Poll 22: What do you think about erasing autism?

Post Reply New Topic

If at some point in the future autistic genes are found and unborn children are modified to be non-autistic how would you feel about this?


Option A
I think that gene modification to erase autism would make otherwise autistic people healthier, more normal and happier and so is a good thing


Option B
I think that gene modification to erase autism would make the parents of otherwise autistic children happier and so is a good thing


Option C
I think that people shouldn't change the genes of an unborn child as the child should be left as it is for spiritual/philosophical reasons


Option D
I think that gene modification goes against the intended diversity and natural evolution our species, risking a dystopian future of strict gene selection and compulsory modification, initiating a rapid transhumanistic evolution via synthetic genes resulting in the end of homo sapiens, ironically in this scenario the neurotypical people so against autism and for a cure are likely to find the gene selection eventually extending to their own neurologies being scrutinised and found defective.


Option E
I think that autism is not an inherently negative thing and so gene selection to erase it should not even be considered by anyone, modifying the child's genes is against its rights as it is not ill and thus the excuse of an essential cure cannot be used. Any government should be strongly against this, making it illegal


Option F
I think that gene modification is good as we can advance our species by getting rid of things like autism and many other deviancies as well, resulting in a much more effective homo sapiens


Option G
I think that if a way to erase autism is found and implemented then it is simply a natural part of evolution, we should look at the bigger picture and not worry so much since humans will be extinct soon enough anyway, we shouldn't be against research into, or implementation of, a cure and gene selection to erase autism or anything else, we should just go along with how the species is changing


Option H
I have an opinion which is mostly different to all of the above and have written it below

Option E
I think that autism is not an inherently negative thing and so gene selection to erase it should not even be considered by anyone, modifying the child's genes is against its rights as it is not ill and thus the excuse of an essential cure cannot be used. Any government should be strongly against this, making it illegal.

Option D, though the particular wording of "I think that gene modification goes against the intended diversity and natural evolution our species" feels wrong - I don't think there are intentions in evolution (until we take the reigns by intentionally modifying them), but I do feel that this diversity is the exact reason that species advance, and that we should be very cautious when 'fixing' ourselves as we may be undoing what actually lead to our success. It seems to me that people with ASD, if they can overcome the disadvantages involved with ASD, stand a better chance and making discoveries or creating inventions that can change the world, when compared to the general NT public. What advancements, cures, and answers could we be throwing away if we remove the autism spectrum from the human spectrum?

This is one of the biggest motivators for me in attending therapy, explaining my concerns, and trying to learn how to best augment shortcomings; I have a deep rooted feeling that I have the biological tools to accomplish very big things that most others may lack, and that, in some sense, it is my responsibility to make use of that potential and not let it go to waste. Just about all of us must overcome difficulties to achieve anything worth doing - maybe my difficulties may be inherently harder because my brain is foreign to most others, but I believe my payoff for overcoming them will be proportionately greater, as well.

D. Gene modification is a very slippery slope.

I do wish there could be more than one option here. There are good applications for gene modification, however, I don't have much faith that the human race is ready for that kind of power. Who gets to decide what should be modified?

I chose Option D, athough it was a toss-up between D or E. Genes for autism wouldn't still exist if they didn't serve some kind of positive purpose to certain humans,or protect them against something in the natural environment.

This all depends on the particular individual on the ASD range. The autistic kids we see on TV who bang their heads against the wall and shriek and wail would benefit immensely from something that allowed them to function better. This kind of situation isn't good for parents or the individual.

OTOH, I've heard it said that this conversation wouldn't be occurring were it not for aspies; we wouldn't have the Internet. I'm sure because we are able to think outside the box--at least when we allow ourselves to--that we're responsible for a lot of the world's inventions and discoveries.

I think the advisability of a cure for autism would depend on the individual on the ASD.