Aspies For Freedom

Full Version: AFF mentioned in The Times newspaper (UK)
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Today AFF got mentioned in The Times!  The article is available online, here's a link to it: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment...438295.ece

Quote:
Is autism simply in the wiring?  Ailments come and go. I don’t mean in a personal sense — although my lumbar vertebrae are creaking again after a blissful period of quiescence — but in a social and historical sense. Homosexuality is no longer an illness. Lefthandedness no longer merits a cure. Could autism be next?

Some people argue that the developmental disorder — which compromises communication, social interaction and imaginative play — is merely an example of human “neurodiversity”. Just as disabled individuals sometimes prefer to call themselves differently abled, some people with autism would like to be regarded as differently wired. To try to alleviate or cure autism, they say, is tantamount to oppression. And genetic tests, which are in development to identify autism in the unborn, are a mere step away from eugenics.

This movement, which boasts groups such as Aspies for Freedom (a reference to Asperger’s Syndrome, a high-functioning form) and the Autism Liberation Front, does not accept the image of autistics as odd loners. Instead, nonautistics are portrayed as sad conformists unable to operate outside the social horde. It opposes any attempts to “cure” or even treat autism.

The movement is driven, unsurprisingly, by those at the high-functioning end of autism. It is ironic that they have been accused of not empathising with others at the low-functioning end, who are less able to cope with everyday life.

Professor Simon Baron-Cohen, a leading autism researcher at the University of Cambridge, says: “I agree that high-functioning autism is better characterised in terms of neurodiversity. Low-functioning autism may also be, but is probably best characterised as involving additional disabilities, such as learning disability, language delay, epilepsy and so on. I don’t think we are looking to ‘cure’ autism any more than we are looking to cure lefthandedness or being gay. But if there were treatments or interventions that help without affecting the areas of strength [such as the excellent attention to detail] I imagine these would be welcomed.”

I think it's great that this site is getting attention.
It's not perfect- note their criticism that we leave behind the "lower-functioning" (they accuse the whole movement of this, which is ridiculous- take a look at all that Amanda Baggs has done, for example); and they say both that the "lower-functioning" are incaple of dealing with everyday life, and that epilepsy, ect. are PART of "lower-functioning" autism (they can occure together, but that's different; and part of what gets people classified as "LFA" is having other issues that make them seem "worse" all around, even if their autism wouldn't normally be "severe").

But getting mentioned at all- and in such an important newspaper- is a huge step forwards.
Maybe this should be moved to the good news subforum.
cool. Smile
We may become celebrities one day!
I understand that someone can be called LFA even if it's just one disability, such as not being able to speak.  (Remembering a piece on NPR about a local group, in which an "LFA" lady unable to speak used a computer with a speech synthesizer, typing very fast, and the words flowed out of the computer speaker just fine, including a choice word or two about being called "low functioning".  Couldn't be that low, for she has her pride.)  My question is, what then do they call the rare ones who are barely functioning at all?
I think this comes down to how we intepret the word "treat".

Treat and treatment to mean covers a multitude of meaning including everything from drugs and medical procedures to psychology approaches.

I am sure most here are opposed to trying to "treat" autism and related conditions with drugs where as most I would think would support an approach that promotes understanding of the autistic spectrum and helps us to better understand and deal with those not on the autistic spectrum.

Given the choice between supporting autism being treated or being opposed to autism being treated I would choose the former, because of the large spectrum that the word includes. What the article should have done is reported what sort of "treatment" we would be in favour off and what types of treatment we would be opposed to.
First line of the second paragraph should read:

Treat and treatment to me covers a multitude of meanings,
On wider note the article is certainly a move in the right direction of the press lets hope it keeps moving in that direction.

bohemian_storm Wrote:
I thought you were only diagnosed as LFA if you have an IQ below 80?


But how accurate is IQ testing, especially for those who can not speak or write?  Even for "higher functioning" people, the tests are not accurate for people with autism because sometimes we don't understand the question and there can be more than one answer[/align].  The first I got tested for IQ, I scored 80. That was because other kids around me told me that if I got an wrong answer that would be subtracted from my score and if I got too many wrong answers I would get a negative score.  I believed them and did not answer most of the questions because I thought I might be wrong.  I got a score of 120 and 132 at later times.   IQ testing is rubbish.

bohemian_storm Wrote:
I thought you were only diagnosed as LFA if you have an IQ below 80?


But if somebody doesn't (yet) have the means to communicate, how would you know their IQ?

How could low funtioning auties have IQ lower than 80 when they are able to calculate 98127*12412 in their head?

erkolos Wrote:
How could low funtioning auties have IQ lower than 80 when they are able to calculate 98127*12412 in their head?



ever seen Rainman? its a movie about a LFA that has a genius memory, he memorizes the phone book, he counts cards for his dishonest brother, but yet he is unable to put patterns together, he is unable to add and so forth. so just because you have an area that you seem to be genius at, you are unable to apply it within context, you do not understand the principles. just because I know 2+2=4 does not mean that I know that if I have one candy bar and someone gives me another I am aware that I now have two candy bars.

thats how if someone is able to calculate astronomical numbers in their head they can still have a low IQ.

anyway my opinion about the articule. you read it one way and it seems like a fairly unbias and non-partisan paper, read it another way and it seems like the guy is mocking us.

bohemian_storm Wrote:

erkolos Wrote:
How could low funtioning auties have IQ lower than 80 when they are able to calculate 98127*12412 in their head?


Uh, who, specifically?


There are true examples. That is what it means to be "savant".

Pages: 1 2
Reference URL's