Susan Leekam, Autism SPeaks

Post Reply New Topic

So, im going to this conference, and Susan Leekam is speaking.

She is a welsh researcher, working partly for autism speaks´ money, and is a strong supporter of them.

Se works for Lorna Wing, who aside from being a very nice lady, also has a good view of people with autism. So thats surprising.

Im looking for good questions to ask her in regards to her choosing to work for/with autism speaks.

My own question would be:

"What is it about autistic people, that you find so wrong and useless, that you want to make sure that not a single autistic person will be born in the future?"

I think that would be a great question. You should ask it. You should also tell them that you're on the spectrum and that you've made a good life for yourself.

Little advice, don't play the emotional card (i.e. judgemental word use). Try to set on a neutral tone or she will probably get on the defensive which means you won't get alot of honest answers. Stay factual and friendly.

For example, main questions (follow-up question depend on her answers) if not answered in her speech:
-What is your view on autism?
-What is your view on Autism Speaks regarding a cure for autism (anti-vaccinations, heavy metals poisoning treatment (chelation therapy), diets, etc.)?
(don't expect a honest answer, it's one of the contributor of her research - thus a certain influence and a certain dependency)
-What are you're thoughts on eugenetics with autism?

Revealing your autism might change her way of answering your questions, your call.

Good luck!

Cheerfully,
Wallourdes

all around good tips. she will be speaking tomorrow afternoon, its 2 two day conference.

im there as a professional, speaking on autism and sexuality. Im not sure she will know im on the spectrum.

I agree that holding back that piece of information is best, at least at first, to get her to answer more truthful and/or direct.

850 people will he hearing her speak, and hearing me ask her questions. should be good.

more tips appriciated.

I probably wouldn't use the word eugenics though. That has an implication that will probably get her on the defensive again.

I think she would be puzzled by such a question. I don't see merit in being personally offended in that way by the efforts of researchers. I wonder what proof there is that they are trying to prevent anyone from being born.

that is directly written in their goals? they have used terminology in the past like "wiping out autism".

and to give you an exact quote here:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33868343/


"Wright: Hopefully until we eradicate autism. Once we finish autism, then we’re not doing this anymore. We’re sold out [for the Third Annual Celebrity Chef Gala], but they can always still send donations if they want to. "


so yeah. they want to do that.


also in same interview, she takes credit for inventing world autism day. (something the UN actually did, then invited her to come celebrate)

in another interview:

"we try to stem the tide and ultimately eradicate autism for the sake of future generations. If we continue our current trajectory, we’ll get there in my lifetime."

When they talk of wiping out or eradicating autism, I don't think they mean getting rid of individuals or preventing them from being born. I think they're supposedly trying to eventually prevent the condition from disabling anyone else who will live in the future, so they won't live with the disability involved. I'm interested in knowing how helpful her research will turn out.

That makes no sense. Since autism is genetic, how can you stop people from having it in future without aborting their fetuses, as would be the if a pre-natal test were available, or by eliminating the genes via gene therapy? What could conceivably be done is to use therapies that can help the children with autism cope better in life or become more independent but that won't completely remove the disability. I would also rather they had that than a cure.

When they talk of wiping out or eradicating autism, I think they mean exactly what they say.

They certainly want to prevent any more of us being born, and for those of us presently alive, they'd really like to find some way to make shut up and go away. Frying your brain with TMS appears to be successful, and it's a little more subtle than ECT or lobotomy.

I think something like gene therapy would be involved, and maybe some other techniques that would modify aspects of the brain involved, in order to ensure functionality. Independence can't be done without removing disability. No need to cope with an unjust system they live under. Change the way life is.

I think that most people who are curebies have good intentions. They view Autism as a disease, and believe there is a "normal" person in there "trapped" by Autism. To them, a cure for Autism wouldn't eradicate what makes a person who they are, it would free them to really be who they could be.

Those of us full on the spectrum or dancing around the edges know all too well, from personal experience, that it's impossible to eradicate Autism because it permeates everything we do, every way we see the world. But most people process and respond the NT way. Easier to "fix" us than to "fix" the so-called empathetic majority.

Or society can just try and attempt to accommodate people living with disability. That's a better solution.

That sounds like conciliation to me, not a solution. It can't be accommodated to make it bearable. It's not fair and it deprives of too much. It's time for the cognitively well-off to stop pretending mental disability isn't inherently unfortunate.

If you knew anything about me whatsoever, then you would know that I'm NOT "cognitively well-off". The difference is, I actually accepted my "difference" and learnt to adapt to my limitations. While I do sympathise with people who are honestly unable to work because of some kind of disability, you are never going to live life comfortably with that kind of defeatist attitude. There are a lot of people who are more disabled than you.

How are you not well-off that way? Who with a real problem of the such would refer to their impairments as a "difference"? I am truly mentally disabled and have a problem when successful characters like you, define my kind of situations in ridiculously dismissing ways, and accept my submission on my behalf. I basically cannot work, and nothing will console me about that or ensure me comfort despite that. I'm not the one with the defeatist attitude, as I and others refuse to accept a dispossessed and subpar fate as something that can't ever change, while some others are reaping so many benefits. I want a way out of this that involves putting an end to such disability through making ability a right, not a privilege. Not necessarily for my lifetime, but eventually through technology.