.

Families, schools, public services and communities can avoid many problems if they receive simple and correct guidance. A large part of conflicts, exclusions, suffering and costly interventions can be reduced if the social environment learns not to judge, not to reject, and to understand situations involving autism.

The Organization insisted that accessibility for autistic people is not a privilege taken from others and given to autistic people. It is a correction of the social system itself. Very often, these corrections are useful for everyone because they reduce confusion, aggression, incoherence, excess, disorder and unnecessary complexity.

Autistic people are often the first to suffer from these defects of the social system, but when these defects are corrected, the whole society can become clearer, calmer, more coherent, more economical and more humane.

This is one reason why the Organization considered its approach especially relevant for Nepal. Attitudinal accessibility does not primarily require expensive buildings, imported programs or heavy centralized structures. It requires correct information, attention, patience, willingness to adjust, and the ability not to interpret autistic reactions through fear, ego or rejection.

8. Why this approach may be especially suited to Nepal’s human qualities and realities

The Organization explained that many autism policies in wealthier countries rely on costly, centralized, professionalized and urban systems. These models often require travel to cities, repeated interventions, specialized programs, professional control and significant family resources. Some of them also remain oriented, explicitly or implicitly, toward making autistic people appear less autistic.

For many families in Nepal, such models may be very difficult to use in real life. Financial resources can be limited, and access to specialized urban services can be difficult, costly and tiring because of distance, roads, transportation and time. If autism policy is built mainly on expensive centers, repeated travel and specialized professional systems, many families may receive a formal policy on paper but little practical help in daily life.

Such models may also become mistreating when they mainly aim to normalize autistic people instead of respecting autistic nature. They often rely on money, institutional power, professional authority and the idea that autistic people should be made to conform to non-autistic expectations. This is precisely the kind of logic that the Autistan Diplomatic Organization tries to avoid.

The Autistan Diplomatic Organization therefore tried to present another possibility for Nepal: not a weak or minimal policy, but a different kind of policy, based first on intelligence, discernment, humanity, kindness, accessibility, acceptance, social adaptation and respect for autistic nature.

The representative of the Organization referred to his personal experience with Nepalese people and to his stay in Nepal. He explained that he had often observed qualities such as kindness, humility, patience, willingness to help, attention to others, delicacy, and a lower tendency to take offense or react with ego. He clarified that of course not all Nepalese people are identical, but that this human potential may be very important for autism.

For autistic people, such qualities are not secondary. Patience, humility, kindness, careful attention to others and the ability not to take autistic reactions personally can make an enormous difference. In autism, human capital can solve problems that money alone cannot solve.

This is where a particularly important convergence may exist between Nepal and the approach proposed by the Autistan Diplomatic Organization. The Organization’s approach is not based on force, money, heavy systems, coercion or the attempt to make autistic people conform by pressure. It is based especially on accessibility, correct understanding, social adaptation, the reduction of attitudinal barriers, and the creation of conditions in which autistic people can learn, participate and develop without being damaged or forced to erase their autistic nature.

This seems especially relevant for Nepal. On one hand, many families may not have the financial or material means to rely on costly systems, frequent travel, specialized urban services or imported “ready-made” methods. On the other hand, Nepal may already have, in its social and human qualities, many of the dispositions needed for a more accessible, more respectful and more natural approach: kindness, patience, helpfulness, subtlety, humility, delicacy and a capacity for human attention.

Because the Organization’s approach gives great importance to attitudinal accessibility, these qualities may be decisive. Attitudinal barriers often appear when people judge, reject, mock, fear, misinterpret or take personally the reactions of autistic people. If a society can receive simple and correct information about autism, and if people are already relatively inclined toward patience, kindness, helpfulness and non-aggressive attitudes, then many obstacles can be reduced without enormous financial expenditure.

This is why the Organization considered that Nepal may have all the dispositions and qualities needed to make good use of this alternative approach. It would seem regrettable to try to apply, without deep adaptation, ready-made methods imported from wealthy Western countries: methods that are often expensive, difficult to access, sometimes harmful, not always very effective, and frequently based on making autistic people conform. Nepal could instead build from what it already has: human attention, patience, social subtlety, practical adaptation, community life, and the possibility of doing useful things with limited material means.

In this sense, Nepal’s main capital in this field may not be financial capital, but human capital. This human capital could allow Nepal to develop a model that is more accessible, less costly, less violent, less normalizing and more coherent with the real needs of autistic people.

This does not mean that specialized support, professionals or structured services are useless. They can be necessary. But they should not be the only foundation of the policy, and they should not replace a broader effort to make families, schools, public services and communities more accessible to autistic people.

The Organization also mentioned the symbolic originality of Nepal: its unique flag, its particular time zone, its geography and its cultural identity. It would be regrettable, and almost absurd, for such an original country simply to import a normalizing model whose purpose is precisely to make autistic people appear less different.

Nepal could instead develop a Nepalese model for autism, adapted to its own realities, to families with limited material resources, and potentially useful for many other non-rich countries. Such a model could show that a country does not need to copy expensive and sometimes questionable approaches in order to help autistic people. It can use accessibility, human quality, correct understanding, low-cost adaptations and respect for autistic nature as stronger foundations.

9. Learning non-autism as a second language, without erasing the first

Another important idea presented during the visit was that autistic people do need to learn certain things in order to understand non-autistic society, avoid dangers, participate in social life and be better understood.

The Organization was very clear that it does not deny the need for learning. Autistic people may need specific learning about society, communication, ordinary expectations, dangers, practical life and the non-autistic world.

However, this learning must not mean erasing autism.

The Organization used a comparison with languages. A French person living in Brazil must learn Portuguese and certain Brazilian cultural codes. But learning Portuguese does not require deleting the French language, French culture or personal history. In the same way, autistic people can learn the non-autistic world as a kind of second language, without destroying their first autistic language.

This comparison is important because it avoids a false opposition. The point is not to refuse learning, and it is not to leave autistic people without tools. The point is to distinguish useful learning from normalization that seeks to suppress autistic nature.

Autistic people should be helped to understand the non-autistic world, but without being forced to erase their autistic way of being, their autistic qualities, their originality, their specific interests, their sensory needs, their forms of attention, and their relation to the world.

10. Acceptance is not passive tolerance

The Organization also explained that acceptance must not be passive, superficial or condescending. It is not enough to say that autistic people are tolerated. Real acceptance means allowing autistic people to exist, learn, participate and develop without being forced to appear non-autistic.

Acceptance does not mean refusing all learning. It does not mean ignoring difficulties. It does not mean abandoning autistic people without help. It means respecting autistic nature while addressing real support needs, real difficulties and real situations of disadvantage.

If autism itself is accepted, many efforts currently spent on making autistic people appear non-autistic become unnecessary, or even clearly harmful. The energy can instead be used to make society more accessible, to support useful learning, and to create real opportunities for participation.

11. Natural inclusion and opportunities to try

Inclusion was presented not only as a right, but also as a natural learning environment, provided that the people around are sufficiently accessible.

The Organization insisted on the importance of offering opportunities instead of overprotecting. Many autistic children are considered incapable simply because they are autistic, or because autism is interpreted as a global incapacity. This perception often prevents them from being given real, safe and respectful opportunities to try, participate and learn.

This point must be distinguished from another one: autistic people are often placed in disabling situations because of socio-generated obstacles in the environment. The first issue is the perception of incapacity imposed on autistic people because they are autistic. The second issue is the production of disabling situations by an inaccessible social environment. Both issues exist, but they should not be confused.

The Organization gave the example of Tima, a young autistic boy in Kazakhstan (Autistan.kz). In a natural mountain environment, with a non-defectological approach, he was not treated as sick or defective. He was given concrete opportunities through simple tasks and real activities.

At first, he seemed very passive and almost disconnected from the activities. His family, probably with good intentions, seemed to consider that he would never really be able to do anything by himself because he was autistic. The response was not to force him through a costly specialized program, but to give him real, simple and respectful opportunities to participate.

In only a few days, his attitude changed visibly. He gained confidence, participated in practical activities, was recognized by other children and experienced simple moments of friendship. The Organization explained that photos and videos can show this evolution.

The essential point was not an expensive therapy. The essential point was a natural, respectful, non-defectological environment, and a concrete change in the system around the autistic child.

12. A free, sustainable and fulfilled autistic life

The presentation also addressed the idea of a free, sustainable and fulfilled autistic life.

An autism policy should not stop at childhood, diagnosis, school or health. It should consider the whole life of autistic people: identification or confirmation of autism, integral health, education respectful of autism, professional training, possible independent living, autonomy, continuity of support, ageing and longevity.

It should also protect the possibility of a fulfilled autistic life: creativity, specific interests, nature, experiences, discoveries, travel, chosen relationships, freedom, originality and a personal path.

A very important part of this approach is the valorization, protection and application of autistic strengths. This means changing the frame. Some apparent defects may actually reveal autistic strengths, and some autistic reactions may function as signals showing where the environment is producing socio-generated sensory, mental or other harms.

Instead of seeing only apparent defects, public policy should also recognize autistic strengths. Autistic reactions can help identify harmful features of the social system and help society return to more balance and harmony.

13. A spontaneous synthesis of the main message

After the prepared presentation, the representative of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization added a spontaneous synthesis of the main message he had tried to convey.

He explained that, instead of importing the usual approaches to autism — often medical, technological, expensive, centralized, based on specialized centers and difficult for many families to access because of cost, distance and transportation — Nepal could also consider a complementary and alternative approach based on accessibility, especially attitudinal accessibility.

Autistic people do need to learn society: how to understand social situations, how to behave in certain contexts, how to avoid dangers, and how to participate more easily in ordinary life. But this learning should not mean removing autism. Autism is a difference. It includes both strengths and difficulties, and it should not be reduced to a defect that must be eliminated.

To explain this, he used a comparison with languages. A French person living in Brazil has to learn Portuguese and some Brazilian cultural habits. But learning Portuguese does not require deleting the French language, French culture or personal experience. In the same way, autistic people can learn the non-autistic world as a kind of second language, without destroying their first autistic language.

He then explained that, in many countries, the first reaction of families and systems is to see the most superficial and problematic aspects of autism and to fear that the autistic child will suffer in the future because people will reject, mock or exclude him or her. This fear can lead parents to think that the only solution is to correct or normalize the child.

But there is another way: autistic people can learn useful things, while society can also learn not to judge, reject or mock them.

This second dimension is extremely important because it can be very useful, very effective, and very low-cost. It is mainly a matter of awareness, correct information and attitudes. Autistic people cannot truly be made non-autistic. Therefore, instead of trying to erase autism, it is much more coherent to make society more accessible and more accepting, while helping autistic people learn what is useful for living in society.

This is why the approach may make particular sense for Nepal. Many usual methods are costly, not always very effective, and sometimes mistreating for autistic people because they are based on normalization. In Nepal, however, there appears to be another kind of capital: human capital.

The representative of the Organization referred to what he perceived as kindness, patience, humility, helpfulness and the ability not to take offense easily. He mentioned his own experience with Shree Ram Dangal, who had lived with him for several years and had never reacted with offense even in difficult moments.

He also recalled that, during his stay in Nepal, he did not observe the same kind of aggressive or judgmental social reactions that often create barriers for autistic people. For this reason, he considered that Nepal may have a strong social potential for attitudinal accessibility.

The Government of Nepal may continue developing centers, services and medical or specialized approaches. But a complementary approach could be added: informing society, families, schools, public servants and communities so that autistic people are better accepted, less judged, less rejected, and better understood.

Such an approach would cost much less than heavy specialized systems, and could help reduce suffering, exclusion, unnecessary conflicts, hospitalization and other serious consequences.

The key point was therefore that if society remains inaccessible and hostile, families may feel forced to normalize autistic children because they fear that the system will damage or exclude them. But if the social system becomes more friendly, more informed and more accessible, then autistic children can learn what they need to learn while still keeping their autistic qualities and autistic nature.

For the Autistan Diplomatic Organization, this makes the Nepalese context especially meaningful: Nepal may have human qualities that are particularly useful for autism, and these qualities may be more effective than costly methods when they are combined with correct information, awareness and practical accessibility.

14. The Ambassador’s reaction: acceptance, dignity, respect and environment

After the presentation, His Excellency the Ambassador of Nepal thanked the Organization and indicated that the presentation helped him better understand the subject.

He identified two important messages in what had been presented.

The first concerned the way autistic people are viewed, and the importance of acceptance. The Ambassador emphasized that it is not only a matter of accepting autistic people, but also of recognizing the dignity and respect to which they are entitled.

The second concerned the importance of the environment. He highlighted the need to consider the environment and inclusion. This allowed the Organization to clarify again that obstacles may be sensory, but also attitudinal, and that attitudinal barriers are often forgotten.

This reaction was important because it showed that the Ambassador clearly perceived two central axes of the approach: changing the way autism is viewed, and adapting the social system instead of trying only to correct autistic people.

15. Specialized schools or inclusion?

An important discussion then took place regarding the autism-related schools that may be developed in Nepal.

The Ambassador indicated that he was not fully informed about everything currently being done in Nepal in the autism field, but that he had read or heard that the government was considering opening schools for autistic children.

He then raised a very important question: is it preferable to open new specific schools for autistic children, or to integrate them into ordinary schools?

The Organization replied that this question goes directly to the heart of the problem. The main challenge for autistic children is to learn to live with others. If they are placed only in schools made up of autistic children or children with similar difficulties, with only specialized staff, they cannot naturally learn ordinary social life.

This does not mean that inclusion is easy, or that no adaptations are needed. But when some different children are included in ordinary environments, with a minimum preparation of the environment and attitudes, they can learn real society instead of being separated from it.

The Organization also referred to its own experience of being placed in a specialized center at the age of six or seven. Such a context can make a child think that he himself is “problematic” or “abnormal”, because he is placed among children who are all perceived as having problems.

This discussion was important because it connected the Nepalese policy context with a broader question: how can autistic children learn society if they are separated from society?

16. The possible contribution of autistic people to society

The Ambassador then developed the idea that autistic children can be integrated into society and contribute to it.

He explained that every autistic child may have a particular capacity or aptitude, and that it is important to help the child develop the skills that correspond to him or her, so that later the person can contribute to society through an occupation, work or social activity.

He gave the example of Nepal regarding blind or visually impaired people. He mentioned that in certain public schools there are possibilities for blind people to become teachers. He referred to the case of a blind cousin who became a teacher.

This comparison opened the idea that there can also be autistic teachers, or more broadly autistic people playing useful professional roles in society.

The Organization nevertheless recalled that one of the major obstacles remains rejection. People who appear strange or different are often automatically rejected because they cause fear or because they do not correspond to usual social expectations.

The Ambassador recognized the importance of this problem and compared it with other historical social changes. He recalled that changes which seemed difficult in the past, for example regarding the participation of women in public life, eventually happened rapidly on a historical scale.

This part of the exchange was important because it connected the issue of autism with a broader human and social question: societies can change their perception of groups that were previously excluded, underestimated or considered incapable.

17. The role of the Embassy of Nepal as a human and institutional bridge

The Ambassador explained that the role of the Embassy of Nepal in Brasília is not only to maintain relations with the Brazilian government, but also with civil society, people, academic circles and institutions. He referred to this as part of public diplomacy.

The Autistan Diplomatic Organization explained that this was precisely the kind of role that could be very useful. A simple letter or email sent directly to an institution may receive a polite reply and then remain without follow-up. But if the Embassy of Nepal, after having met the Organization, indicates to the competent authorities that this initiative seems serious and deserves attention, then the people responsible in Nepal may take the approach much more seriously.

In this sense, the Embassy can help cross the first attitudinal barrier: initial doubt, lack of understanding, lack of time, unfamiliarity with the approach, or the impression that autism should be dealt with only through usual medical or institutional frameworks.

The Organization explained that names and email addresses are useful, but often not enough. What is most effective is a human and institutional connection that can lead to an actual working relationship: first a short technical note, then a real video conference, and later, if useful, a more precise contribution to documents or projects being prepared.

The Organization gave the example of previous exchanges with Jonas Ruškus, rapporteur for France at the United Nations Committee on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities between 2019 and 2021. At the beginning, the exchanges were polite and limited. But as the dialogue developed, he understood more and more the importance and usefulness of the Organization’s explanations.

This example was used to explain that an unusual contribution may at first appear difficult to evaluate or secondary, but when a real dialogue is allowed to develop, competent people can progressively understand how useful it is for their own work.

18. A concrete continuation: documents, evidence and possible contacts in Nepal

The Ambassador proposed a concrete continuation.

He asked the Organization to send, electronically, to the official email address of the Embassy of Nepal, the presentation used during the meeting, the available resources, videos, evidence concerning the work already carried out with the United Nations, the World Health Organization, France and Kazakhstan, and useful documents, especially in PDF format.

He indicated that these materials could be studied by the Embassy, and that after this first review, the Organization could write again. The Embassy would then try to identify relevant contacts in Nepal, especially among governmental institutions or institutions working in the field of autism.

The idea of a future video conference was also discussed. The Organization explained that written documents are useful, but that a real dialogue by video often makes it possible to clarify difficult concepts and avoid misunderstandings.

The example of the meeting with Chiara Servili was mentioned again in this respect. At first, the distinction between autism and autism-specific disorders was not immediately obvious. But through dialogue, questions, clarifications and examples, the meaning and usefulness of the distinction became clearer.

19. National autism plans and the importance of implementation

The meeting also allowed a discussion on national autism plans in different countries.

The Organization indicated that in 2024 it had carried out a study on the Australian national autism plan project, with a comparison showing around 18 countries or regions that already had a plan, strategy or national document on autism at that time. It was also noted that there may now be more.

This comparison may be useful for Nepal, because a national autism policy is not only a matter of general principles. It also requires implementation: priorities, measures, responsibilities, coordination, practical actions, accessibility, support systems and monitoring.

The example of Iran was briefly mentioned, following the recent visit of the Cultural Attaché of Iran (Autistan.ir) to the Embassy of Autistan. The Organization indicated that Iran also appears to be working on a national document related to autism.

Brazil was also discussed. The Organization explained that Brazil has many laws on autism, but still lacks a true national implementation plan.

A comparison was made with a large ship. If autism were a very large ship, families should not be left alone on board, without captain, without crew, without staff and without practical organization, while just receiving hundreds or thousands of pages of maritime or navigation laws. Laws are important, but they do not replace a plan, a structure and practical guidance.

The Ambassador noted that countries could learn from each other. This remark opened an important perspective: a future dialogue may not only be bilateral between Autistan and Nepal, but also comparative and international.

20. General appreciation of the visit

This visit can be considered very positive.

One of the most important meanings of the visit was the clear convergence that the Autistan Diplomatic Organization tried to present between Nepal’s concrete realities, Nepal’s human qualities, and the non-defectological approach proposed by the Organization. This approach may be especially relevant in a country where many families cannot easily rely on costly specialized systems, repeated travel or urban services, and where human qualities such as patience, kindness, helpfulness, delicacy, attention to others and social subtlety can become central resources for accessibility.

It made it possible to officially receive His Excellency the Ambassador of Nepal to Brazil at the Embassy of Autistan, together with Mr. Tejendra Regmi, diplomat at the Embassy of Nepal in Brasília.

It also made it possible to present clearly the approach of the Autistan Diplomatic Organization, especially the fundamental distinction between autism and autism-specific disorders, the importance of attitudinal accessibility, the need to reduce socio-generated sensory, mental or other harms, and the possibility of thinking about autism policy in a way that is not centered on defect, normalization or expensive specialized systems.

The meeting opened a serious discussion on the risks of approaches that focus too much on specialized settings or normalization, and on the importance of inclusion, dignity, respect and real opportunities for autistic children and adults.

It also showed that Nepal may have a particular potential to develop a more human, less costly and less normalizing approach to autism, based on accessibility, acceptance, human qualities, natural inclusion, local adaptation, reduced dependence on expensive travel or specialized centers, and respect for autistic nature.

The meeting confirmed the importance of human diplomacy and direct dialogue. The Organization was able to show that it does not seek to impose an external vision, but to propose useful explanations, analyses, experiences and contributions, in order to help the Nepalese authorities make fairer and more effective choices at a time when the first national orientations regarding autism still seem to be under construction.

21. Conclusion

This first visit of the Ambassador of Nepal to Brazil to the Embassy of Autistan in Brasília marks an important step in the opening of a possible dialogue between the Autistan Diplomatic Organization and the competent Nepalese authorities in the field of autism.

It made it possible to present an approach based not on the correction of autistic people, but on the correction of obstacles in the social system, accessibility, acceptance of autism, the dignity of autistic people, and the possibility of a free, respected and fulfilled autistic life.

Nepal, through its human qualities, its cultural singularity, the limited material means of many families, the practical difficulty of relying mainly on costly urban services, and the current preparation of structures or orientations related to autism, could have the opportunity to develop an original, useful and exemplary autism policy, adapted to its realities and potentially inspiring for other countries.

The Autistan Diplomatic Organization warmly thanks His Excellency the Ambassador of Nepal to Brazil and Mr. Tejendra Regmi for their visit, their listening, their patience and their openness, and hopes that this first meeting may be followed by concrete dialogue with the authorities and institutions concerned in Nepal.