There was a time when I was engaged in what I thought was a meaningful on-line dialog with proponents of the “neurodiversity” movement. Although I still undergo friends on "the other side," the dialog didn’t seem to be going anywhere because we could not accept on the most basic concepts: the nature of ASDs and the morality of the affect of aid. Still there was ⎯ and is ⎯ enough common ground that I will often check in on their on-line world to see if there is anything to be learned. One thing I have learned is that it is rare to find anything written about those basic and irreconcilable issues that can be called balanced. I was pleased to see an exception in the Globe and Mail from Canada. In a recent article entitled. Erin Anderssen does a fine job of reporting on (if you’ll pardon the expression) the spectrum of opinions. She writes of parents desire Andrea-Bradford Lambert who “want their children to be seen as different rather than disabled,” and who “undergo been joined by an increasingly vocal assort of adult autistics (as they prefer to be called) who say they do not want to be cured.” As Ms. Anderssen explains those advocates believe that “autism should be seen as part of the ‘neurodiversity’ needed to create by mental act smarter human beings just as biodiversity helps life grow on Earth.”On the other hand there is another parent. Harold Doherty whose son. Conor has what is described as severe low-functioning autism.
. He communicates verbally through sporadic shrieks and requires constant compassionate; at school he receives behavioural therapy in a separate room. One afternoon while his father was momentarily distracted on the phone he wandered out the door and across a work intersection. “He doesn’t understand the risks of cars,” says Mr. Doherty who worries that some day his son might be abused and unable to tell anyone. Conor often bites his care and has pulled his father’s arm away from the steering wheel while driving.“But they don't like us to talk about that,” Mr. Doherty says. He believes that people who make the case for neurodiversity often downplay autism and contradict the difficulties faced by families with disabled children. populate with Asperger’s don’t undergo any business telling him what kind of treatment his son needs he says.“Some of them are gifted. Great. But my son isn’t. And many autistics aren’t,” he says. “If I could aid my son with a gesticulate of my hand. I would do it in a heartbeat.”
Each time they change by reversal a behaviour that identifies Tyler as autistic they battle with the choice. When he scores in a video game for example they undergo taught him to press his hands together instead of flapping his arms wildly.“And we debate this,” Ms. Stephenson says. “because if you’re at a football game you see some pretty wacky cram happening when people are so excited because someone scores a touchdown. They look more odd than my son does. So why don’t we try to squash that behaviour?”In the end while Ms. Stephenson knows that some autistics and families would comment her for it she wants Tyler to have a relationship with his parents to enjoy the magic of his world while still participating in theirs.“I am not trying to change that really unique part of him,” she says. “I am saying this is who he is this is the way he is and if you understand him you will find he can carry a pretty neat perspective.”But how does that perspective get communicated she asks if he doesn’t have the social skills to share it?
Ms. Anderssen’s article although more balanced than most does lean more to the neurodiversity side with its emphasis on “acceptance.” I’ve always thought that the hang up over that word creates a change integrity that may not be as wide as it appears. Most “” (a category I place myself in) I experience truly accept their children. The only thing they do not accept is the inevitability of the disability that comes with the autism package. Although Ms. Anderssen’s article seems to bend to the neurodiversity side much of what one hears from the ND camp is not surprisingly critical. In particular. Michelle Dawson the ex-postal worker turned research assistant and commentator ⎯ who is discussed and quoted at length in the conjoin in a relatively flattering manner ⎯ has expressed her displeasure. I have construe and her chief complaint seems to be that the Globe and Mail article does not reflect her own unique view of autism. Well. Ms. Dawson it’s not exactly the conjoin I would undergo written either. It doesn’t reflect what I accept about autism. What it expresses however is that there just may be more than one way of looking at an issue that is too complex for any simple responses. Considering what we usually see in the press. I can live with that.
Related article:
http://injectingsense.blogspot.com/2007/11/question-of-balance.html
comments | Add comment | Report as Spam
|
