Can you tell us a little about your PhD and what led you to explore such a personal and practice-based research topic?

My PhD really felt like an organic continuation of some of the practice-based research I had explored since becoming a mother. I made theatre shows, artworks and installations about the experiences of pregnancy and motherhood, and some of this work featured my son, Fred.

When Fred was 4 he was diagnosed as autistic, and so my parenting changed, my priorities, my perspective on childhood, my knowledge of neurodiversity, and by extension my artistic practice changed too. I realised that I could not make work about my maternal experiences without acknowledging how my mothering is fundamentally shaped by the fact that my children are autistic.

Coupled with this was Fred’s real love of performing. He is a confident and creative child, and I just loved the idea of us working together as a collaborative team. And so that’s what the PhD is about - us, our relationship, the everyday, and the development of a methodological framework which centres around the child’s creative agency, needs and interests.

Your research involved creative collaboration with your son. How did you approach the ethical and care-based considerations of working together in this way?

This was so complex, and a real journey actually. From the start I made sure that Fred was involved in all the creative decisions, and so all of the work we created together centred on activities and hobbies which were interesting or important to him, including dancing, feeding pigeons, spinning, and throwing stones. I never asked him to do anything he didn’t want to do, and he was very clear that he only wanted to explore subjects which didn’t feel too personal, or about the specific challenges of being autistic. As a result, the work often focused on activities and routines that help Fred feel happy, calm and regulated.

I also embedded the research into our everyday lives, it was incredibly important that it always felt fun, and not like ‘homework’ for him. I made lots of ‘mistakes’ along the way and these moments became part of the research contribution. The process required significant self reflection and forced me to confront difficult feelings around guilt, shame, and ableism. Ethically it was a bit of a minefield, but what emerged, I hope, was a series of findings, methods and reflections which consider how creative work with autistic children can flourish when careful attention is paid to how both child and adult are positioned within the researcher-participant relationship.

How has your artistic practice shaped your PhD research, and how has the PhD developed your practice as a performance artist?

When I began the PhD I imagined that Fred and I would make theatre shows together. In the end though, none of our work made its way onto a stage. It was interesting to learn that audience approval and public presentation need not be the artist’s ultimate goal. Instead, Fred and I ‘performed’ in public places with no invited audience, we documented these experiences on film, and edited the footage together to create short video artworks which we term ‘digital souvenirs’. These videos are not publicly accessible; they function primarily as a digital scrapbook of family memories. They are simultaneously research artefacts, artworks, and part of a family archive.

In a way I stopped being a performance artist during this period, at least in the way I had been in the past. My editing skills improved certainly, but I made a conscious decision not to allow my previous performance-making knowledge and training to influence this new creative process, in the hope that it would allow space for Fred’s interests and creativity to be prioritised.

My next project will probably return to the theatre, this time working with my daughter. Dorothy, who is also autistic, loves being on stage and actively seeks an audience. I am interested in applying some of the methods developed during the PhD and also discovering new methodologies through collaboration with her. In particular, I am keen to explore the experiences of autistic girls and to see what new creative approaches emerge through that work.

How have your experiences working with The Care Lab at the University of Manchester helped you grow and develop as a researcher?

Over the past few years, Fred and I have worked closely with The Care Lab, part of Manchester University and the Whitworth Gallery. Their work, broadly, explores the relationship between care and artistic practice. Together, Fred and I co-designed and delivered a workshop at The Festival of Care, sharing some of our methods and research findings. Most recently, The Care Lab commissioned us to produce a project for neurodivergent families. Over several weeks, participant families worked collaboratively to make artworks exploring their own lived experiences, using some of the methods Fred and I developed during the PhD study.

These projects have been instrumental in helping me understand the value and potential of my research findings within a wider context. PhD study, particularly for a subject like mine which was purposefully insular and contained within my family unit, can make your world feel small. Working with wider communities is rewarding because it highlights the potential impact the research might have beyond my own family experience.

You published your work in the International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media. What did that experience teach you about academic publishing, and what advice would you share with other PGRs hoping to publish their work?

My main piece of advice would be to go for it. The world of academia can feel a little intimidating, and I certainly had fears that my writing wouldn’t be good enough. However, I found the process to be incredibly valuable. Writing the article effectively produced a whole chapter for my thesis which meant that I had less work to do later on. It has also helped to position my work within my chosen field of study, including identifying a gap within existing published research.

The peer review process did feel tricky and a little confronting, but the reviewer's comments prompted important revisions, encouraging me to re-write and re-think certain sections. Peer review also prepared me for supervision meetings, thesis writing, and ultimately my viva because I became more adept at really questioning and scrutinising my words - seeing the flaws, the holes or inconsistencies. My supervisors were incredibly supportive of the process too, and had confidence in my abilities, even when I had lots of self-doubt. Publishing has also opened up new opportunities, enhanced my research portfolio, and I now understand that world and its processes a little better.

What helped you navigate full-time doctoral study alongside caring responsibilities, and now that you’ve been awarded your PhD, how would you like your research and artistic practice to develop next?

The most challenging thing was not really about time spent physically working, because I was able to condense my working day into the time the children were at school. And the practical aspects of the research were, as I mentioned, embedded into my daily life. The biggest difficulty was around escaping the work emotionally and psychologically. In many ways, choosing a subject which aligned with my life was clever - I knew I would never get bored or lose interest, it was about my son after all, and he is anything but boring! But, the PhD became the constant screensaver of my mind, and maintaining a critical and emotional distance was extremely difficult.

The nature of the project forced me to continually reflect on my own mothering, my perceived failures, the advocacy involved in parenting children with additional needs, and everyday reality of family life. It was never escapism, like some work can be. I am incredibly proud of what I have achieved, but it took a toll on me at times.

I believe this project has made me a better mother, researcher and artist, but I would have benefitted from additional self-care strategies. My advice to other researchers undertaking similarly personal projects: take breaks, do some yoga or something, speak to a confidante, and make space for your own mental health.

I have so many ideas for what I want to do next. I would like to work more closely with my seven-year old daughter and develop a theatre project with autistic women and girls, alongside a brilliant movement director and fellow SEN mother. I’m really keen to re-visit and expand The Care Lab project exploring creative collaboration and everyday care practices within neurodivergent families. I am still writing every day, and working on chapter and article proposals. Fred also has some ambitious plans: he would like us to write a book together, sharing resources, methods and practical guidance for people working creatively with autistic children.

Find out more about Sophie’s research on her website.

Read Sophie’s article in the International Journal of Performance Arts and Digital Media, and her and Fred’s contribution to Routledge’s Care Aesthetics and the Arts.

LBU Research Voices is a blog series that celebrates the experiences, journeys, and expertise of our LBU research community. Through this series, we explore the knowledge our researchers have gained, not just from their work, but from their lived experiences, career paths, and the communities they engage with. By sharing their stories, we hope to inspire learning, reflection, and connection across our LBU research culture.

Explore the full LBU Research Voices series to read more stories from across our LBU research community.