Mitzi
I wouldn't take the Spectator's word for anything either -- and yes,
the piece raised my feminist hackles! -- but I was sure I saw a really
nasty attitude to autism in the piece. Thanks for your comments
Judy Evans
Cardiff, Wales (UK)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Mitzi Waltz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, December 09, 2002 3:24 PM
Subject: Re: Autism
> Here's where things get sticky!
> Based on current evidence from genetics, brainscans,
> and "objective measures" of various sorts, I don't
> think it can be denied that autism has an organic
> basis. Just what that basis is, however, is subject
> to great debate among researchers.
> The genes identified as contributors are so many,
> and so little is known about what they actually do.
> More difficult yet, there appear to be several
> different combinations of genes involved. Theories
> include genetic differences that lead to immune/
> autoimmune differences that, in combination with
> environmental factors (we're talking eposure to
> toxics etc. here, not "toxic parenting") lead to
> changes. One contributor gene in some cases appears
> to be a RELN mutation, which can do all sorts of
> things (and which prevents the person from processing
> metallic elements properly, such as zinc and
> mercury.)
> Baron-Cohen's work has largely been on the psychology
> of people with autism, i.e. the Theory of Mind
> theory. There's definitely debate amongst people with
> autism about the validity of TOM tests as an
> indicator of deficits in autism, and some reserchers
> will quibble on it as well although the majority are
> convinced. His latest stuff on the extreme male
> brain theory just raises hackles on so many more
> points!
> In response to your other question, there are a fair
> lot of folks who, while not saying that autitic
> spectrum disorders can be difficult to live with,
> both for people who have them and those who care for
> them, having autistic traits is not necessarily
> "disabling" in of itself. After all, who says how
> much and what kind of play is "normal"? Who says that
> spending a lot of time ruminating over, say, the
> intricacies of bus timetables is "abnormal," while
> similar attention payed to football stats is
> "normal"? Indeed, many eccentricities of interest and
> personality that might have passed for "normal" could
> easily fall under the ever-broader definition of
> autistic traits, and be pathologised by doing so.
> Which can then lead to special schooling, lowered
> self-esteem, increased risk of additional psych
> problems (already high in this population), exclusion
> from further education and work, and reduced choices
> and opportunities in general. If the primary deficit
> in autistic spectrum disorders is impaired social
> behaviour as compared to a norm of some sort, it's
> easy to come to the conclusion that at least some of
> the disablement people with ASDs experience is
> situational, not internal.
> Re question 3, yes, there are still those who
> don't believe autism has an organic
> cause...Bettelheim still holds sway in France and
> Francophone Quebec, among other places, and there are
> segements of the antipsychiatry crowd (Peter Breggin,
> for instance) who still follow that line. The idea of
> autism as externally imposed is so strong that it's
> an undercurrent that keeps popping up in unusual
> places, like among certain applied behaviour analysis
> practitioners who take an extreme approach to
> behaviourism, among some "facilitated communication"
> folks, etc. etc. Not to mention the people who are
> still encouraging parents to take their kid for an
> exorcism...hard to believe that's still happening,
> but it is.
>
> --Mitzi
> (who wouldn't take the Spectator's word on how to
> spell "cat," much less on male-female brain
> differences).
>
>
>
>
>
> re what Tom S. said:
>
> > For our US colleagues, The Spectator is a very conservative/right
wing
> > weekly news magazine, so clearly it will 'wrap' any science
findings
> > which appear to confirm its prejudices in a broader message about
e.g.
> > the inevitability of gender differences.
> >
> > But I am interested in the challenge to the underlying Baron-Cohen
> > research made by list contributors, and would like some more
> > informationhere. Are people denying that autism has an organic
> > basis? Are they
> > disputing whether autism is an impairment? Or (and) are they
> > suggestingthat it is not a deviation from the average human
> > neurological state?
> >
> > I would be grateful for clarification.
> >
> > Tom
> >
> > ________________End of message______________________
> >
> > Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> > are now located at:
> >
> > www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
> >
> > You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
> >
>
> ________________End of message______________________
>
> Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
> are now located at:
>
> www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
>
> You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
>
________________End of message______________________
Archives and tools for the Disability-Research Discussion List
are now located at:
www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/disability-research.html
You can JOIN or LEAVE the list from this web page.
|