Why hate Autism Speaks

Post Reply New Topic

I will sum it up.

You have a distrust of Autism Speaks. The more the conversation becomes transparent\understood the less facts there are in reply. Listen folks I am not a member of Autism Speaks, I don't need Autism Speaks in what I do, other autism groups want to associate with me whether they are pro Autism Speaks or not and I never depend on the approval of ideology and I understand in great detail the psychology of the autism community. You must prove your remarks or else be prepared for others to attempt to understand you. Autism is not like being gay, black and so on. People with autism do want treatments developed and while self-esteem is great the politics of self-esteem can be used by politics for other agendas. Sometimes what may seem great really may not be such as a great image of autism being a positive thing for self-esteem and while good for the abortion debate is not good for the quality of life debate.

This is a very important time in autism politics. The media I don't believe has a conspiracy against people with autism. As a community of people the autism community to me is more complicated then the world around me. So as long as sensitive self-esteems exists, so as long as the selective abortion issue is relevant and so as long as cure is sought in awareness you got one mess of a triangular conflict of interest with issues. I am not sure it can be resolved and maybe some folks want to keep you confused.

Autism Speaks simply is the image of autism in context to cure pursuits and it seems little more then that.

If you're pro-cure, I wouldn't worry too much CI. There are plenty of Autism organizations, with a little research, it's not hard to find one that doesn't offend whatever political corner you're in. People who care about autism will find the organization they approve of, either one doing research, or one providing services to families with autistic children. (both I assume you care about) And we all know the general public will just donate to whomever has TV commercials, so we can't really stop the research from getting done. If there isn't an outright cure found (nowadays, there usually isn't. We haven't cured anything since polio), they'll find useful treatments or therapies.

I believe in the preservation of choice and the preservation of all relevant human rights. I also think it is important to take notice when false facts and baseless beliefs attempt to counter the human rights to choose the pursuit of cure. To me it's fine to say you don't believe in a cure, think its wrong and should be stopped. I just don't believe the public should be pressured into evading human rights based on propaganda. It is annoying at this point but has been satisfying to intellectually figure out this part of autism politics. I've done it for other issues such as the belief in extraterrestrial life visiting earth, conspiracy theories, psychic-ism and other kinds of topics in psychosocial related studies. Just as an issue this topic has gotten to a point where I cannot find anymore challenge and I worry about the human rights of others with regard.

All ASA chapters throughout the nation should receive a letter from my organization within 30-days about inclusion frameworks on the local level. Id really enjoy folks to focus on progress instead of conflict when applicable. These cure politics and related issues are a distraction but do not typically manifest in day to day advocacy of most organizations

Well the public really isn't hearing the anti-cure position. Until they start to do research on the subject, most NTs probably have no idea that anyone wouldn't want a cure. Even if they were somehow made aware of the problems with autism speaks, there are plenty of alternative organizations providing services and doing research that deserve funding. (And as a strict matter of practicality, spreading the money around is a good idea)

It's kind of hard for anti-cure to get a fair say with such bad advocacy calling pro-cure pity. You got to be hard on poor advocacy approaches. Also anti-cure in conceptual premise seeks to oppose a cure and why would anyone wish to oppose curing when others choose it. Doesn't Autism Speaks just give other organizations such as research science organizations money? I could always if I chose and had the proper professionals which I have access to raise money to research scientifically (mostly behavioristic related) treatments for inclusion. Public relations is important and unless an organization does proper public relations they are not going to get funded by the public as easily as Autism Speaks for instance.

I'd suggest getting rid of the anti-cure concept and presenting it as a human rights choice issue in conceptual approach.

You're right, the PR is problematic. To Start, Anti-cure is just a terrible name. It doesn't frame the debate well for us. When you look at Pro-Life and Pro-choice, they both use a label that sounds pleasing. After all, Life and Choice are both pleasing concepts. Anti-cure doesn't have that. It sounds negative and counter productive. And it's not really an accurate expression, since it's more about the side effects of the existence of a cure that we dislike.

Those who don't want a cure for ANY autistic are kinda rare (although I've seen a couple people with this position). They just don't want to see it forced on kids, or see a genocide happen. Some also have concerns about spending money on what they see as useless research when families could use that money to help their autistic children. Other's worry that cure research sends a counterproductive message to the world about our ability to be productive member's of society while we're trying to get education and employment opportunities for the community.

So yeah, we could use a different name then anti-cure. (Pro Choice is Pro-Choice instead of Pro-Abortion for a reason)

Sorry, ci. I made it quite clear that I could only offer my opinion. I'm not an activist. I'm not a media professional. If you have no use for my opinion it would have been useful to say so earlier in the conversation.

Separate the autism abortion issue from the cure concept. Although cure research could result in prenatal testing enabling abortion choices the choice for cure differs substantially. The guilting toward individuals that are pro-cure which cure approaches are common place in the disability community and general world as a whole simply because science needs to figure out a complete understanding of autism which might also lead to enough understanding for prenatal testing is simply different issues. When in context to cure for treatment development the abortion issue is a conflict of interest politically with human rights for those advancements.

I am unable to advocate directly for the abortion issues whether pro or not but will create differing ways to think about the issue. However I am concerned for those that have developed a psychological attachment for the issue. I am also concerned that the issue will manifest violence as explicit threats have already surfaced. I personally do not believe the vast majority of people hate people with autism which can be easily assumed emotionally given the abortion issue.

The abortion issue folks got to realize sometimes younger individuals in school are reading these forums. What emotional damage is being done to them whether for or against but as a issue as a whole. I believe therapy may be needed. Professionals should be made aware of the issue in schools perhaps that work with children with autism and in the developmental disability field in context to individuals with autism should this issue become more popular.