Thoughts on Acceptance and Cure
From ‘Autistics’: We don’t want a cure, in the November 3rd Globe and Mail, some thoughtful views on a topic often under discussion here.:
Some neuroscientists theorize that autism starts with a genetic glitch that skews the connections in the brain over time, improving some, but disabling others. If so, science may find a way to jump-start the stalled connections, possibly with drugs, without snipping the improved wiring.
“My hope is that we can find a way to have our cake and eat it too,” Cornell University neuroscientist Matthew Belmonte says. “That is, we can preserve those unique and very productive perceptual and attention capacities, but combine a way to share those gifts with the broader social world.”
Dr. Belmonte, who has a brother with autism, compares it to mingling at a cocktail party, surrounded by conversation but always thinking of that profound and pithy rejoinder 10 seconds too late, after the subject has already changed. “We’ve all had that experience,” he says. “Picture all of life being like that.”
The cure he envisions would allow what is profound and pithy about autistic thought to enter the conversation.
The views of autistic adults and of parents of autistic children can be diametrically opposed about accepting autism as diability and difference, and wishing to cure it now. Nonetheless, says Tanya Stephenson, whose 5 year old son has autism:
“I think we’re moving a tiny bit closer to acceptance. You can learn a lot of really cool things if you live and flow through different worlds. And who is to say that our world is the normal world?”
Who is to say, indeed: I’ve been in many a cocktail party type conversation and have to say, it is a good thing to hear something original, different and (dare I say) quirky, rather than “nice weather we’re having.”
Estée has some more commentary on the Globe and Mail article.
Related Stories
POSTED IN: Disability Rights, Stereotypes
11 opinions for Thoughts on Acceptance and Cure
amy
Nov 3, 2007 at 2:00 am
““That is, we can preserve those unique and very productive perceptual and attention capacities, but combine a way to share those gifts with the broader social world.”
Not surprising, but I wish they’d leave that road alone. It’s also bound to be a substantial disappointment. There’s no guarantee that these ‘gifts’ are reliable, or that they have anything to do with what society needs and/or is interested in. Or that many autistic people care. Or notice.
Kristina Chew, PhD
Nov 3, 2007 at 2:13 am
Writing as the parent of a disabled child, I see how the road is ever in need of repairs and try to make it more accessible for all.
M
Nov 3, 2007 at 9:16 am
Along with discussing cures for autism, I think there should be a parallel effort to tinker with normalcy. Have them meet half way. Example: if scientists could install subtitles in humans…where little words pop up explaining what the person really means…that would be enormously helpful. No more having to interpret facial expression, vocal inflection, etc.
Normalcy Subtitles Now. That is my new activist group.
gack
Nov 3, 2007 at 5:31 pm
amy:
Do you still consider yourself to have undiagnosed Asperger’s?
amy
Nov 3, 2007 at 8:31 pm
gack: Does it matter?
Kristina: I understand the point about accessibility, but this is what I’ve feared: accessibility will come because the larger society figures it can use autistic people in some (deeply unrealistic) way. As you’re another member of an American minority, I’m sure you can appreciate the danger involved when the majority suddenly takes on a minority as a pet or project. In this case, “They may be giant nuisances, but they have special gifts we can use!” Things get ugly in a hurry when the minority doesn’t perform as fantasized. So I think it’s better to skip that particular, er, partnership.
gack
Nov 3, 2007 at 8:37 pm
Yes or No, amy. Yes or No.
amy
Nov 4, 2007 at 12:16 am
gack, I’m sorry, I’m not here either for an inquisition or for sorting into flag-waving camps. If that’s what you’re interested in — well, it’s unfortunate, but anyway you’ll have to find someone else to talk to.
Reductive classification is useful if you need a particular thing. — Oh. I suddenly get it, what this NT-education project is about. This isn’t about looking for people to take others as they are and accommodate accordingly. It’s about pushing people to accept a particular range of behaviors tagged “autistic” or “AS”, to be accommodated in people labeled “autistic” or “AS”.
How very boring. And what a missed opportunity, given this nice concept of neurodiversity. No wonder there’s all this internecine baloney, you’re fighting over what and who goes on which lists.
Anyway, gack, if what you were interested in was the “taking people as they are and accommodating accordingly” bit — which would seem to me genuine acceptance of neurodiversity — the diagnosis wouldn’t matter. Which is why I asked you why it matters.
gack
Nov 4, 2007 at 12:21 am
You, amy, are the one who classified yourself to begin with when you first arrived here. Either you stand by what you once claimed or you don’t.
amy
Nov 4, 2007 at 3:23 am
gack, I cannot for the life of me see a) how this is any of your business; or b) why it should matter to you.
As it happens, reading this blog and a few others has convinced me that the labels do more harm than good, unless you need some particular sort of therapy or accommodation, or have extremely low self-esteem and are seeking validation in a group identity. Also that they’re largely meaningless. I’m not interested in them anymore.
Do you routinely go around demanding people show you their papers?
Why don’t you just go ahead and make whatever attack it is that you’re so anxious to make. Get it off your chest.
gack
Nov 4, 2007 at 3:36 am
Thank you, amy. You’ve explained it quite clearly now.
Cliff
Nov 4, 2007 at 4:18 am
I think that it’s just a position worth listening to, amy. I enjoyed hearing it.
Cliff
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: