Refrigerator Mom Theory

Post Reply New Topic

Like the other remnants of the 1960's-80's Blank Slate theory it has been shown to be unfounded. That is, it's a nice pet theory that someone built some sort of career on, or hoped to do so, but there is no actual science behind it. And other explanations that do involve 'hard' science such as neurology, which can be tested and verified have shown over time to be much more reliable in providing a testable explanation.

tl;dr version: autism due to "refrigerator mom" = junk science.

K, mon, except I might replace the last part with the Sun orbiting above Plane(t)-Earth in a circle... ;o

The Atomic-Bomb may have been a High-Impact Bomb or Set(s) of Bomb(s) that was/were not necessarily Atomic. The model of the existence of Outer-Space is put into question because of various anomalies that seem to contradict claims of a Globe-Model (that is why I want to do the experiments for myself, because I otherwise would not know if ships that have sailed 600 miles out to sea suddenly become visible again when zoomed in with a long-ranged telescope or if those time-lapse clips were merely created using CGI, and 600 miles is 1/4th the entire width of Australia, although granted it's still only 0.02% of the circumference of the Globe-Earth Model, perhaps it would be more definitive if we had publicly affordable telescopes that allow for everybody to see and zoom out 10K miles across the sea to confirm disappearance of ships over a horizon or not).

Ban-Dodger wrote:

I think it has validity. Actually, I know that it has validity,

Says the guy who also knows that the Earth is flat, that "outer space doesnt exist", that atomic bombs dont exist, and that the Sun orbits around the Earth.

Dutch Hunger
I guess I will also add a screen-shot of some comments to a TED-Talk whilst my editing time has not yet expired...

Fnord wrote:

Ban-Dodger wrote:

I think it has validity. Actually, I know that it has validity, but existence is more complex than meets the eye.

Evidence, please?

I am confused by your post Ban Dodger. But then, again, why does that not surprise me?

It is hypothesized that next to genetic factors Schizoid Personality Disorder develops due to cold or unloving or neglectful parenting (developmental trauma in the first month of a child, in which the contact-structure gets affected).

I am amazed there is anyone that still believes this. I think psychiatry/psychology have gotten so more things wrong than right. This is one that should make people afraid, very afraid.

One of 3 larger research projects . JSTOR has a very detailed one but I am no longer member.



Mutation link to Autism


and for conslolation
Autism linked to higher intelligence

I think a lack of maternal bonding probably does effect a child quite profoundly, my cousins adopted a baby from Ethiopia who was in an orphanage half starving and they've talked about him being potentially autistic but I think it's really hard to say what types of delays that could have.

I was my parent's first child so I imagine I got a lot of attention and love but then again I have a two siblings within 2 1/2 years of me(I don't know what the heck they were thinking )that had major health issues so I can't imagine I got a lot of attention once they came along. Maybe that had an effect on me in some ways, who knows? I don't think that is what causes autism however.

The modern consensus is that autism has a strong genetic basis, although the genetics of autism are complex and are not well understood

The above is a cut and paste from the Wikipedia page on refrigerator mother theory of autism. Although the refrigerator mom theory has been discarded by modern psychology and replaced by the genetic theory, there's not a lot of evidence for the genetic theory. The genetics of autism are "not well understood". According to Peter Breggin's "Toxic Psychiatry", "The evidence for a physical basis for autism is as flimsy as the evidence in regard to other psychiatric disorders."

Or maybe I'm wrong. If everyone in this group has Asperger's and everyone thinks the refrigerator mother theory is BS, maybe I'm wrong. I don't claim to have the answers

It was horrifically damaging when the theory was most popular. Autistic kids were not fully human according to all of the experts and the mother was similar to Nazi concentration camp guards according to the leading propenent Bettelheim the theory's most popular proponent. The fact that he was a concentration camp survivor made him believable. The refrigorator mother theory lives on today in this way, the idea that there is a normal child trapped inside by autism and needs to be "recovered' goes back to that era. What has changed is the hero and villain. Then mom was the villiian and the psychiatrist was the hero. Today it is vaccines or whatever is the envirnmental theory of the moment is the villian while the heros are the "warrior moms" combined with inventor of the diet or treatment cure popular at the moment.

This is a clip from the 2002 Documentary "Refrigerator Mothers"

So it only seems logical that if refrigerator moms were the cause then than they should be the cause now. So how do they justify families where one child is Autistic and the others are not. Did mom just pick that one and say, "I will love the these but that one, I will hate just because?" I don't think so. And refrigerator parents don't devote their lives and spend all their time and energy trying to help their Autistic kids. That would not be logical.

Alright, I should probably try to clarify, from what I gather about the various reviews and evidence as to what might cause/trigger Autism. I am one of those guys who understands that there are always valid points to both sides of any controversial or highly polarised opposing view-points. This is a case of where it is Nature Versus Nurture.

The "materialists" are calling bullocks to the idea of Nuture being what causes Autism rather than Genetics being the causal-factor (you have to understand that the Materialist-Paradigm is highly Mechanistic in the sense that the outcomes are believed to be somehow encoded within the genetics, but to get a better idea of why Materialists are opposed to External-Forces of Controls, just try studying Para-Psychology in-depth and you should get a better understanding of what kinds of things Materialists will reject and why).

They (Materialists) are right that it's genetically (Nature) linked but, from the information that I have gathered, people who carry Autistic-Genes will only become Autistic if those Genes are Triggered as a result of the lack of necessary external-factors During Pregnancy (Nurture), kind of like Genes that remain Dormant, but then all of a sudden the Baby has Blue Eyes and Blonde Hair or something (assuming that it wasn't due to having affairs). Basically, Autism may have some significant basis in Genetics, but causing Autism requires these Genes to be Activated due to the lack of Nuturing Requirements During Pregnancy, from what I understand thus far.

I base this reasoning on the existence of the Dutch Hunger Winter Effect where the development of those babies were found to be determined During Pregnancy rather than putting all of the responsibility onto how parents were raising their children after child-birth. Although I am not aligned with Religion, and disagree with many beliefs from Religions, one thing I will agree with is that Homosexuality is not Normal (not for purposes of a Family Unit), nor conducive to the best-development of raising children. The best development of a child requires that the child have both a mother (female) and a father (male), and the father must stay with the female during her pregnancy, providing the necessary emotional and caressing support to her during these critical-stages, and simply meeting these criterion should be enough to let the child develop without subjecting the child to potentially negative-influences that may trigger the Autistic-Genes. I also think the man/father still needs to be masculine, and an actual man with actual confidence, rather than some p**** who who panics over the slightest of life-challenges, and the woman to be properly feminine (kind and caring), for this to work statistically consistently.

That is basically my current take on Causal-Factors of Autism in a Nut-Shell. The structure of society has been such that the economic-equalities seem to have resulted in more and more single mothers so if my information/opinion/analysis/take/interpretation/etc is accurate to any level or degree then it should be no surprise the statistics of Autism continue to be on the increase (yes, yes, I am aware that there are those who believe that stuff is being added into the water and food-supplies and vaccines that lead to or trigger or cause Autism but that is another discussion altogether that I may look into more deeply on another day).

Then how do you explain Autistic children being born to families where both parents are loving and affectionate and nurturing even from before conception and all the way after the baby is born? There are plenty of loving, wonderful exemplary couples who are together and support each other completely during the entire pregnancy. Many fathers are very affectionate and gentle and loving and protective with their unborn babies showing that affection through the mother. They still end up with Autistic children. I know how my father was. I know my father and I have a much younger sibling and I saw first hand how wonderful my father was with my mom when she was pregnant. And I have seen both of my parents care for and love infants. They were shining examples of great pregnant and young parents to babies. But I am Autistic and my sibling has another mental illness which is known to be caused from the same genes as those that cause Autism.

Anomalies are why there are Fields-of-Research called Para-Psychology. I do not believe in Clock-Work Biological-Mechanics either; not as a 100% consistent Pre-Determinism anyway. The only explanations that I can really think of right now would really send Materialists flying off their rockers. I would like you to read Dr. Carl Wickland's book in its entirety if you can spare time to read it all (the one titled "30 Years Among the Dead" and you can read various but potentially boring due to often being repetitive cases for yourself to get an idea of some of the possible other influencing factors that I may suspect).

For the record, I no longer regard para-normal phenomenon as being para-normal or due to so-called spirits, for I now have technological-vocabulary to be able to explain those anomalous encounters of existence as a form of technology or technological-interference. I will also tell you about a friend I once had, who was diagnosed as depressed ever since childhood, and they had him on Prozac all of his life, all the way up until the day he suicided. That experience shook me up quite a bit, and was one of the reasons as to why I started doing as much research into the psychiatric-industry that I did, learning that the entire psychiatric-industry pushes an agenda for profits, causing many of the debilitating conditions that we see in the populations, rather than actually curing anything. You will need to read Gwen Olsen's works or and/or book-reviews and/or listen to all of her speeches to get an idea of how the entire industry is rigged (I will link one of her presentations in addition to a Scientific-Article showing no real link between Serotonin-Levels and many oft-promoted ideas about how it affects Mood/Emotions).

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1277931/

I am also fairly well-versed in a number of the "Conspiracy Theories" that exist in regards to other beliefs as to the other possible causes of Autism but I will try not to promote those ideas at this time due to a lack of having thoroughly invested their claims as of yet (I will get started on it though and let you know maybe some time tomorrow or by the end of the week if I find anything worth mentioning).

Seems unlikely. The idea started back when psychoanalysis was the big thing- and psychoanalyists LOVE blaming stuff on parents. (Nowadays psychoanalysis has the status of a pseudo-science that just won't die. I think Freud himself would be pissed off at this- he's on record as saying that scientific progress should eventually make his work obselete in favour of neurological models.)
Yes, some autistic people have parents (not just mothers) who seem a bit distant from them. Two alternative reasons:
a) The parent themself is mildly autistic or has autistic traits
b) The child is distressed by touching and social interaction, so the parents have learned to give them some space.
Speaking for myself, I grew up with a mother who's very quiet and a father who just would not stop hassling me about my odd behaviour. Guess who I get on better with now?