My eldest step-daughter lives in the small two-bedroom house that is attached to, but separated from, our main house by a double garage and a small sunroom. Next week, she’s moving to Queensland to continue her university studies (a masters) in psychology and education. While we were eating dinner the other night, G asked me whether I thought that neurodiversity was increasing or if it was just becoming more widely recognised, and therefore accurately diagnosed, and whether that would offer my eldest step-daughter more extensive career opportunities.

Naturally, I looked for statistics. Data is the first thing I turn to for knowledge, understanding, and comfort. In 1997, approximately 1 child in 2,500 in the USA was diagnosed with autism. In 2000, the CDC began monitoring prevalence rates and by 2017, that number was 1 in 68 (Southwest Autism Research and Resource Centre). Although it was noticed that prevalence rates were increasing, long-term expectations and outcomes for adults were unclear. Most group living homes, which had previously and frequently been part of the care of autistic people, had closed by the end of the 1980s.

Despite the wording indicating that more people are being diagnosed today, there is no distinction made as to whether this is because there is a greater understanding of the diagnostic criteria thus more people are being identified, whether it’s because the diagnostic criteria for multiple conditions were rolled into one categorical diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder in the last DSM-5 in 2013, or if the number of people who experience neurodiversity in the form of ASD is increasing within the population. The likelihood is that it’s probably both; prevalence is increasing and awareness and recognition is increasing, thus leading to higher levels of diagnosis.

But regardless of the cause, if the number of people being diagnosed is increasing, it does allow for more opportunities to review and amend an education system that is largely failing the neurotypical community, and barely managing to help (and more frequently harming) the neurodiverse community. I advised that schools such as the Steiner School do already exist and function with a very different ethos to traditional education but that there’d certainly be room for other models if that was the area that my step-daughter was interested in pursuing.

My ex-partner’s current partner’s children (read it again if you need to) attend a Steiner School and I broadly explained the difference between their style of education and the traditional school system and curriculum. I am still friends with my ex, M. He is known as “the nice one” by my step-daughters, and I have explained on more than one occasion that we separated not because anyone was abusive or toxic but because we simply wanted to go in different directions. He was very good to me–better than I deserved–at a very difficult time of my life and it pleases me greatly to see him happy with his partner.

Unfortunately, he and I also have “cancer/caring for someone with cancer” as something in common. Back in September 2019, his partner received a diagnosis of metastatic breast cancer. She was given a prognosis of 12-18 months. It’s been three and a half years and, while she is still in treatment, she is also still here. In addition to her standard medical treatment (surgery, radiation and chemotherapy), she also uses complementary therapies. She had some sort of testing done by a company called Genostics which gave her additional suggestions of other therapies that may reduce the cancer (she has multiple tumors in multiple organs) or, at the very least, keep it in a holding pattern. At the time of her diagnosis, she was told she probably wouldn’t see her son’s sixth birthday but she’s just celebrated him turning eight and the cancer is not yet advancing.

Overall, cancer survival rates are improving. Unfortunately, cancer diagnoses are also increasing. And especially in people who have no family history of cancer. In 2018, a few weeks after my colleague was killed in a workplace accident, a close relative was the first person in our family to be diagnosed with cancer. His cancer is generally viewed as having reasonably strong survival rates but various treatment complications not dissimilar to G’s put that at risk. But he, too, is still here–five years on. Ten years ago, G would not have survived either his cancer or his subsequent neutropenic sepsis but we are now at two years. Medicine and miracles happen every day. Sometimes those stories of survival can be disheartening, though. When G was first diagnosed and I started the process of caring, I joined a couple of groups on facebook for support. They were “generic” carer’s groups, though, and I felt very out of place being so young (comparatively), caring for my partner rather than children or an ageing parent, and not being in financial distress due to our health insurance and workplace sick leave policies. We were extremely fortunate and each of our respective companies looked after us.

At the time, the idea of talking to other people who were dealing with my specific situation–or even just journaling about my specific situation–was not possible. My therapist wanted me to but I all but quit writing for eight months. I could not write about hope and I absolutely could not write about death. Instead, when I had it within me, I wrote about the stars.

There are so many ways in which our stories overlap; in which the tectonic plates of our selves bump up against other people, their experiences, and our own past. It is not fair that so many people I know have to process a partner or parent experiencing a cancer diagnosis and the caring that comes along with that. It is not fair. I understand this. Nonetheless, I find it hard to bear.

It is difficult to know how much to share, here in this forum; I am not writing a book about the year of cancer (yet) which is a different process to blogging. This is open-ended. There is no target word count, no theme to stick to, and no plot or outline to follow. Which means I ramble. Jump around topics, touching on whatever is floating around my mind at the time I sit in front of the keyboard. And yet, week after week, there are readers; you are here. Thank you.

I think about the reader. I care about the reader. Not “audience”. Not “readership”. Just the reader. That one person, alone in a room, whose time I’m asking for.

Jeffrey Eugenides, The Art of Fiction (Interview), The Paris Review