I think Aspergeans should NOT have children

Post Reply New Topic

Hey my "I get the sense from WP that...." has absolutely no scientific basis, I have done no research, or even bothered to do the slightest bit of analysis of the posts on WP to come at this idea. In other words my reasoning is at best pure subjective drivel

I was undecided for a while, but now I have decided that I would like to be a parent.

Honestly, people without any conditions will consider this. Besides, genetically speaking, adding your own bit ot the gene pool actually helps. Reproduction exists to do two things (over the course of generations): 1) Slowly weed out detrimental flaws (as long as the gene pool is fresh and diverse, some family ailments cant be done away with by a uniting with a family that doesnt have those traits), 2) Produce viable offspring with the advantages of the parents, along with its own set of disadvantages/quirks that may/may not ensure its survival and or propagation. Your view is quite negative, perhaps from your years of being tormented . . . but you let yourself be tormented by it. Besides, all things in life have a price. You cant expect your kids, or anyone elses, to grow up in a happy go lucky society . . . that just doesnt exist. Life is unpredictable, thats one of the few constants. The problem is you view your condition (whatever it may be) as a hindrance, but you have yet to learn how to apply it. Folks in the Autism range can hyper-focus on their interests, which allows us to look at things exactly as they are, but from angles that others cannot think of (Read something by Temple Grandin, who uses this ability to make slaughterhouses more "animal friendly").

I have read a bit about Temple Grandin and heard her speak several times and I do not doubt her intellect nor her rather peculiar good intentions but it somehow reminds me of the possibility of a Nazi guard being kind and considerate to the Jews on their way to the gas chamber.

If most of the people I see have kids can have kids, then what would make someone with Aspergers worse with kids? We all have strengths and weaknesses. You have kids because you want kids, or because you are prolife and sexually active.

Grandin knows how to steer the right course in the animal stockyards and processing plants. We raise animals to be slaughtered for their hide and meat. We can be humane about it if we so desire.

And there is a large difference between herding humans to slaughter and herding lesser beasts to slaughter. The lesser animals are not people.

Grandin has used her special characteristics and talents brilliantly. She is useful, functional and earns her keep. What could be wrong with that?

ruveyn

Look at Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. We raise people to be slaughtered too. Where is Temple Grandin when we need her in the right place?

I agree with your views. I'd rather not be autistic, and since I would pass this on to any children I might have, having children is not an option for me. Responsibility is where it's at for me. I hear a lot about how people wouldn't want to get their autism removed, and frankly, I think it's just a bad case of denial - Nothing's wrong, I don't want to be like everyone else! Everyone else is the problem!

And the lies just get piled on top of the foundation of denial until they've convinced themselves that they actually want this disability. Life IS better without autism, but somehow along the way, people convince themself that it's somehow a blessing, and strangely enough, convince others, too. Lying to people because of your own insecurities is one thing, but actually believing the lies yourself... Well, that's just sad.

Look, this isnt about casting a negative shadow. Those who take the negative view are missing the big picture: we DONT know what brings about ASD. A family could go generations before producing a child in the spectrum. As i stated on another thread (pure speculative thinking) I think the gene that -COULD- be responsible does so to protect the newborn child during a difficult birth. Running on pure observation, this gene would cut or limit oxygen to certain areas of the brain in an effort to preserve the more necessary areas. Then, once the oxygen supply is stead it starts to, lets say, bypass some sections to reestablish the flow. IF this is the case, then the gene is our evolutionary defense against complete brain damage at birth. Off-topic, i think i may start a poll about this concept and see where it goes. Anyway, this could imply that everyone has this gene, but it only activates during difficult births.

I guess it would depend with the severity of autism, but anyone who can learn to love themselves flaws and all are far from sad. Everybody has flaws, not just autistic people. What's sad is when you can never be good enough for yourself.

We are what we are. Anybody who cannot accept that is in trouble. Having kids is a crap shoot. You deal with what you get and make the best of it. Life is an adventure with no guarantees. It's a good idea to have a sufficient income since childbearing and raising is expensive but we all die at the end and life is really too short to cringe at all the lurking horrors. You meet them as they turn up and hope something works out.

Yup. Soldier on, and suck up the pain and bother. Bitching and moaning are wastes of time.

ruveyn

Wrong

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt106618.html


I don't understand, why so many of you want that desperately to be demographically equal to aspie males(in term of numbers)?

Ummm....no I'm not wrong because I don't believe I ever made my hypothesis a fact unlike yourself LPP.

Many women do go undiagnosed. There's been many articles talking about how females present the traits of aspergers differently from men.

As (my kind) who want to be equal in the ratio of guys....your assumption is mostly YOUR assumption.

And I'll have you know it took years before I was ever diagnosed with aspergers.

I've read that thread, and no concencus appears to have been met. Actually, some excellent rebuttals have been made against you - not the least the fact that the source you used is Wikipedia.

EDIT: And it's a bit of a strawman that you argue that the gender ratio is 'not equal', I think most realize that, but disagree with the heavily exaggerated number you use. In fact, I can't see anything in MissConstrue's post about the gender ratio being equal, so maybe you have problems with your reading comprehension?

It depends on the person, to be honest. I can see how some asps would be pathetic at raising children, but there is a far greater amount of non-asps who can't raise their kids properly either. When you see parents who can't manage their money, don't spend time with their kids, don't teach them skills, either act negligent or discipline them the wrong ways, it's easy to see that you'd be a better parent despite your own issues.
It's a personal choice, anyway. Asperger's isn't a life threatening syndrome, how people deal with it varies considerably.