Bouchard: What I Learned By Attending Every New Hampshire Autism Council Meeting

By Shannon Bouchard, NH Journal

I didn’t begin attending meetings of New Hampshire’s Council on Autism Spectrum Disorders because I expected to uncover problems. I attended because I believed public advisory councils matter.

As the parent of an autistic daughter and a disability advocate, I wanted to better understand how state government listens to autistic individuals, families, providers, educators and advocates. I assumed the meetings would give me insight into the council’s priorities, the challenges facing New Hampshire’s autism community and the work being done to improve services.

Instead, I learned something broader about citizenship itself.

What began as an effort to better understand one advisory council became a lesson in how ordinary citizens can engage with government.

Few citizens ever attend meetings of state advisory boards or commissions. We trust that public bodies are doing the work assigned to them by the legislature. We assume meeting minutes accurately reflect what occurred, appointments are properly maintained, public records are available when requested, and government operates with a level of transparency that allows citizens to understand how decisions are made.

Those assumptions deserve to be tested — not because we should distrust government, but because public confidence depends on openness and accountability.

As I continued attending meetings, I found myself asking more questions. Some arose during the meetings themselves. Others came after I began reviewing meeting minutes, public records and documents obtained through New Hampshire’s Right-to-Know Law.

Each answer led to another question.

How are advisory councils expected to measure their effectiveness?

How can citizens evaluate whether statutory responsibilities are being fulfilled?

How should public bodies respond when members of the public request records or seek clarification about their work?

Those questions were never about proving misconduct. They were about understanding how government works.

Over time, I came to appreciate something I had not fully understood before: Transparency is not simply about producing records. It is about giving citizens enough information to understand how public institutions carry out the responsibilities entrusted to them.

Attending meetings also reminded me that public service is rarely simple. Council members volunteer their time. State employees support their work. Families and self-advocates bring lived experience. Providers contribute professional expertise. People often approach the same issues from different perspectives while sharing the same desire to improve the lives of autistic individuals.

That diversity of viewpoints is one of the strengths of public advisory bodies.

But meaningful participation depends on more than good intentions. It requires clear communication, accessible public records, consistent governance, and a willingness to answer legitimate questions from the public.

One lesson surprised me more than any other: Government becomes easier to understand when citizens participate directly.

Reading statutes, attending meetings, reviewing minutes, and using the Right-to-Know Law transformed my understanding of how public institutions operate. It also reinforced the idea that oversight is not performed only by legislators, journalists, or attorneys. Ordinary citizens have an important role to play as well.

That experience changed my perspective on civic engagement.

Whether the issue involves autism policy, education, transportation, public health, or another area entirely, democracy works best when citizens are willing to observe, ask thoughtful questions, review public records, and engage respectfully with public officials. Those actions should not be viewed as adversarial. They are part of a healthy democratic government.

I still believe advisory councils serve an important purpose. They provide opportunities for collaboration between the government and the communities most affected by public policy.

But I also believe every public body can benefit from periodic reflection, meaningful oversight, and a commitment to continual improvement. Transparency and accountability are not signs of failure.

They are signs that public institutions respect the citizens they serve.

The most important lesson I learned from attending every Autism Council meeting had little to do with autism itself.

It was this: Democracy is strongest when ordinary citizens are willing to show up, pay attention, ask respectful questions, and remain engaged long after the meeting adjourns.

Shannon Bouchard is a special education advocate and Sandown resident who has attended meetings of New Hampshire's Council on Autism Spectrum Disorders and regularly uses New Hampshire's Right-to-Know Law to examine public records. She wrote this for NHJournal.com.

This story was originally published by the NH Journal, an online news publication dedicated to providing fair, unbiased reporting on, and analysis of, political news of interest to New Hampshire. For more stories from the NH Journal, visit NHJournal.com.