The Great 'NeuroDiversity' Swindle

Post Reply New Topic

Isn't the NeuroDiversity position originally an NT construct that allows NT's to feel better about their children having AS ?

It's since been latched onto by the anti-cure element of the AS community to promulgate their indignant and uncompassionate POV's.

Correct me if I'm wrong though.

or, it could be a reaction to the norm, which is thereby re-labeled in order to sustain a (hopefully) artificial distinction.

After all, we're cross-fertile.... People are people, so why should it be...

truthfully, we just need to learn about each other in order to get along better.

indignant and uncompassionate???
They are not against helping autistic people, they are against normalcy as a goal.
Btw no one seems to have a clue about what "normal" is, I don't think it exists.

The brutally forward "anti-cure" stance is originally more about taking distance from the unrealistic idea of a miracle potion that would turn weird people into averege people, so we can instead look at what autism and normalcy actually is and do something that would actually help someone.
But it has been taken too literal.

Why would stopping one line of investigation assist with another ?
It's not a zero-sum game.

The motivation for a cure is rooted in compassion and the desire to relieve suffering.

And even if (for whatever reasons you may choose to disagree) you somehow can't imagine that AS causes suffering, it would still be profoundly immoral to hamper the search for a cure on the basis that 'it might not be suffering'.

That's the arrogance and discompassion of the NeuroDiversity position.

The fact that we can't switch between neurotypicality and AS means that it's not visible in the same way that say Leprosy is.

Does that make it acceptable to do nothing about it ?

Hmm, maybe I should start a thread about the "psychiatry swindle"? Neurodiversity is a very useful concept.

Perhaps not exactly zero-sum but there are a lot of things done and said by those prominently carrying a "cure" banner that are hurtful to those with AS and very destructive, even the very individuals that they intend to help. The more helpful aspects of an ND outlook do seek to address those things. Note that I am not blind to nor do I give free pass to the unsavory portions that gather around the ND banner; the jingoism, the myopic vision, and self-centered attitudes.

That compassion mixed with misunderstanding makes an excellent paving material on hellbound roads. There-in is the rub.

So the search for a cure should be abandoned because of some imaginary and groundless fear ?

That's what we have medical ethics committees (among many other such panels) for.

The only people who are forcibly treated with anything are those who present a legally demonstrably threat to the safety of the general public.

... that you and I should get along so awfully?

By Jove, that's the Anwser! Everyone needs to wear fishnet shirts and put on make-up in sexually ambiguous ways. Oh, and take the time to communicate, both incoming and outgoing.

I was posting with the "Tyler" account. Through some hard work and patience by all involved I believe that "lurker" came away with a bit better understanding, and tolerance, of "neurodiversity". Is he going to be holding tea with some of the more strident ND folks? Er, well I dare say not this week. Baby steps, baby steps to bring us all together. But I think he edged a bit closer to seeing the common goals. I know I came away reminded of the frustration and helplessness felt by parents who are seeing very real suffering of their kids, reminded of my own ignorances and fears lost, of my own trials and tribulations attempting to understand and communicate with my son.

All in all I chalked the whole episode up in the "win" column.

That'll teach me to listen to Depeche mode...

I guess the point I'm making is that

a) we're not 100% yet on what autism is
b) we don't know that there ever will be a cure (in my lifetime, anyway)

Sir, place the loaded question on the table and step away. That question has all sorts of problems with it. What I don't think you are grasping that we are still at the gaining understanding stage, not the "finding a cure" stage, and that currently the evidence points to there not being a feasible cure anymore than curing someone of having a pulse...and all that implies. Fortunately there has been some progresses in the treatments to alleviate/mitigate some negative symptoms, by various medical and mundane means. But confusing that with "cure" is a matter of misunderstanding/miscommunication.

You don't realize that a propensity for ignoring/pissing all over/crying "conspiracy" against limits imposed by said panels and similar bodies is part of the problem within the "cure" movement?

... or those that are of age of minority (and a few others).

The problem is, "the cure" to turn an autistic person into an NT is very likely beyond our lifetimes. The researchers know this. They know that to re-wire every individual neuron would be highly dangerous. Therefore, the main focus of autism research is genetic testing, made for the purposes of pre-natal screening followed by selective abortion. Once they have that, then they won't bother to try and cure anything. All they have to do is wait for the existing autistic people to die off.

Right on Katie. That nailed it perfectly.

I hesitate to dip my toes into these waters without an asbestos suit but...

Speaking as a suspected Aspie (not yet formally diagnosed) and as the parent of a child with severe autism I think that I see this frequent WP topic a little more from both sides.

Genetic research is good for a lot more than selective abortions. I know the numbers re: Down Syndrome and I am very concerned about the potential for selective abortions gone wild but I also believe that the research is too important to stop.

I was raised by good parents but I had a miserable childhood for social reasons. I still have problems today in some areas that affects my work. My child is frequently miserable due to sensory issues and being overstimulated. I will not oppose research that could alleviate his suffering, and hopefully help him to avoid the problems I have had growing up and as an adult. If it is a given that there is a genetic element to autism then research in effective treatments for harmful symptoms and or co-morbids begins with finding the relevant genes.

Even if no new therapies were ever developed. I believe that it would be valuable to know the risk factor for potential parents. Having children is a blessing with costs. Having a child with severe autism is blessing with a much higher cost paid not only by the parents but also by the siblings of the ASD child.

I look at my wife's and my siblings that will be starting families in the future and right now they just don't know the risk factors.

I want to end by saying that I love my son and would not trade him for a different "normal" child. Issues were raised during the pregnancy that would have led some parents to selectively abort but we did not. We also turned down the screening for Down Syndrome altogether. My concern is not with having a special needs child but with the best life I can provide him with while also providing a happy childhood for his brother.

I'm not sure if neurodiversity means no cure as in don't help people with autism? Where do people get this idea?

One person thinks the word cure equates to good treatment.

Another person thinks cure means eradicating every single trait.

Another person thinks cure means genocide.

There have been news stories that have spoken about a cure in the form of genetics and prenatal screening. Why would anyone think that as a valid cure? Isn't that a lack of empathy?

Isn't that what sociopaths would come up with?

Eradicating all traits of autism as a cure? That sounds like someone who thinks everyone should be exactly the same. Why would anyone want that?

Cure in a form of treating symptoms that are bothering the person with autism? That approach is less forced and helpful.

For people who claim autistics don't have empathy, I sure do see alot of people who can't put themselves in other people's shoes unless they experience it themselves. Maybe it's more like someone with autism will not put on a fake smile and pretend they care where as someone else who has been told it's the norm will and others believe it.

If there were alot of people with empathy, wouldn't they be able to put themselves in an autistic's shoes and understand that a person with autism does have feelings but just doesn't express it the same way they do?

The term normality is all about conformity so let's say being rude and manipulative is what earns you the most rewards and in order to be normal you must be that way then the conformists adapt to that.

If you get most rewards from being nice and honest, then it becomes normal.

Normality is forever changing.

Normality is not a solid foundation.

Normality is about the fads and what sells at that time.


There was a time when integrity, honesty and being polite was the norm. There was a time when there were no flourescent lights, candles were the norm.

I don't see why there is such a problem with accepting that people are not all the same. Not on the outside, not on the inside.

I think that the concern is that if a prenatal test were available that a majority of people would perform the test and choose to abort if the test came back positive. Through the individual actions of all those potential parents that the effect would be the eradication of ASD.

Of course if the number of autistics were miniscule less research on treatment of symptoms would be done and awareness in the general population would be reduced making life harder for the autistics that are out there.

Nah, not a 100% to 0% game, more like 99% to 1%.

There are lots of research that attempts to find medical differences in autists, and they seem to have enormous funding and media representation.(they even have their own ribbon you know...)

Then there's things like autistic intelligence and alternative communication.
Autistic people can learn and be gifted, and tend to be independent self-learners, how do we help autists who do not teach themselves, to learn? there's a whole science about how NTs learn called pedagogy, but how come some autists learn easier than others? frankly we have no idea.

If we would have spent a 10th of the funding we now spend on "cure" and "prevention", on alternative communication and autistic intelligence, then we would be so damn far ahead today.
Give more anti-cure and lets change that 99 to 1 to 50-50 tbh.

It's also a strange claim that only "high functioning" individuals are anti-cure, it's not true.