posted
So I'm sitting here reading about Autism as research for a story. Once again, I am struck by the simularities between autism and homosexuality as well as other so called disorders. People believe that by treating symptoms of autism such as rocking and lack of eye contact you cure the "disease" by making the person appear normal. But, first of all, is autism really a disease or simply a neurological variation? Just as homosexuality or bi-sexuality is a variation. It is not a disease, not a disorder, not something that has to be cured. It's simply... different. Groups of people, after all, seem to have an instinctive fear of difference such as certain African tribes in the past killing new born twins seeing them as bad luck or in Europe back in the middle ages, burning young and old women as witches. Not to mention beating up, ridiculing and tormenting anyone in this day and age who is handicapped, shows signs of being gay or is of a different race or religion. We no longer need this sort of behaviour. It is outmoded and useless. It has been damaging society for far too long.
Society must adapt to difference. More people must educate themselves about autism, homosexuality, different religions and cultures. We must learn to see each other as individuals. Otherwise we end up with things such as- Young men having electrodes attached to their genitals to shock them if they look at pictures of males. Or, in Stone Butch Blues how the writer talks about being raped by cops just because she wore men's clothes. Autistics electricuted with mild shocks for their behaviour. It has to stop. The attitudes must change, the old assumptions must be broken. Otherwise, people will continue to fall through the cracks, something that must be avoided at all costs.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If it's causing problems in your daily life, it's a disorder, simple as that. Most treatments for autism do not involve burning stakes so I don't see your point.
Posts: 1839 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wouldn't anything at all from a bad temper to things that are more severe cause problems in daily life? Anything could be considered a disorder, even not being able to go to sleep before 12 am and wake up at 6 am... The problems do relate to each other in a small way... There is only a small difference between detroying native american tribes through genocide and sending children to boarding schools (Like they did in the past) to learn how to be "proper" to the point that they cannot relate to their relatives or speak their own language...
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I am pretty sure that that is due to damaged sperm.
The reason that Autism is concered a disorder, and homosexuality should not is simply because of the way it effects the person. Homosexuality simply means that you have a preference for the same gender over the opposite one. A homosexual can function normally in the world.
In contrast, we have autism. Autism is in no way, shape, or form like homosexuality. With autism, the person does not function normally in the world. They do not have the same capacity to learn and communicate thoughts through speach. Autism keeps a person from being part of soceity, and that will that ever change. The symptoms that autism present will not allow the sufferers from being excepted into a community for obvious reasons, while homosexuality only requires people to stop being biggotted.
posted
What is meant by functioning normally though? That's the main thing I am trying to figure out. Would it really be a disorder if more people in society educated themselves about it and learned how to handle people who behave differently? Wouldn't that make things easier?
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Homosexuality is a devolopemental occurence. Not necessarily a disorder. It simply depends on how much hormones are in the mother's bloodstream when the hypothalamus is being developed.
That doesn't make a homosexual's feelings any less valid than a heterosexual's. It's just different, that's all.
Autism is a genetic occurence, it is not developmental. There is a giant difference between that and a developmental difference like homosexuality, and that is why you cannot rationally compare them.
[ June 12, 2004, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Nick ]
Posts: 4229 | Registered: Dec 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
The reactions many people have to the both of them are simular. Plus there are some people who believe that treating a few symptoms equals a cure. (Reparative therapy, what little I know of ABA)
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote: I am pretty sure that that is due to damaged sperm.
Sorry, but every man makes damaged sperm. That is why we makes millions of sperm per day, due to the high deformity rate. I know because I had mine checked. Twice. Count was good, with some missing flagella and a few deformed as well.
I believe the autism/NFL link is something more complicated, but genetics may be at the root of the problem...
Posts: 1870 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was under the impression that individuals with autism, at least in moderate to severe cases, were unable to take care of themselves. That they find it difficult or impossible to learn basic skills and carry out daily activities like preparing food. I would certainly consider that a disorder; the cause is irrelevant.
As for symptoms versus causes, isn't it really the symptoms that are a problem? If our bodies all carried a virus, but it harmed no one, would that be a disease? Are our intestinal bacteria a disease whose symptoms are "naturally suppressed"? If the underlying cause ceases to cause, who cares if it is still there?
Posts: 1114 | Registered: Mar 2004
| IP: Logged |
I know we've talked about the deaf before so I'll use that as an example. Plenty of people who are deaf consider it part of who they are and would choose not to hear. They're sad if they have "hearing" children becuase the child will never share that part of their lives. Autism could easily be the same for people with the...disorder? Variation?
I'm with Mabus on the last bit. I thought autistics couldn't take care of themselves. I wonder if it's like Down Syndrome. Citrus County is home of the Key Training Center. They teach work skills, help with job placement, and provide group homes. If autism is like Downs, it would be entirely possible to be a happy, productive member of society with a little help.
I hope that is true. My mom worked with an autistic child a few years back. She had heard that autism meant his brain was working so much faster than everyone around him that he couldn't relate. To her, it seemed like he was constantly daydreaming. When she could get his attention, he seemed like anyone else. The trouble was keeping him grounded in reality instead of drifting mentally.
I may have to look around for some more info on this. Thanks for the thoughts, Syn.
Posts: 2283 | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged |
Though I don't think it's "as simple as that" as Richard suggests, his post raises a nice question of definition. All outlying behavior can't be categorized as mere variation in Avid's productive-member-of-society.
posted
It depends on the spectrum. From my limited research it seems some people are high functioning, meaning you couldn't tell they are austistic until you talked to them and their patterns seemed a bit unusual. They might go on and on about a subject they are interested in one second and clam up the next. Then you have some that do not speak and seem to be unable to communicate. A lot of the people on these sites on both sides of the issue say that if autism is caught early the child can be taught to adjust and can learn. But some children are over stimulated from too much loud noises or uncomfortable clothes. Things that would be shrugged off by most people are major sources of distraction and irratation for people who are autistic. My opinion is that autistic people can be taught to be productive members of society without being forced to completely conform to so-called normal standards. If certain autistic behaviours like rocking or hand waving are comforting, why should they be discontinued? Not everyone wants to be social and extraverted after all, everyone is different. Most importantly, I think that emphasis should be placed on what the child is interested in to help them to learn better. If the child is fixated on trains, use books on trains and shows about trains to engage them. I also believe that autistic traits disappearing or fading does not mean that the autism is cured. It reminds me of eating disorders and cutting and how people try to treat the main symptoms while ignoring what could be causing them. An autistic child could be misbehaving because she is uncomfortable or something like that.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Wanted to pop in to say that I'm extremely interested in this thread, but have no meaningful information to add. Please keep the discussion going.
What on earth does that have to do with homosexuality? I thought it merely controlled hunger and the pituary glands along with other hormone systems?
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Homosexuality is a devolopemental occurence. Not necessarily a disorder. It simply depends on how much hormones are in the mother's bloodstream when the hypothalamus is being developed.
If I recall correctly, this was merely a conjecture in the Homecoming series, not anything founded in empirical evidence. I doubt it was meant to be taken as scientific fact.
posted
When it comes to gayness I do. I don't think gayness is that big a deal. In fact, I don't even care what causes it anymore than I care what causes homosexuality. That doesn't matter. What matters is that a certain portion of the population is gay, has autism, is deaf, is different in some sort of way and society has to get used to it. The days in which a person could be killed or astrisized (sp) for their difference are gone. We don't need this anymore, it does no good. It doesn't help a young 7 year old with asperger's to adapt to their condition. It doesn't help a fifteen year old gay male to feel less out of place at school. And prevention, why would you want to prevent a person from being gay or different in some other manner? Is difference really such a bad thing? It shocked me in that article to learn that a proponate of ABA also tried to cure feminine boys. What's wrong with a boy being feminine besides 9 of his peers beating the crap out of him because he'd rather stay indoors and play dress up or Barbies with his sister than kick a ball? What in the world does feminine mean? (Plus, I know I'm misspelling that word.)
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
That is a question - what if homosexuality was completely a choice? Would it then be morally permissible to discriminate against homosexuals?
Posts: 1364 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not from my opinion. But those religious people who believe in the Old Testemant's truth would say so.
Posts: 3060 | Registered: Nov 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some people, fluid people do choose to be gay... They could face discrimination in both the so-called gay community and the so-called straight community. To all those who say there's a homosexual agenda-Impossible. All the different gay factions don't agree and those that try to push it as being congenital will hate people who have switched to being gay as a choice for undermining their argument. No one should be discriminated against though. Sexuality is too complicated a thing.
Autism isn't something a person has, or a "shell" that a person is trapped inside. There's no normal child hidden behind the autism. Autism is a way of being. It is pervasive; it colors every experience, every sensation, perception, thought, emotion, and encounter, every aspect of existence. It is not possible to separate the autism from the person--and if it were possible, the person you'd have left would not be the same person you started with.
This is important, so take a moment to consider it: Autism is a way of being. It is not possible to separate the person from the autism.
Therefore, when parents say,
I wish my child did not have autism,
what they're really saying is,
I wish the autistic child I have did not exist, and I had a different (non-autistic) child instead.
posted
This is a great discussion. First off, Autism IS a developmental disorder (sorry Nick ). It clearly occurs during the developmental part of a person's life. Not that has anything real to contribute because I don't think that is Syn's point. Also, it is a disorder not a disease. I don't think they know for sure what causes Autism, only its symptoms. As a disorder, that is all you have to work with so you can only really treat the symptoms, not the cause...'cause we just don't know what that is, yet.
Also, re: NFL. I don't think there are more kids with autism in the NFL, but I am sure those in the NFL who have kids will use their positions to raise money for research. What there is right now is a disturbing trend of increased autism diagnoses across the country, athlete or not. I have no idea if it is because Autism is still a relatively new diagnosis and we are simply seeing more people diagnosed accurately or there are, in fact, more kids developing the syndrome. Many parents with kids with autism still say it started right after their little ones got their vaccinations and a lot of research is looking at this.
It was said best above...Autism is "treated" because, without assistance, many folks with autism would not be able to survive, period. If you don't need help, you don't get a diagnosis. A rather famous person with autism (the "higher" form called Aspergers) named Temple Grandin only half jokingly noted in a talk I attended that a good portion of the tech heads at NASA probably could be diagnosed with Aspergers. All the "positive" traits of autism can be found in many folks in the sciences along with some of the "negative." It was an interesting discussion and one that, knowing a fair amount of NASA scientists locally, seems reasonable.
Why aren't the diagnosed? Because they can get up in the morning without help. They can talk on the phone, pay their bills, get dressed, resolve conflicts, etc. Many folks with autism simply can't do that for a variety of reasons. And people really typically only treat those symptoms that cause them to hurt themselves or others or in some way prevent them from doing something. I have worked in the field of supporting people with disabilities for a while now and rarely do I see folks getting treated for rocking. They get medications because they might be smacking those around them or they might have a behavior plan or a carefully structured environment because of an unhealthy obsession with coffee. I am not a big fan of behavior planning or medications, but anymore you need to show some risk to health and safety to treat, not just the awkward rocking or other repetitious motions.
That said, I have no idea how this could be compared to homosexuality. I am curious why this comparison. I am curious why these two aspects? Why not Down Syndrome and homosexuality? Why not Autism and heterosexuality? Or Autism and "tastes great" people (vs. those dastardly "Less filling" people).
posted
Probably due to the negative associations and stereotypes for both of them. The way people assume that all autistics are mutes who rock back and forth. Or that all homosexuals are gender outlaws out to tear down the fabric of society.
But the main simularity has been the attempts to "treat" autism and homosexuality. I have to do more research on the subject, but there are some simularities. Or, it could simply be my odd habit of associating things.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Again, great topic, Syn. I haven't the time nor energy to respond appropriately, but I too am enjoying the discussion.
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Are people still trying to "treat" homosexuality? How so? I mean, sure, there are some folks out there who try to "de-program" homosexuals but homosexuality isn't even a MH diagnosis as it once was. And in the cases of those "treated" they are all done voluntarily where I think there are very few folks with autism who voluntarily get put on medications or get involved in behavior modification plans.
I am wondering if this connection comes from the (at least US) feeling that sexuality, even at best, is still something closer to a disorder than a natural state of being. I am not sure if Syn is US or not or that Syn thinks this way about sexuality, but the comparison between one disorder and a view of sexuality speaks to this.
Sexuality in this nation is both prevalent yet extremely juvenile and immature. We parade naked women to sell every product under the sun (though, oddly enough, not Viagra where one would think that WOULD be the most appropriate place...instead we get freaky frozen face man) and yet the barest glimpse of a woman's breast on television causes a national uproar. Youngsters become sexually "activated" (biologically speaking) in the early teens, yet we have a State mandated age or church mandated relationship that determines when sex is "legal" or "appropriate." The Catholic church holds up homosexuality as a sin and an abhorence yet they keep heterosexual men from ever knowing the physical love of a woman in their priesthood...if homosexuality is an aberration, so is the priesthood. To even have constructive, honest and open talks about sexuality freaks most adults out and is it any surprise that kids grow up not knowing much more than what their bodies say about sex...or what television and movies have to say about it.
Sorry for the shift, but I have a hard time accepting sexuality as a disorder. Autism is really a disorder and the lives of kids and adults with it are very complicated and can be difficult for the person with autism and those that love him. Sure, not all folks with autism rock back and forth or can count toothpicks that fall on the floor. But many can't communicate with those around them, few can have a "typical" life with mortgages, marriage, jobs, and choices that we all take for granted. I know fathers and mothers are proud of their kids and they don't want our pity. I am cool with that. And if they choose to not "treat" their kids, that is cool. If their children rock or play with dust motes or do whatever, fine. But that doesn't change that most folks with some form of diagnosed autism spectrum disorder needs some sort of support, mostly through the rest of their lives. Homosexuals don't require that, not matter how much they love someone of the same gender.
See, it depends on the perspective. If you talk to some autistics they will say that they like being solitary. That they are proud of the positive aspects of autism such as an ability to be fixated on certain things, and an ability not to get involved with irratating social order stuff. I don't really think it's a disorder... Anymore than homosexuality is. Parents, upon finding out that their child is gay or has autism end up lementing miserably about how the child will lack a "normal" life. Just want is meant by a normal life? Not everyone wants to be social, work in an office, have 2.5 kids. And yet, there are many people who are autistic and gay who do just that. They have children, houses, lives. You can have a life even if you are "handicapped." That's what society needs to learn. That difference need not limit a person. Homosexuality isn't a tragedy. Neither is autism. When education emphasizing useful things a person with autism can learn to adapt to society and still keep their identity.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Syn, good points. And I agree with most, but this is poignant...
quote: If you talk to some autistics they will say that they like being solitary.
If you can talk to a person with Autism and they can respond "I like my solidarity" then all is cool. Temple Grandin could easily say this. Donna Williams can say this. People who can speak up for themselves, autistic or otherwise, are going to have an easier time in life than those who don't. Most people who are homosexual can do this, many with autism cannot.
Good point about parents lamenting their child's life when they hear a diagnosis of autism or that at some point they find their child is homosexual. But again, these are very different feelings. Autism is diagnosed at a very young age whereas homosexuality really isn't something you find out about until waaaay later in life. I would be willing to bet more parents "grieve" the new life for their child if they are autistic than if they come out to their parents, especially in these more "enlightented" times. I think a more apt comparison (if using the autism for early and something else for later in life) would be schizophrenia, which usually isn't diagnosed until late teens or even early 20's. THAT is a significant change that will impact a person's life in a much more complicated way than homosexuality would and causes parents to really re-evaluate who their child is and what their life will look like from then on.
quote:Homosexuality isn't a tragedy. Neither is autism.
Agreed. It truly is all perspective.
quote: That difference need not limit a person.
This is really what it boils down to, I think. It isn't the differences of people with autism that limit them...it is their inability to communicate with the outside world, inability to interract with society in a way that will allow them to live on their own, etc. It isn't society's personal feeling about autism that keeps them down, though it is that very thing that has a negative effect on homosexuals.
I agree, people with autism can have as much autonomy and individualism that they can handle. I also agree that people shouldn't be "treated" until who they are is masked by layers of medications and behavior planning. People who can live on their own with autism don't suffer the slings and arrows that folks who are homosexual. As discussed earlier, there probably a ton of folks who have more "functional" forms of Autism Spectrum disorder who never get diagnosed because there is no need...they do fine. We might call them "nerd" when they are in school and "pointdexter" or "dweeb" but we also value them when they fix our computers, program our mainframes, or put a person on Mars. Unless they are homosexual, then society shuns them and puts restrictions on them.
Syn, do you always start up such cool topics? I only post here intermitently, but this is one of the cooler ones.
quote:The Catholic church holds up homosexuality as a sin and an abhorence yet they keep heterosexual men from ever knowing the physical love of a woman in their priesthood...if homosexuality is an aberration, so is the priesthood.
First, the Church does not hold homosexuality up as a sin. The Church says there is an intended mode of sexual expression and that sexual actions outside that mode are sinful. This includes a lot more than just homosexual acts.
Second, the Church holds to the notion that humans are more than there sexuality. In one sense celibacy is an abberation, because it's a departure from the norm. But in another sense it's a sacrifice voluntarily made by a person intending to dedicate his life to a particular form of service to Christ and his Church.
Finally, I'm not sure why think the two beliefs are incompatible. Both are derived from the belief that human beings can control the sexual impulse and are not defined by it.
quote:Finally, I'm not sure why think the two beliefs are incompatible. Both are derived from the belief that human beings can control the sexual impulse and are not defined by it.
Exactly. Yet one is a sin and one is a sacrifice. But I am nearly de-railing the thread by veering into these waters. The bigger point to bring the thread on track is that maybe the comparison of a developmental disorder to sexuality is a telling one. Autism is a developmental disorder and homosexulity simply defines one type of relationship between two people. I should not have brought the Catholic Church into it and I am sorry, I was only trying to point out different points of view on sexuality and the fact that this country in particular has mixed feelings of what sexuality is (as well as what Autism is, too! ).
posted
I got to do more research but, the other day at a meeting a woman mentioned a place in Canton, MA called the Rottenburg (sp?) institute where they use shocks in order to make teenage girls behave. Some of them are autistic. I have also read about many people with autism being forcefully restrained. Then there is also this article to consider- http://www.autistics.org/library/tito-can.html
But what I'm thinking of is what would be the best way to help a person who refuses to speak to get along in society? I once met a man who according to my friend, just stopped talking. He simply didn't want to. There are times when I wouldn't mind doing that myself. Yet, not talking is impractical when it comes to getting a job. There are many autistic people who can do amazing things with calenders and still have trouble finding and maintaining jobs.
Another thing on my mind- even a high functioning person could have had a lot of problems growing up; violent teasing, abuse from parents, teachers and professionals. Such as in this article- http://www.autistics.org/library/dotous.html If things like that are still happening something has to be done to stop it.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
There's a difference between having a disorder and making yourself the disorder. It makes perfect sense to me to say that a person with autism is so affected by the autism that they would not be the same person without it. However, there are certain things that autistic adults and children have difficulty with and many of them are very much involved with having a "normal" life.
The disorder-as-person thing has been bothering me for a while now. There's a growing tendency to treat obesity or being overweight as a part of a person. To some extent, this is healthy. Worrying less about your weight and what you eat takes away stress that can control your lifestyle. But the website that I read which supported this phenomena, www.fatso.com (warning: bare butt pictures for no reason), supported things that would make the readers even more unhealthy. For instance, in the q&a section, someone wrote in asking for advice on how to remedy wearing out pants between the thighs. The advice columnist told the reader to either replace the inner part of the pants with leather, or try spending more time engaged in activities that don't require (her) thighs to meet, i.e. sit around more.
Though not nearly the same as saying that autism is a huge part of the outlook of the person afflicted with it, the side-effects could be the same. Just as people who are overweight could consider it OK to be unhealthy, people who have autism could consider it OK to go without treatment and cause difficulty for the people around them. It's a lose-lose situation in both cases.
Posts: 4816 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Syn, I hear you. Those are great articles on the website, too. I think shock treatment for folks with autism or other disabilities is a pretty rare thing. If it happened around here, someone would lose their job or end up in jail. There is only one thing where I hear shock treatment is still used and it is used with some people with epilepsy to "reset" the brain's electrical patterns. This is something done willingly by the patient and is simply using electricity as a tool, not a punishment.
This site is a cool site. There is a great movement within the disability community of empowerment and self-determination and I am totally in favor of it. Where possible, when I am helping to support a person with disabilities, they are as much in control of how to direct support dollars as possible (for home modifications, choosing an agency to help with finding a job, etc.). The folks in those stories would do fine with that sort of independence. Most people with autism that I work with cannot.
I think we are saying the same thing. There are plenty of people with disabilties that aren't, as Ryuko pointed out, defined by their disabilities. This is cool when it happens.
And it is cool if you just want to stop talking. I worked at a home in Southern Ohio with a gent, then in his mid 50's, who stopped talking at age 10 or so. From what I have heard, he started talking about 4 years ago (6 years after I left). He was pretty bright and seemed capable and his choice not to talk is cool, but an entire world had to be built around him to support that choice/disability/whatever. The autistic person who chooses not to talk or who can't handle a "typical job" needs the same sort of support. I have helped out a guy with aspergers. He is probably on paper a genius level IQ. He can look at a map once and then memorizes it. He is a walking and talking "Mapquest.com." In fact, we tried to set up a local job just to do that...a call-in map service "Hey, I am lost and at the corner of such and such...how do I get to..." He could do it, but his disability reared its head too often and he couldn't stay focused long enough to do it. He does have a PT job at a Travel Agency, sorting maps and such. But he has to have a staff person with him around the clock or he will get on a bus and go to wherever. Which is fine, except he has left Cleveland and ended up in Pittsburg, Chicago and Detroit...usually arrested, because he had no idea what to do when he got there and he "went off" on bus attendants, other passengers, etc.
The point is that he has a cool life, mostly, but with a lot of support. Tito in the story is cool but he requires a lot of support as well. Which is cool. I am all in favor of helping people find a cool life to use their gifts and find what works for them. But with a person with autism, that will require more support than someone without autism.
Which takes me back to the original thesis of putting autism up with homosexuality. I think we can both agree that if the "treatment" options for people with autism are done without consent of the person or are in any way punitive that is inappropriate and harmful. But people with homosexuality have yet to get that kind of treatment, as a large group. Sure, homosexuals have to fight off their fair share of folks who stereotype them, as well as those with autism, but stereotyping happens with everyone! Older folks have to deal with stereotypes (grumpy, old fashioned, inflexible, can't drive, etc.) or (in honor of Mr. Reagan) black women who are single mothers have their fair share of stereotypes (lazy, welfare queens, quota queens, etc.). I think there are reasonable comparisons with these last two and homosexuality but I still have a hard time seeing the connection with autism.
posted
Know anyone with autism? I don't agree with shocking people but I don't think it's wrong to use cognitive/behavioral therapy to modify them either. My niece has "improved" a lot with intervention. Since her parents both have autistic leanings, I think this is much better than just letting her and them follow their own way in letting her do as she pleases (such as playing on the computer or watching videos all day).
My own daughter has some symptoms and I'd like her to modify them, if she can, to not be as different from her peers. Are any of your links helpful in that or are they only geared to make modifying autistic symptoms appear monstrous?
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Ryuko, the "fatso" thing is almost enough for a new thread. As a person struggling with weight (was a skinny minny for first time in 20 years a year ago, but "fell of the wagon," dang it) I have a hard time with the "accept who you are" thing with weight. As a nation, we are huge and the health implications of excessive weight is horrendous (and costly for both the individual, those around them and to some extent, the rest of society). I don't ever want to be comfortable with being unhealthy. Sure, when I got my weight to the point where I was in great shape, running, low BP, etc., I didn't mind if I had a little middle age paunch. I can live with that. I can't live with the time where I couldn't see my toes or couldn't walk up stairs, though, and I don't think we should be totally into saying this is a good healthy self image.
This "Fat!so" thing is pretty ugly. Not in a "that's an ugly person" thing because being larger doesn't mean you are ugly. It is ugly in the sense that being unhealthy is now considered a "norm." Being overweight and having related medical issues or being addicted to food is not normal or healthy. It would be like saying "I am a functioning alcoholic and I am fine with that." No way.
But this is off topic to rant on this. It is a good comparison for the autism discussion, though, as autism.org really is about "I am autistic, hear me roar!" And I mean that in a good way. But being autistic isn't unhealthy, unless that person really can't take care of basic life needs. Same with a person who is overweight. I now have slightly more than a paunch but I still can keep up with my 5 year old all day, go for long walks with the dog, do housework, have a job, and my BP isn't back up. So that is cool. But if you need a cane to talk due to weight, have to rest after going up one flight of stairs, can't keep up with your little ones, then there is a problem. For a person with autism, that is okay because there isn't any choice in the matter...it is who they are. With an overweight person, even if there is a struggle (and boy do I know) it is still in the realm of choice and personal responsibility to fix it.
Good discussion...kept me from eating second bowl of cereal and made me vow to take longer walk today!
quote:Syn, I hear you. Those are great articles on the website, too. I think shock treatment for folks with autism or other disabilities is a pretty rare thing. If it happened around here, someone would lose their job or end up in jail. There is only one thing where I hear shock treatment is still used and it is used with some people with epilepsy to "reset" the brain's electrical patterns. This is something done willingly by the patient and is simply using electricity as a tool, not a punishment.
fil,
first of all, there are a significant number of people who have been subjected against their will to the "therapeutic" (ECT) shock regimen you described - and who view it as a torture they would do anything to avoid repeating. To be fair, there are other people - even those subjected to it against their will - who view it as something that saved their lives. And just about everything in between, of course.
The other kind of shock treatment - using devices to administer painful shocks to control behavior - still occurs. There's even a large provider operating in Rhode Island and Massachusetts that specializes in it. And there are only two states that expressly forbid the use of pain as a "tool" in behavior modification - Pennsylvania and Nevada.
Most people use principles of behavior modification in tandem with other modes in teaching and training. However, it's also true that there are some regimens of strict behaviorism that bear distinct similarities to a secular and scientific version of exorcism - and it ain't any prettier than the religious kind.
I'll see if I can dig up some links later - the places that actually use shock and strict behavioral approaches are a little shy in their language in describing what they do.
posted
I think accepting where you are is important in terms of change coming from within. Of course, I'm still against the general tenor of this thread which is that autism is within the spectrum of normal and "shouldn't" be changed.
What is someone has OCD which expresses as bigotry? Should we just celebrate their diversity as well? P.S. What about eating disorders? Can suicide be viewed as an alternative lifestyle choice?
posted
I have the same question (I think) as pooka. I don't know much about autism, but I do know that there is a pretty large range of symptoms and degree to which those symptoms manifest. At what point would treatment or care be necessary? And outside of autism, what distinguishes a behavioral/psychological variation from a disorder? Do any behavioral or psychological conditions require treatment? If so, why some and not others? If not, why not?
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Not really, Pooka... But, it depends on what methods are used to treat it. For example, I am currently reading about cutting which is the practice of inflicting wounds on oneself. It is a complicated problem. Just like telling an anerexic to eat or forcing them to eat against their will might make things worse, hiding sharp inpliments isn't enough. Somehow, the real cause of the problem has to be treated instead of the symptoms. Such as WHY a person is suicidal or why someone has decided to cut themselves repeatedly or not eat. That is a difficult thing, these symptoms seem to be a physical manifestation of a deeper pain. In some ways it's simple. If the activity hurts the person, if it gets in the way with leading an active life the way OCD can then it needs to be treated. If the autism causes a person to be violent, that needs to be treated. If a person is banging their head against the wall they need to find another sort of outlet. Cutting is a complicated problem. I have recently discovered that if I am too angry I can get self destructive in the form of hitting the walls and possibly scratching myself up... a bit frightening. Everyone seems to have some sort of problem that needs to be fixed. Fears and phobias that keep a person from leaving the house, cripling emotional disorders. Mostly, what I want is for the stigma of such things to clear enough to understand them in their real light so that people who have them can get the help they need.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:I have the same question (I think) as pooka. I don't know much about autism, but I do know that there is a pretty large range of symptoms and degree to which those symptoms manifest. At what point would treatment or care be necessary? And outside of autism, what distinguishes a behavioral/psychological variation from a disorder? Do any behavioral or psychological conditions require treatment? If so, why some and not others? If not, why not?
Sax,
Those are excellent questions!
And they are not going to be answered to anyone's total satisfaction any time soon - but I think you probably know that.
They're important questions, though - and ones that we should be aware of. Definitions of what is a "disorder" and what requires "treatment" change over time. And it's probably a good thing there isn't universal agreement on the issues.
One relatively new element in the mix is the pretty aggressive marketing tactics of pharmaceutical companies trying to expand notions of what is "pathological" and in need of "treatment" - if you've seen any of the very vaguely worded tv commercials regarding "social anxiety," you'll have seen a good example of this.
(I might take a stab at starting thread sometime on overlaps of social anxiety/panic/performance anxiety and other stuff not really well labeled sometime for personal reasons - might be a good discussion. Or not.)
Posts: 4344 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Autism has been a subject closer to the front of my mind these days because Juliette has a boy with autism in the K/1 class she's teaching. This student is very high-functioning, but he still requires a full-time personal aide, and even though he is very good at reading and retention of information, he is not a very good critical thinker. He has very different abilities and needs from the other children. This doesn't make him any sort of freak, but he definitely needs more personal attention than a "normal" student. His behaviors are also not the same as the other students, in ways that seem to me (second-hand, anyway) more than just physical behaviors like rocking or hand-waving.
I'm wondering what separates autism from something like, say, schizophrenia. Let me begin by saying that I know next to nothing about schizophrenia, and what little I do know is likely wrong, having come from watching A Beautiful Mind. But it seems like a not-totally-unreasonable comparison. As I understand it, both are neurologically-based. Both have to do with behavior and perception. Both have physical symptoms. Both occur in varying degrees of severity. Someone like John Nash can, with the aid of medication, lead a reasonably "normal" life. Others cannot. Should we treat schizophrenia? Should we treat autism? If not, why not? If so, why? Is the comparison invalid? If so, why?
Posts: 4534 | Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Great discussion. My cousin Amanda has Autism and my Aunt, her mom, has become an expert in the field (go fig!). I'm still undereducated, but I'll be sure to talk to her soon so I can contribute to the conversation.
As for being gay...it is the same as breathing for me and is a non-issue (now that I'm out it doesn't matter anymore).
Posts: 4953 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: (I might take a stab at starting thread sometime on overlaps of social anxiety/panic/performance anxiety and other stuff not really well labeled sometime for personal reasons - might be a good discussion. Or not.)
I for one would think this is a GREAT discussion. Not only anxiety/panic/performance, but just about every aspect of our life can be medicated to make it better, last longer, look nicer, work more like it should, etc. Overmedication is a huge issue and I think parents with children who are autistic are just as vulnerable to this mentality. Every year there is the new "miracle" cure/drug/treatment that everyone just has to have/do.
But as a separate topic, I think it is great. The anxiety commercials are my favorite... You could replace whatever drug named with "booze" and it would be just as reasonable.
posted
Dr. Snake (whoops, wrong thread), I mean sndrake...
I have no doubt there are still places doing horrid things, but even you noted those places even have a hard time advertising it. I think it is way more likely to be the exception, not the rule.
More prevalent is medication (which I have not seen too often to be effective) and behavior management/modification.
More to the point, though, is that generally nasty things like punitive shock treatment most likely happens in a vacuum, not out in the sunny open world. Meaning, a person with a strong circle of support...parents, siblings, relatives, friends, teachers, etc. won't sit idly by while such things were being used. More at risk would be those folks who lost their parents, grew up in an institutional setting, and have only other "professionals" around the table making decisions on what treatment is needed.
quote:As for being gay...it is the same as breathing for me and is a non-issue (now that I'm out it doesn't matter anymore).
Thanks for bringing the discussion back to the original thesis of this thread. Do you feel you need treatment? Do you feel society wanting to give you treatment?
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
). It clearly occurs during the developmental part of a person's life. Not that has anything real to contribute because I don't think that is Syn's point. Also, it is a disorder not a disease. I don't think they know for sure what causes Autism, only its symptoms. As a disorder, that is all you have to work with so you can only really treat the symptoms, not the cause...'cause we just don't know what that is, yet.![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
