Cures vs culture

Post Reply New Topic

Great list, KenG.

I am autistic, but I don't adhere to autistic culture. I am just me. I decide things based on MY review of their pros/cons.

I am an SLP who is proud to be autistic. I want to empower autistic children to have the skills to decide what their life will be and how to get it. Communication is pivotal in this. I predominantly teach partner skills to families and school staff, such as how to listen to the autistic and how to accommodate the environment to allow the autistic voice to emerge by whatever mode is most effective for the autistic. Once the autistic has a voice that is recognized, the autistic can determine their own intervention. I can also help 'curebie' colleagues and parents begin to understand the disrespectfulness of their mindset, but they can be a tough crowd to win over. They are often bullies to people like me.

For example, I can see merits to judicious use of ABA intervention to reinforce recognizable intentional communication that is not harmful or destructive so their families can listen. I can't imagine it as a sole approach, but being analytic about my actions can be helpful. Done correctly, it does not prevent the autistic from getting what they want, and actually increases this by getting it in ways that feel better for everyone. ABA can also help others communicate more effectively to autistics with auditory processing difficulties. Once this is established, play is the best intervention. Everyone learns better when they're having fun.

I also am in favor of being independent in this world. If someone takes care of me, then I am giving away personal power. Therefore, until I win the lottery, I will continue to learn how to concede in the workplace. It's the price I pay to be as autistic as I wanna be on my own time. I want other autistics to maintain personal power.

I am completely against 'self contained' classrooms; educating autistics w/o full inclusion. This is not to turn autistics into pseudo-NTs, but for NTs to learn to appreciate autistics. I have seen this be successful in classrooms I worked in (Waterbury VT has incredible schools) that train all classroom teachers in Responsive Classrooms, differentiated instruction, push-in services including enrichment specialists, and an on sight inclusion specialist who helps staff & peers understand autism needs such as sensory, communication, and social differences as well as help the autistic recognize how to succeed in this world. The autistic gets to be autistic and when they and their peers grow up, the workforce is ready to accept them.

All this inclusion aside, people in the autistic culture provide the valuable service of defining a norm for who we are. But like any complex group of people, we are not all the same.

While it is helpful to get diagnoses, society has a way of seeing diagnoses as disabilities and proceed to de-able people w/autism. I feel very lucky that I did not have a DX (I graduated from high school pre-IDEA). I was not institutionalized so had to find my own way. We need to ableize autism, esp those who are nonverbal.

LONG LIVE SELF-DETERMINATION,

Right now autism is DXed by a subjective behavioral description. I want the criteria changed to Cognitive Style summed up by this graph where y=intelligence (not IQ), x=skills

[img][img][800:577]http://i244.photobucket.com/albums/gg39/janetcoe/imagejpg1.jpg[/img][/img]

The autistic cognitive style is peeks & valleys, while NTs undulate around a level. For example, I am either a smart person who can sometimes be so stupid or a stupid person who can sometimes be really intelligent. Some autistics are savant in their peek skills, while the rest of us are merely unexpectedly bright. If our valleys are better supported, our peek skills would become valuable to our communities. We have important skills they lack.

Our behavior sets us apart, but does not define us. Our cognitive style does, and each of us has a unique pattern of skills. This is what I want parents and educators to be looking for, to enrich.

Right now, it is called "Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities" by the psychs, but these are our developing cognitive peeks. The psychs are perpetuating lies to make these strengths our disability. This is why some of us can't recognize them either.

Read biographies. Every major contribution to human culture was made by someone with 'Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities'; was made by an autistic. NTs can not give a narrow interest to develop it into something special.

That is nonsense. Autism is defined by more than "Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities;" you can't legitimately retroactively diagnose someone based on that alone (if you can do it at all).


Prove it.

That is nonsense. Autism is defined by more than "Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, or activities;" you can't legitimately retroactively diagnose someone based on that alone (if you can do it at all).

[quote]

I guess from your feisty reply that you take this seriously, but it's not "nonsense".

The one I mentioned is one of the three criteria currently used. Your argument against it is one I've heard before, but living or dead it's all just behavioral checklists administered by pseudo-experts.

I replied in a cranky way, and I am sorry.

However, while you may disagree with some of the details of my post, the main point is that many, perhaps most, autistics are unhappy people. They have many co-morbids associated with unhappiness such as depression and anxiety.

I say, no wonder.

We are defined by our deficits and most of the experts and those who care for us as we mature as well as society in general view us through a negative lens. I think we should begin to take measure and change this. I offered a couple of ideas.

Any group of people, those protected by anti discrimination laws and those who aren't, have strengths and needs. They all have heroes without the entire group being pressured to be superhuman. To talk about our group realistically we may need to touch on these successful examples. To read bios is not to say we are all expected to impact civilization, but to dream of possibilities. To learn from other's mistakes and successes. To say we cannot give a official diagnosis to both Tesla and his nemesis, Thomas Edison, and so many others who fit the criteria misses the point that people with communication and social deficits could focus on their narrow interests, we can achieve much. It's like saying Sojourner Truth doesn't count because we cannot analyze her DNA. We have to stand up and take our place. We must no longer buy into the the lies that we are defective and must be fixed. We need to be defined by our strengths.

I simply will not join in a autistic-haters group, even if they are autistic. That is self defeating and just plain depressing. This is my life to live and I will not ruin it by self destruction.

Instead of taking the easy route of tearing someone down, I hope at least a couple who also want things to improve will add refinement, and eventually, find a more public forum. How many autistics accessing WP are researchers, psychs, teachers, or therapists. How many are writers or commute through other media. How many are not professionals, yet have ideas to contribute? We need a grass root movement for change and all have a place.

We are currently defined by psychs who do not understands us and view us through the lens of negative descriptions.

We have members throughout society, at all stratas of it, worldwide. We need to define who we are - ourselves.

Then "touch" on them rather than diagnosing them. To "touch" on a subject is to take it lightly; to say that someone has a multifaceted syndrome such as autism is a more serious matter.


No. The mention of a detail does not imply that the main point was missed. Furthermore, if your purpose is to do something that lifts autistics up, maybe you should re-think dismissing the analysis inspired by such a basic autistic characteristic as focus on details. Finally, if the purpose of mentioning the likes of Tesla and Edison is to highlight what they achieved with their narrow focus/special interests, then you misrepresent that purpose by calling them autistic, given that the relevant point (according to you) is that they did what they did with that one particular autistic characteristic rather than autistic traits in general.

Thank you for taking the time to critique my writing. It helps me to better present in the future

These are core questions, BuyerBeware. I also think you're correct in the answers are simple enough for a kindergartener to grasp: "play well with others". I had a like-minded epiphany about this simple idea in Sheri Tepper's book, Six Moon Dance.

It may seem this way sometimes, but I think that we should just try to learn from each other.

Its a case of majority rules. NT are the majority so they literally define "normal"

"Normal" is a relative concept defined by statistics. When researchers up grade or develop a measure of "normal", they norm it. Norms change over time and are different in different places.

I like who am and am proud of myself. I a good worker: competent, reliable, and dedicated. All I want is for the norm to let me do my job without bullying, usually in the form of sabotage.

Up with neurodiversity, down with neurobigots!