ARM-Autistic Rights Movement

[Hegemonicretribution]

I am not making any sort of statement here, but I do think that this movement could lead to an interesting discussion. Whilst I am loathed to use wikipedia as a source, for the purposes of sparking debate the article below should be sufficient.

In essence, the claim is that autistic spectrum conditions (ASCs) are simply another, and equally valid expression of the human genome. From this some might assert that attempts at finding a cure are immoral, whereas others simply wish for a new approach to support. The viewpoints in question are extremely diverse, and I was wondering what the left think about this.

Essentially then; 1) Is autism a disorder?

2) Should there be an attempt at finding a cure?

3) To what extent should the autistic rights movement be considered representative of individuals with ASC?

4) What role is envisaged for those with an ASC in the future.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_rights_movement

[Sea]

They seem to think autism is a 'variation' while also viewing autism as something different and distinct that goes beyond the normal variation of traits between individuals to the point where it requires accommodation. The arguments and rederick used can be easily extended to depression, schizophrenia, foot fungus, watery stool, etc. There is also a great deal of research concerning autism and exposure to environmental toxins, which if there is a direct link, would completely negate the premise of the movement.

I don't know much about it this movement, I admit, but so far it reeks of liberal identity politics.


Essentially then; 1) Is autism a disorder?

2) Should there be an attempt at finding a cure?If it is indeed a disorder, then absolutely.


3) To what extent should the autistic rights movement be considered representative of individuals with ASC?To what extent should Bob Avakian be representative of individuals diagnosed with chronic maoism?


4) What role is envisaged for those with an ASC in the future.None, I should hope. To say someone has a "role" based on a condition is outright discriminatory.

[Rooiakker]

The accommodations that disabled people receive are just needs that are not normalized. As a disabled leftist, I fully support the ARM. It's a group fighting against forced treatment, ableist murders, and the acceptance that people can be disabled and that' ok. All of these things are good.

EDIT: "If it is indeed a disorder, then absolutely."

Only if THEY want a cure. Also, part of the ARM is that all the attention looking for a cure.(Which really they are just looking for prenatal testing to encourage eugenics.)

One thing that seperates Autism from other disorders is that Autistics often don't suffer from their condition per se. Why are autistic people seen as tragic, if they themselves feel fine?

[BIXX]

The accommodations that disabled people receive are just needs that are not normalized. As a disabled leftist, I fully support the ARM. It's a group fighting against forced treatment, ableist murders, and the acceptance that people can be disabled and that' ok. All of these things are good.

EDIT: "If it is indeed a disorder, then absolutely."

Only if THEY want a cure. Also, part of the ARM is that all the attention looking for a cure.(Which really they are just looking for prenatal testing to encourage eugenics.)

One thing that seperates Autism from other disorders is that Autistics often don't suffer from their condition per se. Why are autistic people seen as tragic, if they themselves feel fine?

Holy god. 1000000000x this. Why does no one ever ask those who are affected what they want?

I don't care if it's a disorder or not, they're people. If they want a cure, lets help them find a god damn cure. If they don't, we'll just treat them like people.

[Hegemonicretribution]

The issue I find is that for some people autism is so integral to them that the notion of a cure would be abhorrent. They may have found a valid, albeit different integration with society. For others, however, it is a source of huge anxiety and suffering. This may stem from difficulties with integration, but also from a huge array of associated conditions. Hypersensitivity can cause acute pain, and over stimulation can result in frequent instances of self harm.

It seems that self determination would be preferable as far as possible, but that can be problematic when it comes to a group representing a diverse condition. If seeing ASC as another expression of the genome leads to better inclusion then great, but if the payoff is greater suffering for those that are most affected then there is a need for caution.

[Flying Purple People Eater]

In regards to some form of cure, It's not a one-size fits all' argument.

While some people are completely comfortable with their autism and have the ability to make their own decisions, other extreme cases are like hell on earth. In example, there is a teenaged girl I have read of with autism (can't remember the name) who'd been diagnosed with the mental capacity of a two-year old all her life up until she got in front of a computer and typed out her thoughts and feelings to her parents - indicating that she was far smarter than they'd previously believed. She described in painful detail how the ultrasensitivity to touch, eyesight and smell made her do the things she did and that it was like a living hell. If that's the kind of autism that they wish to find a cure for, then I'm completely for that.

However, if 'curing' autism to these people means going up to functioning, otherwise normal people with autism, dehumanising them and stripping them of the ability to decide whether they want to get 'fixed' in the first place because "it's the disorder talking", then no fuck that. That's eugenic-level elitist bullshit.

[Sea]

Only if THEY want a cure. Also, part of the ARM is that all the attention looking for a cure.(Which really they are just looking for prenatal testing to encourage eugenics.) The question was "Should there be an attempt at finding a cure?". I really don't feel that it is necessary that we poll everyone regarding weather or not they approve of the advancement of medical science. That scientific knowledge is, alongside the fight against the economic basis for discrimination, one of our greatest tools in combating such prejudice.
(Which really they are just looking for prenatal testing to encourage eugenics.) To prevent research for a cure on account of what "they" are doing according to your conspiracy theory is to continue to put at disadvantage individuals with autism. Whether it was intentional or not, that's promoting ableism.
In regards to some form of cure, It's not a one-size fits all' argument.There's never really a homogenous "cure" for anything, and of course this is infinitely more true for conditions of the mind. The OP's question assumed some monolithic cure and I just went along with that.

[blake 3:17]

I was baffled by the poll of everyone on weather -- that'd be a pretty huge and constant undertaking.

The word you want (or the one we need) is "whether". Thank you.

[Hegemonicretribution]

There's never really a homogenous "cure" for anything, and of course this is infinitely more true for conditions of the mind. The OP's question assumed some monolithic cure and I just went along with that.

The issue (from what I understand of it) that some elements of the ARM are opposed to is not providing help or support to autistic individuals. The issue is that by phrasing autism as something that may potential require a cure, a stance is taken against it.

In practical terms, how many parents would seek to cure their children? This is not an extension of designer babies, because whilst some parents may favour a particular eye colour, or body type, I believe the assumption is that few would choose a spectrum condition and many would choose against it.

It is not likely to be a simple case of self determination. Mental capacity is a very tricky subject, especially with regards to autism.

[Sea]

I was baffled by the poll of everyone on weather -- that'd be a pretty huge and constant undertaking.Just a little sarcasm, friend.

The word you want (or the one we need) is "whether". Thank you.whoops

[Dr. Jay II]

Sorry for bringing up an old topic, but as an autistic, I think that my opinion could interests some.

1) Is autism a disorder?
Yes, I think it is. It's not offensive to me. Saying that I have a disease is, though.

2) Should there be an attempt at finding a cure?
I seriously don't know. I'm HFA (High functionning autistics), so I do not have a clue about the struggles of the LFA (low functionning autistics). From my point of view, I do know that autism is a part of me, and curing it is erasing a part of myself. Then again, I don't know the pain of LFA.

Also, finding treatments for the people who suffers from sensory issue would be way more useful than finding a cure. I honestly don't think it's possible. We have a different brain. Curing it seems to me quite impossible.

3) To what extent should the autistic rights movement be considered representative of individuals with ASC?
For the moment, there's seems to be a lot of supporters of the ableist Autism $peaks organization. In fact, autistics are very ableists and this rights movement is new to me.

But even if most of us would believe in it, we're not representative of all autistics.

4) What role is envisaged for those with an ASC in the future.
We can do many things, and should'nt be restricted on our condition.

[TaylorS]

I have Asperger's and am part of the ARM. IMO in the last 20 years or so there has been an every increasing narrowing of "normality" and eccentricity and oddness has increasingly become medicalized into a "pathology". Businesses are increasingly reluctant to employ "oddballs" and use things like personality tests in order to get good brainless corporate drones.

Aditionally, I think the current hysteria about a non-existent autism "epidemic" is a reflection of the current anti-rational Zeitgeist that sees being very logical and rational as a pathology. The logical tendencies of autistic people runs counter to this increasingly pervasive anti-rational mindset that originated in the 1960s.

[Firebrand]

I think the dangers of searching for a "cure" lie in the fact that a lot of parents would have their kids "cured" just because they don't fit their "perfect baby" fantasy. All this hype about the search for "a cure" makes parents focus on their dreams of what they wanted to happen, rather than dealing with the reality of what does happen. I know for a fact that my brother wouldn't be the same person if you reconfigured his brain like that, and that brings us to the question of whether it is really moral to effectively replace one person with another. Where does it end? What if rebelliousness was classed as a disorder, and a cure were found. Where would that leave most of the people on this forum?

The focus should be on helping people with autism, and the people around them, and in fact society as a whole, cope with autism, and make adjustments. The main problem is not autism itself but the inflexibility of the school system in particular, that doesn't allow for people who can't tick all the boxes at the approved ages, and don't follow the prescribed "steps of development" at the prescribed rate. Quite often even kids with quite severe autism can learn to interact with the world and other people, if given time and support. The problem is if you can't get to that stage within a certain number of years you are written off by the system. The understanding on how to deal with autism, especially in mainstream schools is often severely lacking, with refusals to deviate from standard teaching methods even when they prove ineffective. e.g. the insistence on making kids with auditory processing issues learn to read phonetically. Autistic kids often need one on one support which the govt is unwilling to pay for, since in their eyes there is no point in wasting that much money on someone who will probably never be a useful worker bee, but could with that help have a fuller life with far more options and possibilities.