Lenny Schafer alerted me to an article written about the alleged attempted murder of Isabelle Stapleton by her mother, Kelly, on his facebook page. In the article, prominent neurodiversity activist Ari Ne'eman once again resorts to one of the oldest dirty tricks in the book the ND's resort to any time a parent murders their autistic offspring or allegedly attempts to do so. He writes:
I think there certainly is a divide, and there has been for some time," said Ari Ne'eman, president of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network in Washington, D.C. “The picture of autism that has been presented in the public eye is not consistent with how we see ourselves.
Note that this is part of a pattern on Ne'eman's part to resort to a phenomenon that renowned blogger Harold Doherty has referred to as "The Royal We". Where Ne'eman attempts to speak for all autistic people, though his Asperger's or autism is nowhere near typical of the vast majority of those on the spectrum, myself included. No, Ari, I am an individual, you can't get away with speaking for me or anyone else who may happen to disagree with your way of thinking.
He goes on to say:
Autistic people deserve the same protection under law, he said, and “we are
profoundly concerned when groups try to present murder as justified or
understandable on the basis of the victim’s disability.”
What person with autism has not received the same protection under the law? The article goes on to say that Kelly Stapleton will be arrainged for attempted murder. She will be prosecuted. Even though Ne'eman may not like this, the U.S.A. is not nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia. Ms. Stapleton is legally entitled to a trial by a jury of her peers. Until she is convicted, she's innocent until proven guilty or at least found guilty in a court of law. The law is applied in the same manner as the attempted murder of a non-handicapped child by their parent(s).
It is not surprising that Ne'eman's most astute statement is saved for last:
Parents do not kill kids because a service system is inadequate," Ne'eman added.
"They kill their children because media and a disturbing number of people send
them the message that that is OK or at least understandable
No, I don't think so, parents do not kill their children because they happen to read reports in the media that Ne'eman alleges exist saying it is okay or understandable for them to do so. It seems implausible that most parents who kill or attempt to kill their autistic kids just happen to read media reports and then say to themselves, "oh, okay, guess it's okay for me to put my kid to sleep." They do it out of insanity exacerbated by the frustration of having to raise an autistic child. In fact Ms. Stapleton has authored a blog documenting her frustration in dealing with her child's disability. Autism is a horrible disability that brings out the worst in desperate people. Of course, thankfully, the vast majority of parents, no matter how far they're pushed off the deep end don't go as far as murder. This is not to say that the murder of autistic children is ever justified or even understandable.
As Lenny correctly pointed out in his facebook article, Ne'eman ( and probably other ND's) are just projecting their own anger and hatred onto all parents of autistic kids. ND is the 21st century incarnation of Bettelheim.
Saturday, September 14, 2013
Monday, August 5, 2013
Are autistic men pedophiles? Bizarre stuff from Temple Grandin's mom
I've just read a very offensive,at least to me, article written on the Daily Beast allegedly by Temple Grandin's mother who implies that many autistic men are pedophiles who spend their time looking at child pornography and end up being registered sex offenders. Nearly three years ago, I wrote about Nick Dubin, a neurodiversity activist who as a matter of public record was arrested by the FBI for downloading and looking at child porn. Dubin, a licensed clinical psychologist and one-time director of a school for special needs children, has made the somewhat dubious (at least to me) claim that he himself is on the autism spectrum. I'm not sure what happened to his case, whether he plea bargained, was convicted or acquitted. Other than this I don't know of a single documented example of an autistic pedarest (or wannabe child molester). I wish Ms. Cutler would provide one but she does not.
Ms. Cutler makes the entirely alleged (with the emphasis on alleged) claim that an autistic man brought his computer into a repair shop and the technicians found child porn on his hard drive. No name is given, no link or documentation whatsoever is provided as to the veracity of this story.
She goes on to make the bizarre and bigoted claims (with no evidence) that autistic men as a general rule have abnormal sex drives and need children to teach them to have sex and this somehow drives them to download child pornography yet does not give a single example (other than her alleged one) of this phenomenon in practice. She claims to quote University of North Carolina professor Gary Mesibov who seems to somehow concur that as a rule many autistic men are pedarests and pedophiles. She provides no documentation of where Mesibov has said this.
I wish she'd give some sort of documentation of this or some sort of published study that claims that autistics have a tendency toward pedophilia. Or if anyone else reads this blog and wishes to comment on an example I'd be interested in hearing about this.
I hope people can understand why I find this most offensive. I wonder if ASAN will get involved with this, since they seem to take offense at something like the Ransom notes campaign which would seem to be considerably trivial compared to this. I've written an email to the Daily Beast urging them to retract this article or at least apologize for it. editorial@thedailybeast.com I hope other people will do so also. Somehow I think this is more offensive than some deragatory song lyrics or other (at least to me) lesser or more trivial matters that petitions have been started over.
Ms. Cutler makes the entirely alleged (with the emphasis on alleged) claim that an autistic man brought his computer into a repair shop and the technicians found child porn on his hard drive. No name is given, no link or documentation whatsoever is provided as to the veracity of this story.
She goes on to make the bizarre and bigoted claims (with no evidence) that autistic men as a general rule have abnormal sex drives and need children to teach them to have sex and this somehow drives them to download child pornography yet does not give a single example (other than her alleged one) of this phenomenon in practice. She claims to quote University of North Carolina professor Gary Mesibov who seems to somehow concur that as a rule many autistic men are pedarests and pedophiles. She provides no documentation of where Mesibov has said this.
I wish she'd give some sort of documentation of this or some sort of published study that claims that autistics have a tendency toward pedophilia. Or if anyone else reads this blog and wishes to comment on an example I'd be interested in hearing about this.
I hope people can understand why I find this most offensive. I wonder if ASAN will get involved with this, since they seem to take offense at something like the Ransom notes campaign which would seem to be considerably trivial compared to this. I've written an email to the Daily Beast urging them to retract this article or at least apologize for it. editorial@thedailybeast.com I hope other people will do so also. Somehow I think this is more offensive than some deragatory song lyrics or other (at least to me) lesser or more trivial matters that petitions have been started over.
Monday, July 29, 2013
"Neurotypical" Ho hum
I just saw "neurotypical". Naturally I was piqued by the trailer of the black guy in the movie saying he did not want to be cured and a neurotypical life was not necessarily better than an autistic life. This would also pique pro ND people, anti ND people as well as others not as jaded as myself, who would be shocked to believe anyone could say such a thing if they have newly diagnosed children and are new to the whole autism scene.
The girl talking about how just because dating does not happen to Temple Grandin does not mean it doesn't happens to others was slightly interesting and provided a smidgen of comic relief.
Most of the documentary was rather boring. Not much insight into what life is like for an autistic, even a higher functioning one. Mostly boring discourses about playing tag, how they feel about certain social interactions, etc.
It became slightly more interesting when ASAN member Paula Westby-Durbin came on, stating that she had not heard about PDD or autism until about 2006 (when she would have been well into middle age) and then apparently got a diagnosis somewhere but is quite vague as to where and on what basis she was diagnosed. I had wondered about her and I wonder what sort of childhood she had and if her parents sought medical treatment for her as a child. She gives some slight explanations such as she lacked friends growing up, yet was successfully able to find a husband and apparently has a job where she will be paying off a mortgage on a house.
At the end of the documentary, they show captions giving the names of these people and a little bit on their background. Apparently, the filming was not done properly and there was not enough room on the screen to read everything and they were flashed for not nearly long enough for anyone to really take it in and read it properly. I'm perplexed as to why PBS would air something so poorly edited.
Adam Larsen, the filmmaker, gave some commentary at the very end which started out as somewhat astute stating that the media only concentrated on severe children or people who were savants. Though the latter may be true, I'm not even sure how the former is true. He then went on to talk about how a number of autistics don't want to be cured and are comfortable with who they are. Then stated his own bias where he apparently believes that autism is a legitimate form of neurology rather than disease.
It's unfortunate they did such a good job of marketing the film but the content was so lacking.
I'm still waiting for someone to make a documentary about autistic children in special schools, frustrated with their life and as adults, frustrated that they can't keep a job or find a mate. However, I won't hold my breath.
The girl talking about how just because dating does not happen to Temple Grandin does not mean it doesn't happens to others was slightly interesting and provided a smidgen of comic relief.
Most of the documentary was rather boring. Not much insight into what life is like for an autistic, even a higher functioning one. Mostly boring discourses about playing tag, how they feel about certain social interactions, etc.
It became slightly more interesting when ASAN member Paula Westby-Durbin came on, stating that she had not heard about PDD or autism until about 2006 (when she would have been well into middle age) and then apparently got a diagnosis somewhere but is quite vague as to where and on what basis she was diagnosed. I had wondered about her and I wonder what sort of childhood she had and if her parents sought medical treatment for her as a child. She gives some slight explanations such as she lacked friends growing up, yet was successfully able to find a husband and apparently has a job where she will be paying off a mortgage on a house.
At the end of the documentary, they show captions giving the names of these people and a little bit on their background. Apparently, the filming was not done properly and there was not enough room on the screen to read everything and they were flashed for not nearly long enough for anyone to really take it in and read it properly. I'm perplexed as to why PBS would air something so poorly edited.
Adam Larsen, the filmmaker, gave some commentary at the very end which started out as somewhat astute stating that the media only concentrated on severe children or people who were savants. Though the latter may be true, I'm not even sure how the former is true. He then went on to talk about how a number of autistics don't want to be cured and are comfortable with who they are. Then stated his own bias where he apparently believes that autism is a legitimate form of neurology rather than disease.
It's unfortunate they did such a good job of marketing the film but the content was so lacking.
I'm still waiting for someone to make a documentary about autistic children in special schools, frustrated with their life and as adults, frustrated that they can't keep a job or find a mate. However, I won't hold my breath.
Thursday, July 25, 2013
"Neurotypical" or neurodiversity propaganda ?
I see that soon a new documentary film which appears to extoll the virtues of neurodiversity is slated to air on PBS on Monday, July 29, at 10 p.m. I looked at my local PBS station for the listings though and could not find it. But hopefully I will see it eventually. Perhaps I should not judge this film before seeing it, but it seems heavily pro neurodiversity. Here is the trailer:
We see a gentleman stating that he is opposed to people trying to cure him and that being a neurotypical is not a better way of life but a different way of life. First of all, a cure for autism does not exist and in the words of Far From The Tree author Andrew Solomon it's sort of like arguing intergalactic space travel. If a cure did exist I would not be in favor of forcing it on this individual. I would want a cure for myself and for others who need it.
I believe being a neurotypical is a better way of life. I don't see how anyone can argue, not having decent interpersonal relationships including marriage, being able to earn a decent living and being able to be productive and get things done during the day is not a better way of life. Certainly those on the severe end of the spectrum who can't speak, aren't toilet trained and self injure themselves are certainly leading a different way of life, but it certainly isn't better.
I also see ASAN's Paula Westby Durbin is featured in this too, so more evidence of a pro neurodiverse documentary.
I hope that no one will take this documentary seriously and that research leading to finding legitimate treatments and ultimately to a cure will still be pursued. If I ever see this documentary I may have more to say about it. Stay tuned.
I believe being a neurotypical is a better way of life. I don't see how anyone can argue, not having decent interpersonal relationships including marriage, being able to earn a decent living and being able to be productive and get things done during the day is not a better way of life. Certainly those on the severe end of the spectrum who can't speak, aren't toilet trained and self injure themselves are certainly leading a different way of life, but it certainly isn't better.
I also see ASAN's Paula Westby Durbin is featured in this too, so more evidence of a pro neurodiverse documentary.
I hope that no one will take this documentary seriously and that research leading to finding legitimate treatments and ultimately to a cure will still be pursued. If I ever see this documentary I may have more to say about it. Stay tuned.
Wednesday, July 17, 2013
Autism not a disability but a gift and super ability?
I see that David Ellams, a computer programmer and app developer allegedly somewhere on the autism spectrum, is trivializing my disability and those of others by proclaiming that autism spectrum disorders are not only not a disability but a gift and a "super ability".
My ASD, and I suspect that of most others, it not a gift but a horrific disability. It causes immense pain and suffering. He seems to believe that it's a given that all autistics are super gifted with computers. Any one of us could become a Kevin Mitnick or some other kind of super coder or hacker. Most autistics (including myself who took coursework in computer programming, but was unable to enter the profession) will never be computer experts, no matter how much spin this individual wants to put on it.
This was apparently in response to a petition protesting some offensive song lyrics. How signing this petition, as Mr. Ellams alleges, will show the world that autistic people have 'super abilities' is beyond my comprehension and defies all tenets of common sense and logic, even for a neurodiversity proponent.
Mr. Ellams also uses what Harold Doherty terms as "the royal we" that some other neurodiversity proponents are fond of using:
We are not ill and there is no cure since we do not need curing, we need to re-educate the world on what Autism really is…
If this crap weren't enough Ellams makes even more irrational statements:
They are each mini Geniuses in their field and with the help of our sister company NextGen Software Ltd we can help empower and inspire them to be anything they want t be, if it is to do with programming and Computers then the FREE NextGen Developer Training programme is for them. Since we know much like myself, we are often very gifted when it comes to computers, in fact we find them incredibly easy,
It would appear that Mr. Ellams has tremendous conflicts of interest as he owns both a yoga for autism company and the next gen software, ltd, where he apparently makes money for the empty promise that an autistic super genius can become a computer programmer or anything else they want.
I wonder if anyone would care to start a petition against Mr. Ellams' s statements and his yoga and software businesses.
My ASD, and I suspect that of most others, it not a gift but a horrific disability. It causes immense pain and suffering. He seems to believe that it's a given that all autistics are super gifted with computers. Any one of us could become a Kevin Mitnick or some other kind of super coder or hacker. Most autistics (including myself who took coursework in computer programming, but was unable to enter the profession) will never be computer experts, no matter how much spin this individual wants to put on it.
This was apparently in response to a petition protesting some offensive song lyrics. How signing this petition, as Mr. Ellams alleges, will show the world that autistic people have 'super abilities' is beyond my comprehension and defies all tenets of common sense and logic, even for a neurodiversity proponent.
Mr. Ellams also uses what Harold Doherty terms as "the royal we" that some other neurodiversity proponents are fond of using:
We are not ill and there is no cure since we do not need curing, we need to re-educate the world on what Autism really is…
If this crap weren't enough Ellams makes even more irrational statements:
They are each mini Geniuses in their field and with the help of our sister company NextGen Software Ltd we can help empower and inspire them to be anything they want t be, if it is to do with programming and Computers then the FREE NextGen Developer Training programme is for them. Since we know much like myself, we are often very gifted when it comes to computers, in fact we find them incredibly easy,
It would appear that Mr. Ellams has tremendous conflicts of interest as he owns both a yoga for autism company and the next gen software, ltd, where he apparently makes money for the empty promise that an autistic super genius can become a computer programmer or anything else they want.
I wonder if anyone would care to start a petition against Mr. Ellams' s statements and his yoga and software businesses.
Wednesday, July 3, 2013
Matt Carey's bizarre take on the cause of bullying of autistics
Matt Carey writes blog posts for the well-known blog Left Brain Right Brain. He appears to have at least some neurodiverse leanings. It would appear that Mr. Carey has a penchant for making factual errors in blog posts or writing things that don't jive with any established facts. For some reason, he at one time anonymously posted under the pseudonym "Sullivan". In addition to regularly writing this blog, he's also a public figure in that he's a citizen member of the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee, a group that gives policy recommendations to the federal government.
He's concerned (as am I) with the fact that autistic kids are often bullied and that bullying can lead to a variety of psychologic problems in the victims and even suicide in some cases. He's written a post on the subject. However, he has a rather strange explanation for the reason autistic children are often bullied:
Having recently seen some pretty horrible anti-acceptance images I feel compelled to make this statement: yes, the portrayal of autism by many parent advocates contributes to bullying. If we don’t accept our own children, with their differences and disabilities, if we promote a message that our children and adults like them are not to be accepted, we contribute many problems, bullying being one. Yes, I understand the argument that when some reject acceptance “it’s the autism not the person”. I reject that logic. It’s damaging the way we as parents often portray our kids. It contributes to bullying, and bullying contributes to many bad outcomes.
As is par for the course for Carey, he neglects to cite even a specific example of a negative image and how it could lead to bullying.
I grew up as a child who was frequently bullied. It was in the 1960's, decades before hardly anyone had heard of autism, let alone publically produced anything that could be construed as a negative image of it. Somehow I don't think nondisabled children or even other special education children who might bully someone go around reading the blogs and the internet and whatever it is that Carey construes as "anti-acceptance images". Kids just like to victimize someone who they feel is odd and get some sort of kick out of it.
As someone who grew up during the Bettelheim era and actually lived through it, I resent Carey implying that somehow bullying is the parents fault, his baseless statement that parents don't accept their own kids, and that bullies just happened to see negative images and that is one of the explanations for their behavior.
There is no doubt that bullying would be done regardless of what images parents or the media portray of autism. It is ridiculous to think that prejudice or animus toward a person with autism is because of parents.
I wonder what Carey's explanation is for bullying of kids who are short, overweight or have acne. Are they not accepted by their parents and/or are negative images made of them?
Finally, I am also curious as to what Carey regards as a negative image since he's so vague about it. Is it that autism is a disease that should be cured? That it's a disadvantage in life that causes incredible pain for the children and their families? Or is it just that a cure for autism would be a good thing, since he seems to have at least somewhat of a neurodiversity perspective? If this is the case, then I wonder why the federal government would appoint this individual to a post that came about under the Combating Autism Act whose purpose is to ultimately eradicate autism and who looks at autism as a negative thing that needs a cure.
He's concerned (as am I) with the fact that autistic kids are often bullied and that bullying can lead to a variety of psychologic problems in the victims and even suicide in some cases. He's written a post on the subject. However, he has a rather strange explanation for the reason autistic children are often bullied:
Having recently seen some pretty horrible anti-acceptance images I feel compelled to make this statement: yes, the portrayal of autism by many parent advocates contributes to bullying. If we don’t accept our own children, with their differences and disabilities, if we promote a message that our children and adults like them are not to be accepted, we contribute many problems, bullying being one. Yes, I understand the argument that when some reject acceptance “it’s the autism not the person”. I reject that logic. It’s damaging the way we as parents often portray our kids. It contributes to bullying, and bullying contributes to many bad outcomes.
As is par for the course for Carey, he neglects to cite even a specific example of a negative image and how it could lead to bullying.
I grew up as a child who was frequently bullied. It was in the 1960's, decades before hardly anyone had heard of autism, let alone publically produced anything that could be construed as a negative image of it. Somehow I don't think nondisabled children or even other special education children who might bully someone go around reading the blogs and the internet and whatever it is that Carey construes as "anti-acceptance images". Kids just like to victimize someone who they feel is odd and get some sort of kick out of it.
As someone who grew up during the Bettelheim era and actually lived through it, I resent Carey implying that somehow bullying is the parents fault, his baseless statement that parents don't accept their own kids, and that bullies just happened to see negative images and that is one of the explanations for their behavior.
There is no doubt that bullying would be done regardless of what images parents or the media portray of autism. It is ridiculous to think that prejudice or animus toward a person with autism is because of parents.
I wonder what Carey's explanation is for bullying of kids who are short, overweight or have acne. Are they not accepted by their parents and/or are negative images made of them?
Finally, I am also curious as to what Carey regards as a negative image since he's so vague about it. Is it that autism is a disease that should be cured? That it's a disadvantage in life that causes incredible pain for the children and their families? Or is it just that a cure for autism would be a good thing, since he seems to have at least somewhat of a neurodiversity perspective? If this is the case, then I wonder why the federal government would appoint this individual to a post that came about under the Combating Autism Act whose purpose is to ultimately eradicate autism and who looks at autism as a negative thing that needs a cure.
Tuesday, June 18, 2013
who's defending Alex Spourdalakis' murder?
In their latest cause celebre The Autistic Self Advocacy Network is calling for the prosecution of Alex Spourdalakis' mother, Dorothy, and his godmother for his murder under federal hate crime laws.
Alex was a 14-year-old 200 pound nonverbal severely autistic boy, so violent he often had to be put in four point restraints during hospitalizations.
His mother and godmother apparently murdered him by stabbing him to death and slitting his wrists. I agree with ASAN that his autism and even it's great severity and the fact that he was so difficult to handle does not justify his homicide.
However, I do question ASAN in their infinite wisdom about how wise it is to spend federal tax dollars prosecuting him for a federal hate crime when his mother and her accomplice are being charged with first degree murder at the state level. If there is ample evidence they did murder him in a premeditated fashion it is likely they will be convicted and sent to prison. It's possible they'll even receive the death penalty. I know there have been some isolated instances of caretakers murdering autistic children and then getting light sentences. However, even if they were prosecuted by the federal government, what guarantee is there, they would not get a lenient or even suspended sentence? It seems much more viable to prosecute these people at the state level. Of course, playing the murder card is nothing new for the neurodiversity movement.
Most intriguing to this blogger is the following statement from ASAN:
Many in the media have attempted to excuse Alex’s murder or sympathize with his killers, citing the challenges of his disability and the need to improve the quality and availability of service-provision. Such justifications are not unusual in the aftermath of such atrocities and they remain as inappropriate as ever
ASAN neglects to cite one specific example of this. I perused a number of the media reports that I could find on Google news and, as far as I could tell, not one of them justified or attempted to defend this individual's murder.
I'm curious as to where ASAN gets their sources and who in this instance (or any other for that matter) justified the murder of anyone who was autistic.
I guess it's possible someone can enlighten me in the comments section (even anonymously) and I wait to hear any specific examples.
Alex was a 14-year-old 200 pound nonverbal severely autistic boy, so violent he often had to be put in four point restraints during hospitalizations.
His mother and godmother apparently murdered him by stabbing him to death and slitting his wrists. I agree with ASAN that his autism and even it's great severity and the fact that he was so difficult to handle does not justify his homicide.
However, I do question ASAN in their infinite wisdom about how wise it is to spend federal tax dollars prosecuting him for a federal hate crime when his mother and her accomplice are being charged with first degree murder at the state level. If there is ample evidence they did murder him in a premeditated fashion it is likely they will be convicted and sent to prison. It's possible they'll even receive the death penalty. I know there have been some isolated instances of caretakers murdering autistic children and then getting light sentences. However, even if they were prosecuted by the federal government, what guarantee is there, they would not get a lenient or even suspended sentence? It seems much more viable to prosecute these people at the state level. Of course, playing the murder card is nothing new for the neurodiversity movement.
Most intriguing to this blogger is the following statement from ASAN:
Many in the media have attempted to excuse Alex’s murder or sympathize with his killers, citing the challenges of his disability and the need to improve the quality and availability of service-provision. Such justifications are not unusual in the aftermath of such atrocities and they remain as inappropriate as ever
ASAN neglects to cite one specific example of this. I perused a number of the media reports that I could find on Google news and, as far as I could tell, not one of them justified or attempted to defend this individual's murder.
I'm curious as to where ASAN gets their sources and who in this instance (or any other for that matter) justified the murder of anyone who was autistic.
I guess it's possible someone can enlighten me in the comments section (even anonymously) and I wait to hear any specific examples.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
