Why has autism not "died out" way before now?

Post Reply New Topic

I have been diagnosed, but a question I have is: If people with Aspergers have a hard time socializing and with relationships, why does the "disorder" still exist? I would think it would have been gone thousands of years ago. Does it "skip a generation"? I would think a marriage and children would be hard to deal with - it is for me and I am not married and will never have children. Another question is: If you have Aspergers, why would you want your children to have it? Just want to know opinions.

Well, in the spectrum of Autism and Asperger you can found various types of personalities. Some are milder, some more severe.

Me as an Asperger with high intellicenge and only little social difficulties don't find it hard to have marriage with some AS-man or stereotypical NT man and a few kids. And I like the thought of having asperger child. It's not that bad, depending on a case.

One thing is for sure I'm not willing to do because of my asperger. I wouldn't give my eggs for someone who has fertilization problems. As I as Asperger can cope with a child with an aspersger, I still don't think that it would be so easy for a NT.

My English sucks again, sorry...

Putting aside the obvious fact that autistics, can, in fact, reproduce...

It hasn't "died out" for the same reason that homosexuality and left-handedness haven't "died out." It's not like your ancestors need to have been autistic/gay/lefthanded. You're assuming that it's like racial makeup, that it "runs in the family" with no exceptions, but it doesn't work that way. If you pushed a button and all the autistic, gay, and lefthanded people of the world disappeared, new ones would be born somewhere in the world starting about ten seconds later.

(Before anyone complains, yes, I know that autism, homosexuality, and left-handedness are not the same things, but they're similar in this instance, and I can't think of a better metaphor. Go complain about Michael Bay ruining the Ninja Turtles or something.)

Understanding, even perception, of Asperger's & the milder forms of autism is a relatively recent phenomenon, so to begin with, in the past people with AS, etc. would merely be perceived as shy, sensitive, quiet, and likely loners, or even hermits.
Not as having a disorder they might pass on.

In the past, marriages were not necessarily companionable couplings based on compatibility.

Husbands could be completely emotionally unavailable and no-one would notice anything odd. A wife would be taken simply out of duty, to carry on a family line. A grumpy man who keeps mostly to himself and rubs people the wrong way is not out of the ordinary in historical terms. It could even be spoken of as being 'prideful'.
(Psychology is also a relatively recent field of exploration & study.)

A female having the qualities of quietness, sensitivity, shyness would merely be fitting into the expectations of feminine behaviour at the time, and be found attractive for it...Only in recent history does such behaviour stand out as odd or inappropriate, with all of our current vast freedoms, choices, and resultant expectations in how women must participate in society.

I get your point Jory, but I think, that those thing, at least homosexualism and autism are somewhat run in the family. Autism is probably running bevause of the things ThinkTrees just said, and homosexualism because it has been "forbidden" and homos have been forced to act like heteros.

I need to study this a little bit more before I can make definite conclusions. Maybe I'll be back with the issue.

Apparently, women who have gay sons tend to have more children on average. So it could be linked to having more kids. Which way the link goes is anybody's guess. Could just be that those extra sons are a good thing when population is high because that means there won't be so many kids in the next generation--you won't outgrow your food supply as fast and the existing kids are healthier (and have more people to provide for them).

Autism is probably around because most NTs have some of the genes for autism, and pass them on. They could be related to creativity, perseverance, math/science/art/music ability. In small doses, those genes are beneficial. In large doses, you get autism. We already know that autism is caused by multiple genes at the same time, probably interacting in some way; I think it's reasonable to guess that autism--and many other developmental disorders and mental illnesses--represents the extreme end of a human continuum, and is connected to beneficial traits as well as detrimental ones. If you want the middle of the range--the part that's beneficial to the community--then you will also have the less-fertile people on the edge of that range. It's a net benefit. Especially since there are people with severe disabilities who also benefit the community in significant ways. Even just their presence is a signal that the community values all of its members, and increases cohesion and cooperation.

However beneficial or non-beneficial the existence of autism genes is to a community, of course you have to look at the ethical side of it too. We're sentient beings able to look into the future, see cause-and-effect, and understand another person's pain. That means we have to consider more than just "Will this person reproduce?". Valuing a person just for being a person to begin with is a big part of what it means to be a community.

Some ASD related traits in some individuals are beneficial to the survival of social groups (resourcefulness, focus, etc)... Therefore imbuing those ASD individuals with a certain evolutionary attractiveness to mates. (?) IMHO

Because it's really easy to get pregnant.

Besides that, people with a subclinical ASD can pass on any form of ASD. People seemingly without an ASD can "pass on" any ASD too.

Hence, there we are.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought the jury was still out on how big the genetic link is. I seem to remember reading that there's a link but only accounting for something like 80% (?)

It's not like ASDs always run in families.

Nobody in my family (both sides) has, so far, been diagnosed with an ASD nor does it seem likely that anyone has it, not even mildly.

They definitely (yeah, pretty sure about this) didn't accidentally mix up at the hospital when I was born but I still turned out to be autistic.

Of course autistic people don't "die out" even if just for the reason that some autistic people happen to be born into non-autistic families for some unknown reason.

As for having children, why not.

If I can take care of them and will be happy about them I don't see a problem with having children.

let's see im 22years old and never "been" with anyone. im going to die alone.

Because during the past people were forced and practically beaten into obedience and nobody did care how they felt.

Same applied at least in some European countries for left--handed people. They were brutally forced to use their right hand, especially for writing.

It was suppression of individual traits and pressure to conform to social norms.