Is it just me or is this profoundly disturbing?

Post Reply New Topic

I read this comment on a blog today, and was utterly shocked. I'm well aware of the cure controversy, but I've never heard anyone say that a cure is required EVEN for autistics who are perfectly happy. I am curious about your reaction to this statement:

"the need for services and a cure for those in this sector of the autism spectrum is great, not because they are unhappy with their lot in life but because society as a whole will not be able to sustain the costs of their care if we do not reverse the trend of an increasing growth in the autism spectrum."

Citation, please.

wow. he/she thinks we need to be "cured" because society can't deal with us? last time I checked, they can, it's not our fault that she can't!

And I agree with pschristmas about the citation

Can we have a link please?

The author seems to assume there is no other offsetting purpose to society in having people in need of societies financial support, and forgetting that the way society "cured" Downs Syndrome was to act before birth.

While I do worry about the costs to society of adults unable to support themselves, I've also observed that nature has a balance it seeks, and will find a way to create. It feels like Autism went up when Downs Syndrome went down; perhaps society is SUPPOSED to have members with a different perspective on things, who may not all be able to live independently. I don't think we can eliminate the types of autism this poster fears without some new condition rising up and taking it's place. Nature will seek its balance.

Of course, that author is also forgetting that many, many autistics ARE self supporting, and not a burden to society in the least, and that we all benefit daily by the inventions "functioning" autistics have created for society. Shall we "cure" those inventions and ideas away, too? Ah, perhaps this is one of those people who would say those adults are not truly autistic? That is the end of the spectrum where the growth seems to be most dramatic, however.

Let's also "cure" the NTs who are too lazy to get jobs. I'm pretty sure we can't afford to pay for those either, and there's a lot of them around.

DW, your post sums up my feelings exactly. So well said.

here's the link - I always hesitate to link to people's comments on blogs... I feel a bit like I'm outing them...
http://blog.cripchick.com/archives/8612

This person is an idiot. If they are worried about monetary costs to society, they should worry about those people who have been collecting unemployment for 2 years and not even attempting to look for a job. Or the 'single moms' out there that collect daycare and food assitance while living with their boyfriend for the past decade who makes $50k + per year.

I will sum this up with a phrase my Aunt gave me when I have to deal with stupid people:

"Empty trucks rattle the loudest"

The people who have the least intelligence will be the loudest and most voracious about hating others.

There are more NTs who are sucking off the system than people with autism. There are tons more NTs sucking at life than folks who are AS or Spectrum. At least we have passions!

This whole "cure" thing is just like the issues about people being bi/gay/trans/etc. People are just idiots when it comes to accepting anything other than themselves, and most of the time they hate themselves too.

Reading the whole context, I'm not sure he is meaning what we all are reading. I didn't read it all that carefully, but got the sense that to the author "cure" means anything that can help move a person from dependent to independent. And he does quite specifically restrict his statement to those unable to ever live independently.

Even then ... while I understand the sentiment, I would still suggest the laws of nature would work against the goal. Society has never been able to move 100% of its citizens into independence, and most likely never will be. And one still has to look at the meaning of productive. He's responding to a blog written by someone who is actually disabled; living dependent on society. But that voice is not silent, and it is not without its own type of contribution. One can, perhaps, be a productive member of society while still being dependent upon society for daily living needs. That has always been true of priests and religious leaders, hasn't it?

Mostly, I think those are the sentiments of a frustrated parent worried about what happens when he is no longer able to care for his own grown child. As a parent, you want that child independent so that their needs of daily living aren't prey to politics or the charitable whims of others. You don't trust the safety net; you want your child to be his own safety net. On that one person to one person level, concerned about the one child you love more than life and want to protect from everything you can, I think I can understand what the poster wants.

That's a standard eugenics argument; it's been around for a long time. The only difference in this case is advocating cure rather than enforced selective breeding. I imagine, though, if a cure became mandatory he'd next complain that that's too expensive a burden and selective breeding or abortion should then be mandatory.

And that argument extends to all disabled people (even working ones, since 'accommodations' are an unfair and unaffordable expense put on businesses, right?), the elderly, orphaned children, and so on. It's a race-to-the-bottom argument that ends with some Spartan society where a lot of babies get drowned.

From 1926:
[img][800:954]http://www.autistics.org/library/1926exhibit.jpg[/img] (click image for into about the pic)

there is nothing in that posters comment saying that all autistics are required to take a cure. in fact, if you continue reading, his next post specifically states that those who are high functioning need not take advantage of cures if they choose not to. altho i disagree with his statement about their being two kinds of autistics,"“borderline” generally among the aspergers who generally can function quite well in the normal world" and those requiring 24/7 monitoring and care. that defies the entire idea of autism as a spectrum. there are a lot who are considered high functioning but certainly do NOT function well in the nt world, they simply manage to fake it better than those with a cognitive deficit would.

as i see it, the statement about the need for a cure is an emphasis on the fact that the cure is not just because someone is unhappy with their lot. that is a valid reason for taking a cure, but it is not the only reason. the poster is a parent, and i am sure the ability for their child to take care of themselves after the parents are gone is more than enough reason to consider a cure. how many parents of a disabled child unable to care for themselves, if faced with certain death, would NOT choose to give their child a cure that could allow them to live independently after the parent died? it would be irresponsible of a parent to NOT at least consider it.

i am much more alarmed by those who insist a cure should NOT be made available than those who promote a cure being researched. i have never seen a single person saying all autistics should be made to be cured whether they want to or not, but i sure have seen autistics saying a cure shouldnt be made available at all. its not neurodiversity if you are forcing people to live with a neurological condition they would rather be cured of.