How can I spread awareness of neurodiversity?

Post Reply New Topic

Just for clarification, evidence suggests the opposite on the Brains of children, which you are identifying as LFA. Accelerated Brain growth in Autism, is not something that has been measured in Aspergers or HFA. It has been specifically measured in Autistic children, with Regressive Autism, or those individuals that some refer to as LFA.

http://www.communitycounselingservices.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=news&id=142250&cn=20

And a recent study that showed 67% more neurons, as evidenced, abnormal growth in the brain of autistic children, were not from individuals with Aspergers, or HFA. This was in individuals with Autism Disorder.

http://www.communitycounselingservices.org/poc/view_doc.php?type=news&id=141820&cn=20



This is the noble part of the neurodiversity movement that should apply to everyone in a civilized society. The general disability rights movement already promotes this ideology.

However, neurodiversity, while at one point defined within the realm of higher functioning autistics, now includes conditions like schizophrenia, and parkinson's disease. Neurological Disorders and differences in neurology documented to cause differences in human cognition and behavior, exist in the 100's of labels and definitions of such.

Who decides what's part of it and what's not? There is no agreed upon definition of which conditions fall underneath the label of neurodiversity.

One thing for sure, is, most people are not going to be able to understand the anti-cure aspect of the movement when conditions like schizophrenia, parkinson's, and regressive autism are part of the conditions associated with the movement.

The movement will never be accepted in mainstream society, unless the anti-cure aspect of the movement is removed, or the movement is clearly restricted to subgroups of individuals that make it clear that they don't see their personal condition as one that needs to be cured

That's reasonable, but a suggestion that research into the causes, prevention, and cures in a broad area of conditions that include regressive autism disorder and parkinson's disease, is not reasonable, considering the inherent disabilities they cause in individual's lives.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neurodiversity







"changing the language from the current “condition, disease, disorder, or illness”-based nomenclature"

This is another unreasonable goal of the movement. Science has determined that all "ASD"s, are neurological disorders. The only way to change this, is to change the nomenclature used by science for all neurological disorders.

Disease or illness is an understandable objection, but disorder is not reasonable.



And, from the Wiki article it appears that some within the movement don't agree with the term "neurodiversity" that is used by the movement, because it sounds too much like a medical term.

"Neuro" is a medical term that is defined as nerves.

That is part of the problem. A medical term that applies to everyone has been hi-jacked, and described as diverse, in respect that there is variation among individuals within the species, and arbitrarily assigned to only some groups within the human species. And, the arbitrary assignments continue as time goes on.

Bio-Diversity highlights the variation in all forms of life.

It makes no more sense to suggest that some human beings are diverse and some are not within the parameters of "neuro", anymore than it makes sense to suggest that some life is diverse and some life is not diverse, within the parameters of "Bio".

Another term, and a set of concrete reasonable goals, would be a good start, for an actual movement.

A term/movement that has no commonly understood definition, by the people that would like to be part of it, is not likely to be very effective.

Suspicion proves nothing.


I see nothing wrong in starting your own thread to brag about your ancestry, either.

Folks, you're really getting technical here! I haven't had enough time to read that far yet.

I've looked at neurodiversity as encompassing everyone, neurotypicals included (who may at some point be demassified by new discoveries). Neurodiversity is a word I picked up just reading stuff here and there when I found WP, so maybe I got it wrong. But I think we should see it as the acceptance of the existence of difference among minds. Anyone can ride the neurodiverse bandwagon which carries all of us, but each needs to fight/choose their own cause. Overall, if the neurotype can survive and procreate, but diagnosis interferes with the continuance of their typology, then there is need for freedom. LFAs ride with us because we are like in nature, they are part of us in terms of genetics. When solutions begin to present themselves, we will look upon our LFA friends be able to make the necessary decisions that preserve our collective neurotype best. Sure we argue, but more arguing means more solutions.

As for the rest, being able to recognize reality is a must. So some schizophrenics will likely become what our LFAs are to us, and those who are peaceful and seeking to retain some trait of schizophrenia for their benefit and become more capable or recover from the disease aspects of their condition. So say a schizo wants to retain his creativity, but do away with hallucinations, this schizophrenic would be an acceptable member of "the neurodiversity movement" (not to be confused with simply "neurodiversity (ND)" which is everyone).

There also exists the possibility that ADHD, Bi-Polar, etc have traits of diversity (traits that are of benefit to them) also. For ADHD I hear therapy works great, perhaps their goal in ND is to establish a culture that better supports their development so that their outcome is naturally the outcome of therapy. Maybe Bi-Polars want to feel super happy all the time and not get depressed... Why not?

Of course I'm not really an expert on the rest of these conditions, but I want them to have their chance. Simply dishing out genetic cures as I've said before may impair genetic diversity and lead to genocide. Perhaps debates with them would lead to getting it right and determining what traits they would like to have and how they want to live when they are "cured." I believe medicine will be able to provide these options and further development may yield greater results, such as trying on a pair of "genes" to see how life is... Genetic vacations if you will

Identifying genetics associated with disorders, is important in understanding how the environment interacts with the genetics. Removing an environmental factor is a potential cure, for a condition like regressive autism, if one were found. Is it likely? No, but worthy of research for the prevention of regressive autism.

You, speak to the rights of others, which is good. As long as someone is an adult, mentally competent, and not a danger to themselves or others, they retain their freedoms to choose their own course of treatment. They have that freedom, whether it is of overall detriment to their welfare or benefit. This right already exists, so there is no need for a movement for that.

Minors, those individuals legally determined mentally incompetent, and those whom are a danger to themselves or others, don't get this choice, because they are understood as potentially not able to make responsible choices for their welfare or the welfare of others.

Rules are required in any civilized society, and these are the rules as they exist in our society; these are reasonable rules that are not going to change. Although many in the neurodiverse movement suggest that children should have the choices in their own treatment, rather than their parents or legal guardians. That's not a reasonable proposition, in our society.

Diagnoses and labels of disability are required in society for appropriate support and treatment. The only way to avoid this reality is to avoid diagnosis. Adults have this right, but children don't. Again, it's part of societies agreed upon rules, that don't stand a chance of being changed.

I'm just speaking, in general, to the issues in the neurodiversity movement, that are neither acceptable or reasonable, per the rules of society; enforced through the laws of the society.

In other words, fight for what one can change. But it is a useless effort to complain about the rules of society that have no chance of being changed.

Stopping research for cures, and giving children the right to refuse medical care, over the decisions of their parents, is neither reasonable or remotely possible. Nor is changing the way the medical profession diagnoses and labels disorders for people to receive appropriate treatment and support.

Basically, all is left, is disability rights, legally enforced through the rules of society. This has made the difference for all people with disabilities. The rights that have been gained, unfortunately, are not possible without laws in society, because people will discriminate against others, less fortunate than they, if laws are not in place to protect those whom are less fortunate.

Attempting to aggravate society with unreasonable requests, does not help any minority group achieve reasonable goals.

In reality, beyond the civil rights that have been fought for, these other unreasonable goals, have been largely ignored by mainstream society, because there is no merit in them, or danger of change to a society that has determined the reasonable rules of society; in regard to Parents decisions on their children's medical care; Diagnostic procedures required for treatment/support; and Research into a cure for all medical conditions.

The only effective advocacy efforts have been those that have fought for better conditions for those that are understood and accepted as having a disorder or a disability. Society expects those without a disorder or disability, to gain independence through their own efforts.

So what is left is to acknowledge one has a problem and seek support, or to fight for independence and survival.

The disability rights movement supports the rights of autisitic people that need accommodations in society to function at their full potential. That is where the worthy cause is, but it requires acknowledgement that one needs that type of support in society.

There really aren't enough autistic people in agreement to organize and implement an effective autistic/neurodiversity movement. But, one has the opportunity to join in with the larger movement for disability rights for all. It's what the President of ASAN has done; it is the only real avenue for change.

ASAN is the only organized effort that identifies themselves as part of the online Autistic Community that is coming close to this. They appear to be the organization to support, that has a chance of effecting some kind of positive change, in legal rights for those with disabilities.

The rest of us can gain moral support from online autistic communities, but in the real world those of us that are fortunate have families and friends to support us or jobs we can adapt to.

Because there should be equality.

Mind if I ask a question? Are you folks always this technical???

I find it extremely difficult to answer that question with only one word. But, at least for me, in a word, yes.

Can you give me a list of examples for those who would be "cured" against their will? Also some examples of what constitutes a threat?

[Mind if I ask a question? Are you folks always this technical??? [/quote]

I find it extremely difficult to answer that question with only one word. But, at least for me, in a word, yes. [/quote]

LOL

A cure doesn't seem likely in the near future, but if one were available, it is possible that someone under the age of 18, might be subjected to treatment they didn't want.

However, that is already the case, with other medical conditions, like schizophrenia, where a minor might not want to be subjected to medical treatment; and also among autistic children, whom are sent away to treatment facilities, if their behavior becomes too dangerous for the child or others in the home environment.

There are some that have expressed an opinion that ABA therapy should be outlawed, but it is the only thing that separates some children, from home, and institutional life.

It would be wonderful if environmental factors were found, isolated, and eliminated, to prevent these type of heartbreaking situations from happening, but that appears to be a long shot as well.

I'm not sure what you mean by threat, but if you mean threat from the neurodiversity movement on research for a cure, there is no real threat that I can see, because there is no real movement of significance, or what appears to be a realistic potential of one forming.

If one did organize, and presented that message to the national media, which so far have been a few words from Ari Neeman, qualified by the opposing view in every statement I have seen; it would likely be ignored, because the government and society at large, in the US, understands the economic reality, among the several hundred thousand identified developmentally disabled individuals, diagnosed with autism, moving into the adult population, in the next decade or so.

Along with the general fact, for those that aren't aware of the numbers, that autism can be very disabling for some.

The issue is not the same in other countries; the UK as a whole does has stronger support for the social model of disability, for ASD's.

However the social welfare system there, has medical support and programs, to take care of Autistics and individuals with Aspergers, whom would otherwise not likely be able to afford healthcare or basic subsistence needs.

The attitude could be different if the contigencies were similiar to those in the US. That's just speculation, on my part, though.

The bit about the UK doesn't surprise me. A lot of good research and scholarly writings on Aspergers has come out as of late. The US will come around. It just needs more time.

Longshanks

When I said threat, I was referring to people you said would be cured due to being a danger to themselves or others. I was wondering where you draw the line.

I was talking about people's rights to refuse medical treatment, in general, that already exist.

Minors, mentally incompetent individuals, and individuals that present a danger to themselves or others, do not have that freedom.

That line for those that present a danger to themselves and others is determined by medical professionals, law enforcement, and corrections officials. There are objective guidelines, but whenever humans are involved there is always an element of subjective judgement involved as well.

In another thread, the use of skin shock aversives, to modify self injurous behavior among autistic youth at the Judge Rottenburg Center is being discussed.

It has been an option of last resort for many parents, with children who display life threatening self injurous behaviors as well as behaviors such as attempting to burn the home down, etc.

We don't like to think about these things, but they are the more difficult aspects of the human condition. And, some of the children are autistic.

Those children were turned away or removed from other avenues of positive behavioral therapy, because it was not effective and the children's dangerous behavior could not be controlled.

Now that this Center has abused the regulations that controlled the use of aversives, it is very possible that it will be closed down in the future, or the children that cannot be controlled through positive behavioral methods, will be excluded from treatment at that Center as well.

The question is, though, where will they go from there. It is very possible that some will end up on the streets, in corrections facilities, or state institutions.

There aren't any easy answers, but giving up research, to potentially help children like these in the future, would be an inhumane option.

It's not likely that many that suggest that cure research is an evil eugenics plot to eliminate autistics, have been in these children's shoes, or seriously considered what life is like for them, or where their future will take them.

And it is likely why many parents, and others, take serious offense when the anti-cure aspect of the "neurodiversity movement" is mentioned in public discourse.

Aghogday, all I can say is that I'm truly humbled and dazzled by yours and webcam's brilliance and I thank God for the both of you!

Longshanks

You're defending using electrical shocks to punish behavior someone cannot control? Seriously where do you draw the line.........abuse is never the right way to go about helping someone and that is exactly what that sort of treatment is.