Is Donna Williams truely autistic?

Post Reply New Topic

i doubt any living, breathing human being is empty or vacant; assuming so because someone cannot communicate with you is dangerous. the person does not become human with the advent of their communication with you. do parents of nonverbal autistic children recognize this? it is dangerous to assume because the channels of communication between one person and another person do not function well that either one of them is unable to communicate. maybe they are just unable to communicate with each other.

This person even claim that Asperger people do not have any deficit in communication, she confuses being verbal with being able to communicate properly.

Of course, one can have difficulties with communication without being autistic but the similarities between Classic Autism and Asperger are more important than that (plus, AS people have higher odds of having severely autistic children).

You talking about kgaccount? She talks a lot of BS. I'm sure she's a delightful woman if you met her in person, but she talks nonsense. On the other hand, I'm not exactly sure what to think about Donna Williams either, but seeing as I am not a doctor and I don't know her personally, then I have no place to be accusing her of anything. I wish people would stop accusing people (who they do not know) of lying about their diagnosis/history. I think it's lazy and unfair.

It's quite possible that she is on the spectrum while also having these other conditions. It's also quite possible that she was misdiagnosed or something. I don't know and neither do most people.

By the way, kgaccount claims to have a science degree and yet she knows nothing about how the scientific method works, how to do research and how to find reliable sources. I was shocked when she did her two videos on the autism spectrum being "chaotic"(in regards to aspergers being included as part of the spectrum). Everything she was talking about was a bunch of extemporaneous drivel. The one time she did use "research", it was based on a lot of hearsay and she also looked up a bunch of conditions that seem similar to autism as if that proves her point. She's utter FAILin that regard. Now, in advocating for her son, fine- I don't mind, but she should keep her nose out of science because it's against her. She comes across as a bit of a conspiracy nut and she as often accused people on wrongplanet of being a bunch of sociopaths lying about their condition and extends this paranoia to the rest of the autism community.

Based on one revealing sentence in the video, I think that this is the actual mother of the actual child rather than an actress hired by Autism Speaks following a script.

The sentence is at 2:01

"I have a relative with Aspergers which I find quite interesting. I have a son with Autism as well."

I think that one line reveals what is really going on behind the scenes in this video. It might have been an extremely subtle screenwriter they hired, but Autism Speaks doesn't go for subtle. I think what is really going on here is a family fight. It is unsurprising that she has a relative with Aspergers, since this is genetic. This relative has probably called her out on things she is doing with her son (or not doing) and she has retorted that he/she can't possibly actually understand because he/she has Aspergers rather than autism. That inferred family drama backstory is too subtle for an Autism Speaks scripted video, although it would fit right in with a Hollywood movie about autism.

Once I heard her say that line, I could well imagine the family fights that must have happened as the AS relative tried to steer her away from or towards a particular course and she resisted. She sounds defensive as if she is strongly at odds with people with Aspergers. I suspect what brought this on was her relative with Aspergers. She may be jealous of his/her functioning level and not believing that her son could ever be at that level regardless of any therapy or learned coping mechanisms or natural development. A psychological defense against that would be to say that her relative isn't even autistic.

Her insistence on firm, discrete categories does look a little BAP-ish. I get that way too when people can't agree on whether NT should mean "all people not on the autism spectrum" or "all people who have no condition found in the DSM". That makes genetic sense too.

My personal problem with the concept of autism spectrum is that it forces people to think of autism in a linear fashion with non-verbal people as "low" and talkative Aspergers people as "high" and people may go "up" as they obtain skills. I doubt this mental model is anything close to reality but once people picture "spectrum" in their mind, that's the mental model that it defaults to. I do the same thing even while I try to struggle against that tendency. She likes discrete boxes where everything is neatly contained with its' diagnostic box and there is no overlap and those in one box have nothing in common with those in another. She claims to accept the linear spectrum concept but doesn't actually. Why not? Probably that relative with Aspergers who she just can't bear to think has anything in common with her son.

WOW, Janissy. Sometimes, not understanding it, I forget that an intelligent NT can do amazing things. You know? It's possible to be so blinded by what you can do that the NTs can't that you forget that they have their own beauty and skill. That's impressive.

Also, being verbal =/= being articulate and able to form long, coherent whatever you call large collections of words (having a big vocabulary =/= remembering the names of things) =/= being able to communicate effectively.