Why Neurodiversity may be harming Autism

Post Reply New Topic

I hear a lot of people saying we shouldn't cure Autism and it's something to be embraced but what about those whom are suffering? Is it not possible that these souls could benefit from treatment? Of course there were never perfect treatments in history but maybe some Autistics could dramatically be helped with their issues such as social and emotional.

I also believe that the term neurodiversity is a myth and just symptoms of possible causes that aren't yet understood.

The reason I think we shouldn't oppose and obscure the "cure" probability is because not everyone that is on the so called ASD list is against a cure. Many Aspergians actually would sacrifice some of their talents for a better social life believe it or not.. and we don't yet know if a cure would necessarily destroy an Autistic Person.

Lastly, I have heard some things referring to the term as fraudulent and a way of cashing in on people with disabilities that it's causing people to either live with an excuse or build a politically correct meme.
I myself know what it's like to have lived a "normal" life. I wasn't always socially rejected or lonely all my life, not to put everyone in that category. I'm trying to be as objective as possible here.

Anyway, I could go on all day, but I'd like to know why are you against a cure if you're an adult?

Well why do people think the only way to help those on the spectrum who suffer is to cure autism? Also not sure how realistic a cure is beings every case of autism is different and may not even be down to any one specific cause. Treatment and attempting to change how someones neurology is set up aren't exactly the same thing...I think there are likely treatments that could be beneficial for autism or at least some of the more difficult symptoms.

If they develop a cure people should have the right to it if they want...but I think putting too much focus on finding the cure over learning to cope with coping methods/treatments to help alleviate the worst of the symptoms creates less resources and research to help people with autism have better lives.

And last of all I don't really see how I personally would benefit from a cure(or attempted cure), or if it would be worth the risks it might come with...not really sure how they would go about curing it, but if it was with medications or some form of like physical surgery to attempt to essentially rewire the neurology I imagine there could be unpleasant or even dangerous side effects. But as I said I think people who want to go that route should have the option....but I don't think it should be pushed on people with autism.

I think it depends on how autism affects a person. Not every Aspie has good focusing skills, a valuable special interest, high IQ, and other good skills like that what makes life worth living as an Aspie.
Some of us, like myself, are affected in ways that feels like a disability. To me, my ASD is a learning disability. I have average to below average IQ, and the special interests I have had in my life weren't very useful, they just got me into trouble, and I was never good at memorizing details associated with my special interests.

My anxiety levels are so high, even when on antidepressants (the antidepressants mostly help with controlling outbursts, so I want to stay on these ones). I think my anxiety is so severe, that it's almost impossible to be able to control it with pills. My ADHD is quite high too. I think that if I only had AS without the extreme anxiety and ADHD, I might be more functional in the working world.

Also, some Aspies with more severe autism are entitled disability benefits, so can stay home and work on their special interests, and not have to suffer the pressure of employment. Aspies like myself aren't entitled to disability because I am "normal enough" to work, just because I am capable of looking after myself, can communicate well, make normal eye contact, can read body language well, can make my own decisions, can hold a steady relationship with my partner, and lots more.
But stress, anxiety, social phobia, and lack of focus can really make life difficult, especially at work.

Personally, because of potential implications.

I am against a cure for me, , everas a starting point.

My autism is a disability. It has its negatives - plenty of them - and I don't have any of the specific positives like a special skill, a useful special interest...

However, it affects every single part of who I am. It has an impact on my world view, my morals and beliefs, my personality, everything that makes me me. To take away my autism would be to create an entirely different person.

Now, if other people want to be entirely different people then that would be their choice. However, my concern then is for the autistic people that cannot easily express their preferences, are not supported to communicate them or could be manipulated. They might like who they are, and not want a cure, but others in their life would get them cured because it would be more convenient or easy for them, not the autistic person.

I think we're in a dangerous world when you can medically change someone else's very being, just because the person they currently are is inconvenient or someone that you don't like.

Because a cure for autism is like a cure for cancer, not that the two are comparable except for this one common trait: They both are so diverse that any one treatment might seem to cure some cases but not others. So it's a false hope and a money vacuum, when the money could go to understanding how the autistic brain works rather than how to stop brains from being autistic. That would be a more effective way to help currently living autistic people to better make sense of and communicate with the world, while still retaining what makes them unique. We're not sure how much of an autistic person is autism, because it's so interconnected with so many parts of a person's personality.

I am old enough to remember how curers mentally and physically tortured gay men for being different from heterosexual men. It's intolerance that harms, not diversity.

I'm not against a cure, but I do feel like it's probably not really a useful avenue of discussion. ASD is a complicated condition that isn't understood well enough on a biological level to even say with certainty whether it's one thing or several different symptomatically related conditions lumped under one label. The idea of a cure for people already living with an ASD is a hypothetical, and while it makes for some interesting philosophically focused debates about how much of a person would be changed if you could eliminate a pervasive developmental disorder and about whether that's moral under different circumstances, it's just not going to happen within the next few decades at least.

It's more useful to talk about what is likely to happen in the near future. As of right now, treatment for adults with autism spectrum disorders pretty much boil down to treating tangentially related symptoms like anxiety, using methods that we only know are effective for children (and that might not be tolerable for higher functioning adults regardless), and psychiatric hospitalization when comorbid depression leads to serious self-harm or suicide attempts. We don't really know much about the risk factors for autism, and early childhood interventions leave a lot to be desired. Within the next few years, we'll likely figure out how to screen for at least some subtypes of ASD in a fetus, and then have to confront some very, very dark things. These are all issues that matter a lot more than the abstract idea of a cure right now, when that's probably at a minimum a half century or more in the future.

It is true Nuerodiversity advocates are often anti cure but
NEURODIVERSITY ADVOCATES ARE NOT AGAINST TREATMENTS
AGAIN THE NEURODIVERSITY MOVEMENT IS NOT ANTI TREATMENTS

I know shouting is bad form but I am am utterly sick and tired hearing from people opposed to the ND movement over and over and over again claiming we are anti treatment. Most ND advocates oppose certain treatments most notably those stemming from Applied Behavoral Analysis but does not make the movement against treatments as a whole.

As for my view in a perfect world a cure would be truly voluntary. In the real world most people cured will be under 18 so it will be decided for them by thier parents or guardians.

As for those truly old enough and competent enough it will probably be legal to refuse but as a practical matter doing so will come at great cost. In my opinion the attitude will be we gave them a chance, they think nothing is wrong with them, f**k them. Supports will end, Insurence will end or the rates will go way up, employers will not hire many who refuse. It is possible that refusing will be seen as a sign the person is mentally ill.

Last edited by ASPartOfMe on 24 Oct 2016, 12:23 am, edited 1 time in total.

The idiosyncratic brain: distortion of spontaneous connectivity patterns in autism spectrum disorder

The connections in autistic brains are idiosyncratic and individualized

"Each autistics' brain is distinct; non-autistics' brains are remarkably uniform."

"The scientists analyzed fMRI scans from high functioning autistic adults and controls, obtained from five different data sets. When the scans from the controls were superimposed upon each other, a typical, canonical template of connectivity was clear. Certain regions had high inter hemispheric (between the right and left sides) connectivity: primary sensory-motor regions like the sensorimotor cortex and the occipital cortex. Others showed low interhemispheric connectivity: regions like the frontal cortex and temporal cortex, which are involved in higher order association. Overall, the control brain scans looked pretty much the same as each other.

Autistic brains, in contrast, were all different. Each had regions of high and low connectivity, and there were regions whose connectivity was increased relative to controls and those that were decreased. But no standard template emerged; when these scans were superimposed one atop the another, no distinct areas of high and low connectivity were discernible."

"Each autistic brain differed from the norm, but each did so in its own way. The researchers couldn't even find subgroups of ASD brains that were similar to each other, although they noted that larger data sets might uncover some of these."

Last edited by feral botanist on 23 Oct 2016, 9:05 pm, edited 2 times in total.

This thread is a replication of the OP's OTHER active thread "Curing Autism May not be as bad as you think."

"BrainPower" (I can't believe you are tricking me into calling you this.) You are really coming close to violating the terms of your use of this website. We have rules against posting the same idea over and over again in different threads. Specifically, it's most obnoxious when it's clear that you have an axe to grind with autistic people. You seem to be wanting a fight. That's not the way this webpage is meant to be used.

"Curing Autism May not be as bad as you think."

I just don't see this as something that is even possible once the zygote has formed, except through gene therapy and once you have formed a personality, it could destroy the "you".

So I was focusing on the argument against Neurodiversity.

Probably those who are less impacted by autism, are less interested in a cure. Probably only those who are significantly disabled by autism want a cure. It's not that hard to figure out.

No it isn't, but I just don't see how there could be a "cure", aside from either selecting gametes that don't carry the genetic markers for autism or gene therapy in the first couple of years of life.

Once a personality has formed, I don't see any cure being possible, only treatment of symptoms.

I've always viewed it as something purely hypothetical. Certain things can be controlled through meditation like anxiety and ADD. Certain things can be improved through occupational therapy. But a magic cure pill is just a hypothetical.

I think you are probably correct, a hypothetical, but the other part of the argument, that the neurodiverse label is harmful. I think is a red herring, a base canard.

I posted earlier about some limited research that shows that the term neurodiverse might be a more accurate description than all others.