Pro or Anti Cure?

Post Reply New Topic

I don't think Autism is a disease, so I don't think it can be cured.

I think that individuals (Autistic and NT) can need support in their lives. If they need support they should be given as much as possible.

Some people use 'cure' as a euphemism for amniocentesis followed by abortion. I think this should be called eugenics rather than cure.

Also "none of the above"

"Pro cure or anti cure?" is not the right question. It's like asking if all legs with infections should be amputated.

Quality of life is what matters to me. If there are things interfering with my quality of life, why would I refuse something that would rectify that? Wouldn't it be prudent to balance the risks against the benefits and make a reasoned choice rather than adhere to an ideology that over generalizes?

I am an autism supremacist but ill respect or settle for a neurodiversity solution

Being N-NT is an evolutionary survival trait, and as such is in no way an illness that needs curing. In the same way a defect to 13.910*T allele allows 30% of the population to drink bovine secretions without much in the way of reaction. (The allele that causes lactase persistence in Europeans is located 13910 bp upstream of the lactase gene. It is a T polymorphism called -13.910*T)
It is a “survival tool” that enabled our ancestors to diversify from H&G to semi-permanent settlements

Cure is simply a word used to instill an importance in awareness and potential especially with human rights and choice. Treatment is the process of potential cure which is more the absolute resolution to said and applicable symtoms. It's I don't think talking about the good things being changed. Like the DSM talks only about negative aspects because those are the parts concerning treatment. It would be unwise to persist as if it is universally insulting or derogatory to seek cure. I know since young I had troubles. That does not make me a bad person. But I have enough humility to realize an assumption in judgement as if I am unworthy of life because that is false and others do not intend that.

There is little difference between cure and treatment. The ultimate form of treatment is to cure hardship. To cure sensory integration impairment for instance when someone chooses is a human right. It does not appear very well when others seek to evade that right. However I don't think it is healthy to feel as if one is in whole defective or to think about defect and then rebel against improvement. My solution to that problem is positive thinking and thinking less of the label because it's just a label and that is negative to think about.

The word "cure" is almost an abomination to me, actually. You can't cure cancer, but you can put it into remission. You can't cure elderly dementia, but you can forestall its progression. You can't cure a broken leg to make it as if it had never been damaged, but you can mend it to the point that it can be used again even though it will never be quite the same.

After being treated successfully for syphilis, you will carry scars for the rest of your life. That's no "cure" because it doesn't put victims of syphilis back entirely to the way they were. If you are treated successfully for pneumonia, the damage that the disease does to your lungs makes you susceptible to subsequent attacks of pneumonia. Treatment for cocaine addiction still leaves the brain with a permanent yearning that only that drug can fulfill, and the drug has lasting effects on a person's physical health. You don't get "cured."

Maybe there is such a thing as a true "cure" for something, though I don't know what, but the word "cure" suggests that somehow the patient will be "put back to how he or she was," which is almost never the case in true medicine. Even if you could have an illness and all signs of it forever eradicated from your body, you would still bear the memory of it. The word "cure" is for someone who wants to go backward.

I am taking a very good medication for my Tourettes that also helps my Aspergers. I am extremely grateful to have it because it has worked tremendously to the effect of improving my quality of life. I don't consider myself to be less a person who has Tourettes Syndrome and Aspergers. Instead, I see myself as a person who has received very good care from one of the finest experts in his field, and I can't believe how lucky I am.

So no, I don't want there to be a "cure" for any form of autism. I want there to be a way forward. I want there to be a way to make it possible for a LFA kid somewhere to learn how to talk and pick up a useful job skill. I want better social skills training for young people who are affected with Aspergers Syndrome. Maybe there is even a way to use deep brain stimulation therapy to help people who are on the autistic spectrum. We should find a way forward.

And yet, if I were to say, "no, I don't want there to be a cure," I feel that this would suggest that I see a low functioning autistic child as a "healthy" person who is simply "neurodiverse." I do not. A person with mild Tourettes or simple Aspergers is "neurodiverse," for these are not as much individuals suffering from an illness as much as they are healthy people who need some understanding and sometimes a little help. LFA is to Aspergers Syndrome as an orange grove is to box of Tang: it really is one of the most miserable, troublesome conditions in the whole, wide world. Although I do believe that it is misguided to expect there to be a "cure" for LFA, I think it is important to invest in improving these people's quality of life in any way possible, not excluding extreme forms of psychosurgery where appropriate.

I think how we view and how medical science is now will starkly differ as time progresses.

I'm neither pro- nor anti-cure. I personally don't want a cure, but others do and it would be inappropriate to tell them what they should or should not want.

I dislike the separation of "LFAs" the way they are in the poll. I think they often get introduced into discussions here as if they lack agency, free will, awareness (self or otherwise), and are routinely tokenized.

I cannot imagine holding a stance about any autistic people that I would not extend to those who would be categorized as LFA. I am not saying that our needs are the same at all or that some do not need more assistance and services than others, but rather I don't see what exactly separates them from us that requires any of us to decide what is best for them. If I deserve self-determination, so do they.

People have but not necessary you. Think of cure in autism awareness as a means to enhance treatment potentials for symptoms. Some view a particular symptom as good and some bad. Autism manifest in individuals differently. When a symptoms is bad the idea of curing by means of absolute (complete) treatment remedy of the symptom is a human rights issue. Cure is the result of treatment but cure in awareness effects the human psyches of others to support it to enhance remedies. One could ultimately say treatment or cure but in culture cure may derive more support.