Aspies For Freedom

whats your view on this, both related to ASD and making donors

As i said in some other forum, there is a way this can increase AS frequency instead of decreasing it, since some parents will inevitably abort a fetus on the spectrum.  We in turn can use these tests to identify AS children young, and possibly to raise them in a separate environment.  This way, it is possible that we can increase the chances of Aspies meeting other Aspieas, and making more Aspies.  Of course there are ethical implications, as we dont want to restrict Aspies to marrying other Aspies if they dont want to (as well as the issue of the founder effect, AKA inbreeding, which could occur if the original population is to small.)  Interestingly, this approach, if taken over long periods of time, and occurring in a specific geographic area, could eventually lead to speciation (the formation of a new species)!  Of course, that would take quite a bit of time, and could have dangerous consequences if the starting population is too small. (witness the Dachsund, which, while not technically a separate species, was bred from a small number of individuals, and consequently suffers from an increased frequency of skeletal weaknesses and certain other normally rare disorders)

I feel that when parents are informed that an embryo, or foetus has an ASD, the doctors would give the worst case scenario, as they do with other such tests, as testers have been sued by parents for not informing them of the possiblity of a disabled child.

When given the worst case scenario, many would be under intense pressure, and I think such things as the "Einstein argument" would do little, after all, there has only been one Einstein, and most people dont even know he was autistic.

To educate people of the everyday realities of life with people on the spectrum is more realistic, ie the "We are not all like Rainman argument".

I don't think it's likely to happen very often, at least in the near future, as testing of embryos and in vitro fertilization is quite expensive and is usually not covered by insurance.

Prenatal testing is much more of a concern.

Thanks for starting a separate forum on these issues, Amy.  

The circumstances where this may happen is targeted though, that is to say, if a couple had a child with ASD, if they wanted another child they would be targeted to have a test. That is the kind of thing that happens now for some heritable conditions.

As far as a time scale, we have no way of knowing if something like this is already developed and is being tested, or whether it is 10 years away. I would think it more likely to be 2-3 years away considering the vasts amount of money being put into research, and the knowledge they already have, such as the peptides, testosterone, and gene information.

I agree. Parents often report that they've only been told of the negatives when a prenatal test suggests their child might be born with a particular disability.

I say "suggests" and "might" because these tests are really not foolproof and it isn't often obvious just how badly the child will be affected if they do have the disability.

One possible way of educating people is showing children on the autistic spectrum doing stuff that other kids do and looking happy. I notice a poster about downs children that does just that.

Not just that, but at least one current biographer has argued specifically against his being autistic, "because he was able to form relationships."  (I heard a radio interview with the author, Walter Isaacson.)

There is also a theory that there is a subgroup of late talking children who are analytically gifted but not autistic ("Late Talking Children," and "The Einstein Syndrome" by Thomas Sowell), and that Einstein was in this group.  This of course is nonsense when you take into consideration the notion of an autistic spectrum.

And the cost for IVF and screening, while a deterrent now, will only continue to drop as the market demand increases and more labs appear to meet the need.  I will not be surprised if, in the future, IVF is the norm, and the screening that goes with it, in the developed world.

However, if parents demand increased intelligence for the embryos they will accept for implantation (which surely they would), wouldn't this get tied up with autism?  As most of the highly intelligent people I know have at least some autistic traits, and it seems to me (strictly anecdotally) that highly intelligent parents are more likely to have a child aith autism.  Most of the parents (granted, it is not that many IRL, but I do know some) I know with an autistic child are highly intelligent, and I certainly get this impression online.  My parents are highly intelligent, and while they have their quirks, they definitely can pass for NT.

Nemidaelius-- your theory is interesting, but I think increased awareness of autism as a spectrum, and the internet, have already allowed HFA/AS people to network at unprecedented levels.  That alone will have a genetic impact on the genepool, if even a modest number of relationships and offspring are generated due to this.