No comment, Ari, Michelle, Kev, Sullivan and Kim?

Nick Dubin's arrest for a pedophilia-related crime has generated a significant amount of buzz in some parts of the autism blogosphere as well as on various facebook pages of some persons with whom I am acquainted with, who, to the best of my knowledge, don't have blogger type blogs that they write.

I have been told repeatedly by various individuals who advocate a certain movement called "neurodiversity" that this movement is about dignity, respect and human rights for persons with autism (and perhaps other 'neurologic differences'). One Michelle Dawson is in the forefront of this. In fact, at the time, I first started writing autism's gadfly as well as my article 'neurodiversity just say no' that was the immediate predecessor and greatest influence of my decision to start this blog, Michelle Dawson has stated that because I was an opponent of neurodiversity this meant I was an opponent of human rights for autistic persons.

Ari Ne'eman and ASAN have stated that their autism advocacy is about civil and human rights for autistic persons. Yet they seem to devote most of their time demonstrating against Autism speaks or Ari Ne'eman making insulting and juvenile comments in his role as the newest public member of the IACC.

One of the leading neurodiversity blogs is the well-known left brain/right brain blog whose posts are authored by Kevin Leitch and another individual who calls themselves "Sullivan". This blog seems to devote nearly all of their posts to the question of whether or not vaccines and/or mercury cause autism, an issue that has been dealt upon ad nauseum, with neither side brooking any quarters in their beliefs.

Kim Wombles is an individual that writes the countering age of autism blog and seems to get some sort of bizarre humor posing as some elderly hick Appalachian woman as an alter ego in another blog she authors. In spite of claiming that she believes that persons should be treated with dignity and respect she has referred to Harold Doherty as "an asshat". She condescendingly referred to Jake Crosby as "the puppy" because of his youthful age. Last but not least, she was nice enough to give your humble blogger a plug on one of her facebook pages where she seemed to think it was funny that someone would make fun of me and my disability and also seems to have some sort of schaudenfreude as far as my disability and celibacy are concerned.

We now have evidence that it is quite probable that Dr. Dubin, a psychologist and educator who had regular contact with autistic children, is a pedophile. There is also a strong possibility that the reason Dr. Dubin chose his profession is that he was looking for children to molest and chose disabled ones as they are the most vulnerable, many of them not able to speak and report what happened to their parents or others or because of prejudice they would not have credibility making allegations against the good doctor.

Outside of the right not to be murdered, it would seem the right of disabled children not to be sexually molested would be about the most important of human rights that these august individuals would be crusading for. You would think that they would comment on this latest news story.

Reading Michelle Dawson's TMOB comment board on a regular basis as well as her blog posts, I see no comment by this crusader for human rights of autistic persons. ASAN is also strangely silent. Ari Ne'eman is not organizing some sort of protest against professionals who evidence suggests are pedophiles and trying to protect autistic children from them the way he does with autism speaks. Kevin Leitch, "Sullivan" and Kim Wombles seem to have no comment on the issue. I wonder why that is.

Neurodiversity activist busted for child porn!

In a newly breaking story Nick Dubin, a clinical psychologist allegedly diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome has been arrested for online child pornography of children having sex acts with adults!

As regular readers of autism's gadfly will remember, Dr. Dubin,
wrote a favorable article about the ND movement Dr. Dubin, praised GRASP president Michael John Carley, who has insulted severely autistic persons by saying he does not want to be associated with head bangers and diaper wearers.

What is frightening is that Dubin is a licensed psychologist who up until now, worked with and had access to children. ironically enough, he specialized in the issues of bullying and autism. He has admitted to authorities that he knew the material on his computer was illegal. Dubin has been charged and is out on bail. In the meantime, pending the outcome of his trial, he has been barred from using a computer or having contact with minor children.

Dubin, who claims to have an ASD, yet was not diagnosed until age 27 has written about neurodiversity:

In theory, there doesn’t seem to be a chink in the armor of neurodiversity’s philosophy. Who would argue with the notion that society should take responsibility for how it treats some of its most vulnerable but creative citizens? Or that people with autism have inherent gifts and should be respected by others?

Well perhaps one chink is that there is credible evidence that at least one of its adherents is a pedophile, very possibly not above actually having sexual encounters with small children. I realize that Dr. Dubin has not been charged with an actual sex act and as far as his charge on possession of online child porn, he is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law. However, this story does indeed give food for thought and perhaps one could rethink the neurodiversity movement and the apparently ever increasing unsavoriness of its adherents.

Mr. Robison goes to Washington

I see that looking at John Elder Robison's facebook page, that he is on his way to Washington, D.C. to review 106 research proposals for autism related things and he gets to help pick who does and who does not get funded at taxpayer expense.

So, the taxpayers are funding decisions being made by someone who at one time claimed no cure was needed for certain autism spectrum disorders, who has seriously suggested studying geek success as a solution to helping persons with autism, and keeps company with wrongplanet.net founder Alex Plank, who has blanketly stated that most autistics don't want to be cured and has autism=good as the slogan for his website.

In addition to being a scientific advisor in the public sector, Robison is also on the scientific advisory board of autism speaks, possibly to placate some noisy neurodiversity advocates, who insist that persons on the spectrum be appointed to positions of power in autism speaks. upon looking at Robison along with his fellow advisory board members one cannot but help noticing the incongruity of Robison, a high school dropout, being included amongst all these Ph.D. and M.D. scientists. Apparently notoriety and commercial success as an author trumps scientific acumen as a qualification for making scientific decisions in both the public and private sectors. Likewise it also trumps federal law as someone who repeatedly engages in dialogue and activity undermining the noble cause of finding a way to prevent and cure autism as has been passed by the combating autism act.

Of greatest concern to this blogger is the possibility that Robison may go to Washington hat in hand and ask for some taxpayer dollars for his own personal use and be given a handout by the federal government. We have seen Robison has done this in his capacity as an advisory board member of autism speaks. Apparently Autism Speaks has no scruples about this Robin Hood in reverse stuff. Neither Robison nor AS see any ethical lapse or conflict of interest in such things.

With the federal government's track record, Gadfly can't help thinking that history could repeat itself.

Along with Ari Ne'eman's participation in crafting autism public policy at taxpayer expense we see another fine example of our tax dollars at work.

Ari Ne'eman disenfranchises pro-cure and nonverbal autistics yet again

I see that once again, neurodiversity spokesman, Ari Ne'eman is
shooting his mouth off yet again yet again, claiming that the "autistic community" takes offense at eradicating autism. I have to wonder, yet again, does the "autistic community" include me? Does it include Jake Crosby, Stephanie Keil, Oliver Canby, JediKnight, Tom McKean, Sue Rubin and numerous others on the spectrum who have expressed desire for a cure? How about Connor Doherty who may not be in a position to speak for himself. What about Sean Lapin, Dov Shestack, John Belmonte and many other autistic persons who have limited to nonexistent speech who are incapable of rebutting Ne'eman's nonsense and asking him to butt out and speak for himself and and not for other autistics.

Ne'eman also stated in this diatribe at Harvard that autism should be looked upon as a disability and not a disease, yet neglects to explain the difference between a disability and a disease.

As has been meticulously documented in numerous posts on autism's gadfly, Ne'eman has repeatedly stated that he does not believe that autism is a disability in spite of claiming he never said anything to that effect. We have to wonder why he is now backpedaling and now stating autism should be looked upon as a disability. Could there be political reasons?

Ari Ne'eman and ASAN, I resent you trying to speak for all autistic persons. Almost all of us, myself included, are lower functioning (or more impaired for those who express distaste at the low functioning high functioning dichotomy) than you are. There are others who can't speak and say that they would like autism eradicated. There are others, besides me, who have expressed a desire for a cure. Their numbers seem to be ever growing.

Remember, Ari, nothing about us without us.

interesting petition from Ari Ne'eman and ASAN

I see that Ari Ne'eman (as well as I presume the rest of the members of the autistic self advocacy network) have taken umbrage at republican senatorial candidate Sharron Angle's controversial remarks about autism and insurance mandates, where she implies that some persons may be faking autism. ASAN is now circulating an online petition urging Angle to apologize for her remarks.

It seems to this blogger the majority of ASAN's advocacy activities are aimed at telling the world how easily offended they are and just trying to claim people should not be offensive rather than actually doing something to help disabled people function better in the world or fighting for abuse such as what happens at Judge Rotenberg center. The Ransom notes campaign from a couple of years ago is the most well-known of these examples. If everyone spent as much time crusading anytime a remark that they found offensive was said, no one would get any work done during the day and the world's activities would grind to a halt.

Since Ari Ne'eman and ASAN insist that Angle apologize for remarks that they don't like how about if they apologize to me for remarks and activities that I find offensive.

I find it offensive that they would state that curing autism is morally reprehensible. That they would spend time on the Zacqhery Price case after saying that no criminal should get a free pass because of autism. I am offended that they would claim they never said that autism was not a disability and after I produced Ne'eman's essay they would make a pathetic attempt at damage control and edit the essay, then admit it was a mistake to phrase things in the essay the way they did, then delete it from their site altogether. I find it offensive that Ne'eman, (a 21-year-old kid at the time) had never worked in a job of any sort and would claim that the solution for reducing employment among autistics was to eliminate social pleasantry as a criteria for hiring and a good job evaluation. This is particularly offensive after I have been fired something like 20 times, forced to resign from other jobs in more marginal situations and tried to make a living more years than Ne'eman has been alive. I find it offensive that they would accept donations from the "autistic bitch from hell" who has stated that persons with autism whose views she does not agree with should be put to death and turned into cat food. There is speculation that ABFH is in reality Meg Evans, one of the top executives of ASAN. I find it offensive that they would accept donations from a vicious and cruel hatemonger like Clay Adams who can only try to win an argument with me by bringing back the Bettelheim era and stating my mother was responsible for all the problems in my life and making up bigoted statements mocking my disability and by extension all disabled people whom ASAN claims they want to have dignity. As well as calling both me and my mother names just because he does not like the fact I take Ne'eman to task. Ne'eman may not know about this since it happened before he was born but in 1980 the Ku Klux Klan endorsed Ronald Reagan's presidential candidacy and Reagan renounced the endorsement and refused to accept money from them. I wonder why Ne'eman and ASAN don't do the same thing where ABFH and Clay Adams are concerned.

I find it offensive that they would imply that there is a possibility that parents of autistic children who donate money to autism speaks are morally complicit with murder. I find it offensive that they would imply that genetic research is used to find a way to abort autistic fetuses.

I don't know how to do an online petition and I don't know how many signatures I would get. But the various statements and actions of Ne'eman and his colleagues are just as offensive to me as Angle's statements about autism are to those who took umbrage at her remarks. I suspect there are others besides me who find a lot of Ne'eman's and ASAN's remarks offensive.

I suggest that ASAN write a public apology to me ( and anyone else they may have offended) on their websites before they start circulating petitions claiming someone who makes remarks offensive to them should apologize. After all, what is good for the goose is good for the gander.

Sebelius: pot calling kettle black

Nevada's republican candidate for the U.S. Senate has recently been mired in controversy for statements she has made about the new autism insurance mandates, using air quotes to describe autism and implying that perhaps these people don't deserve coverage or that autism is a trivial condition.

Interestingly, secretary of health and human services Kathleen Sebelius has given her take on the matter Sebelius states:

It is my understanding that Sharron Angle believes that there is a hoax, under the guise of autism, where you would include requests for treatments that may not even be required," said Sebelius, who was in Nevada promoting health care reform with Harry Reid.
Sebelius pounded Angle's comments as "insulting" to parents and kids, adding: "I don't know if there is anyplace in the country where the differences in the candidates are more stark than here."

Autism's gadfly has questioned the value of these insurance mandates in the past, particularly covering ABA, an experimental treatment where the research has used punishment in order to get the results, in spite of the fact that these punishments have been outlawed in California, where I live and possibly other jurisdictions, as well as the fact there have been no published adult outcomes though the federal government has funded this research to assess adult outcomes.

Of greater concern, at least to this blogger, is is the strong statement by autism speaks is that these insurance mandates will make the difference between an autistic child having friends and not having friends.

Aside from the problems of these insurance mandates and their dubious value it seems odd to your humble blogger that Sebelius would be making these statements in light of the fact she has appointed one Ari Ne'eman to the Interagency autism coordinating committee. Gadfly questions the constitutionality of the IACC and the fact that these appointments by the secretary of HHS would seem to violate the principles of checks and balances between the executive branch and legislative branch that this country was founded upon in that these appointments don't require confirmation by the senate and Sebelius is accountable to no one in making a controversial appointment. Speaking of quotes, air or otherwise, check out one statement by Sebelius appointee:

The belief was that anyone society labeled"disabled" could only go so far. Sadly, these misconceptions had the potential to become self-fulfilling prophecies. When the expectation is that people of a certain type can only reach so far, they are not provided with the same challenges and opportunities that educators give mainstreamed students....

Also another statement:

We should recognize what diversity of neurology has contributed to the human race and what it can bring to the future. Difference is not disability and someday, I hope, the world will recognize that those who think in different ways should be welcomed.

Regular readers of this blog will remember that after Ne'eman steadfastly denied that he had ever said autism was not a disability, Gadfly called Ne'eman out on these statements. He subsequently edited the essay changing the difference is not disability statement to difference only becomes disability when not accommodated for. Apparently dissatisfied with this rather pathetic attempt at damage control, Ne'eman and his ASAN cronies deleted the essay altogether from their web page.

Another interesting statement from Ms. Sebelius' appointee:

But if we are to demand equal legitimacy, if we are to assert that a “cure” is not only unnecessary and undesirable but also morally reprehensible

Again, note the irony of the c word in quotes.

Ms. Sebelius, I can't speak for whether some found Ms. Angle's comments insulting. On the other hand, I find your appointment of Ari Ne'eman to a taxpayer funded body that mandates autism policy utterly offensive. I find it strange that you would make these comments critical of Ms. Angle as if you really give a shit about persons on the spectrum, when you appoint someone who does not tell the truth about saying autism is not a disability and claiming that curing people of this affliction, which I presume mandated insurance would pay for if such cure existed, would be morally reprehensible. It would indeed seem your statements are hypocritical and you are a very black pot calling a kettle the same color.

full text of my l.a. mag article

here is the full text of my l.a. magazine article in case anyone is interested.