NY Times Interview with ‘We Are Not Broken’ author

Post Reply New Topic

I’m not against someone viewing their condition away from the pathology model or making the best of what they have including rejection of a “cure” for themselves.

I am against those who make presumptuous claims and pretend to speak for others or all autistic people in claiming “we don’t need a cure for autism”.

They have no right to use the word “we” or talk for me or anyone else with a medical condition about what I don’t need to a public audience.

He has no idea about me or my needs, or the other 100 million or so autistic people.

People like him should have respect for other opinions and re-phrase their language changing it to “I” and others with the same beliefs as “me”.

I "hear" what you're saying.

Again, ND doesn't mean rejecting a cure for genuinely debilitating manifestations of autism like self-harming stims, for example. Mona rightly suggested that more focus should be placed on the non-verbal with a view to understanding the cause. If that lead to a "cure", some non-verbal individuals would want it and some wouldn't. Think of the deaf. Some deaf people choose to be verbal and some reject it. Some choose to get implants and others have no interest. All of those personal, freely made choices should be respected. Part of ND is listening to YOU and your ideas about how we can be better served. Autism is a syndrome with lots of elements and the only effective "cure" would be extermination and we really don't need that. On the other hand, I'm presently considering a Ritalin prescription for my executive function issues. It's not an all-or-nothing scenario.

We are a heterogeneous group, hence the spectrum label. But, it is possible to be an advocate for all of us.

Was Martin Luther King a presumptious black man for promoting his dream for all black people?

I understand what your saying your possibly one of the more reasonable ND advocates I come across.

Sadly many or most are not which is why it has been a community issue for a while.

Many actively campaign against treatments for autism. Spectrum 10k would be a good example of that in action.

It’s one thing to campaign for something that gives to the individual(s) like a right e.g gay marriage. The individual can accept that given privilege or right or ignore it (not all gays want to get married).

It’s quite another to campaign to take something from people i.e the right to allow scientists to study treatments for my medical condition unhindered.

Also the right to be considered disabled and be entitled to various accommodations and benefits that come with that both from society and government.

Many ND advocates try to undermine that by wanting to whitewash or remove the pathology status of autism that underpin this status and with it those benefits.