Autistic Discussion Thread

[Nuroblav]

A shame that the poll is single vote because I accidentally picked the wrong option

Oh well, it doesn't matter.

[Thermodolia]

A disability check I believe.

A 504 is special accommodation plan that a school and the education system in-general has to give you if you have a disability.

Oh then I had one of those then. Though that was because I’m dyslexic, why they name these disabilities so I can’t spell them I don’t know

[The Blaatschapen]

A shame that the poll is single vote because I accidentally picked the wrong option

Oh well, it doesn't matter.

Your vote does matter, this is not politics.

Besides, some people here have OCD and really want all votes to be correct

[Modu]

Ritalin is medically approved for treatment of ADHD. It is prescribed in controlled dosages, nobody is "pumped". Also, diagnosing a mental illness is not as simple as checking off a few boxes. It requires a clinical diagnosis from a trained medical professional. Self-done online tests for example, are not appropriate.



If we can genetically modify people not to have developmental disorders, yes. And if we can pre-screen for it, absolutely. Iceland has nearly eradicated Down syndrome through the use of prenatal screening. This screening and subsequent termination of pregnancy is entirely voluntary. As a result of this health achievement, their medical system has more funds available for other existing health issues in society that have yet to be treated or eradicated.

Also... Homosexuality is not classified as a medical disorder. Transgender people can experience gender dysphoria, however being transgender by itself (i.e. not identifying with your biological sex as assigned at birth) is not a mental illness.

I don't identify with the social characteristics assigned at birth, does that make me disabled? I think comparing aspergers to down syndrome and hoping for its eradication is really extremely offensive, and some people with aspergers have contributed to the fields of mathematics, science and art more than they ever could if they were neurotypical.

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder. The fact that some people with the developmental disorder have made contributions to society is irrelevant. Overall, it causes dysfunction in ordinary life and thus is classified as a developmental disorder. Offensive or not, that is a fact. You don't need autism or Asperger's to contribute to society.

[Nuroblav]

A shame that the poll is single vote because I accidentally picked the wrong option

Oh well, it doesn't matter.

Your vote does matter, this is not politics.

Besides, some people here have OCD and really want all votes to be correct

Well then unfortunately I have annoyed them greatly. Sorry guys!

[United Muscovite Nations]

A shame that the poll is single vote because I accidentally picked the wrong option

Oh well, it doesn't matter.

Your vote does matter, this is not politics.

Besides, some people here have OCD and really want all votes to be correct

ugh. I don't mean to be that guy, but that kind of joke and the position OCD occupies in pop culture as the mental disorder that it's okay to laugh at is really fucking annoying.

[Telconi]

I don't identify with the social characteristics assigned at birth, does that make me disabled? I think comparing aspergers to down syndrome and hoping for its eradication is really extremely offensive, and some people with aspergers have contributed to the fields of mathematics, science and art more than they ever could if they were neurotypical.

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder. The fact that some people with the developmental disorder have made contributions to society is irrelevant. Overall, it causes dysfunction in ordinary life and thus is classified as a developmental disorder. Offensive or not, that is a fact. You don't need autism or Asperger's to contribute to society.

What if people with HFA don't want it "eradicated"

[SD_Film Artists]

I don't identify with the social characteristics assigned at birth, does that make me disabled? I think comparing aspergers to down syndrome and hoping for its eradication is really extremely offensive, and some people with aspergers have contributed to the fields of mathematics, science and art more than they ever could if they were neurotypical.

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder.

But it's still killing future autistics. That's eugenics.

The fact that some people with the developmental disorder have made contributions to society is irrelevant.

Since eugenics is supposedly all about the betterment of society, I'd say that the contributions (which are arguably directly linked to the person's autism) are very important. As with most eugenics supporters, you're being counter-productive towards your own goal.

Overall, it causes dysfunction in ordinary life and thus is classified as a developmental disorder.

That's a very sweeping statement to make. How do you know my life or the lives of other aspies/autistics?

You don't need autism or Asperger's to contribute to society.

You also don't need to be neurotypical to contribute to society. Indeed in some areas it's actually worse to be neurotypical; so should we prevent neurotypicals from existing?

[Modu]

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder. The fact that some people with the developmental disorder have made contributions to society is irrelevant. Overall, it causes dysfunction in ordinary life and thus is classified as a developmental disorder. Offensive or not, that is a fact. You don't need autism or Asperger's to contribute to society.

What if people with HFA don't want it "eradicated"

They have the option of refusing treatment if/when it becomes available for them.

[Telconi]

What if people with HFA don't want it "eradicated"

They have the option of refusing treatment if/when it becomes available for them.

Then you aren't eradicating it.

[Modu]

They have the option of refusing treatment if/when it becomes available for them.

Then you aren't eradicating it.

Not right now, no. But if it turns out to be largely genetic and we can convince enough women to pre-screen and terminate affected pregnancies, then we can accomplish the same medical success as was done with Down syndrome in Iceland. Those are big ifs. The bottom-line is we must continue to fund research and therapy for autism.

[Thermodolia]

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder.

But it's still killing future autistics. That's eugenics.

Technically no. If we made a 100% treatment for autism effective from birth then that’s not really kill future autistics but just the disorder.

Also the vast majority of people who contribute to society are nerotypical so yes in a sense you have to be norotypical to contribute or it at least makes a big difference especially in jobs that require social skills

[Thermodolia]

Then you aren't eradicating it.

Not right now, no. But if it turns out to be largely genetic and we can convince enough women to pre-screen and terminate affected pregnancies, then we can accomplish the same medical success as was done with Down syndrome in Iceland. Those are big ifs. The bottom-line is we must continue to fund research and therapy for autism.

Ya no that’s fucked. Like seriously fucked. That’s some Aktion T4 level shit

[Agarntrop]

Then you aren't eradicating it.

Not right now, no. But if it turns out to be largely genetic and we can convince enough women to pre-screen and terminate affected pregnancies, then we can accomplish the same medical success as was done with Down syndrome in Iceland.

There are no words that can describe how utterly depraved and despicable that idea is.

[Agarntrop]

/bump

[Modu]

Not right now, no. But if it turns out to be largely genetic and we can convince enough women to pre-screen and terminate affected pregnancies, then we can accomplish the same medical success as was done with Down syndrome in Iceland.

There are no words that can describe how utterly depraved and despicable that idea is.

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?

Not right now, no. But if it turns out to be largely genetic and we can convince enough women to pre-screen and terminate affected pregnancies, then we can accomplish the same medical success as was done with Down syndrome in Iceland. Those are big ifs. The bottom-line is we must continue to fund research and therapy for autism.

Ya no that’s fucked. Like seriously fucked. That’s some Aktion T4 level shit

It is absolutely not. Aktion T4 was forced and government sanctioned euthanasia of people deemed unfit to live by the Nazi regime in Germany at the time. What I just proposed was a pre-natal screening option. In Iceland, the government offered the option of pre-natal screening for Down syndrome. In nearly 100% of cases where it was detected, the fetus was terminated. As a result, they successfully practically eliminated Down syndrome without any coercion. Morally clean, and socioeconomically efficient.

If the same could be done for mental illnesses and developmental disorders, we could free newer generations of having to deal with them.

You're acting as if voluntarily abortion is somehow even remotely comparable to state-sanctioned euthanasia of the disabled.

[Agarntrop]

There are no words that can describe how utterly depraved and despicable that idea is.

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?

It is despicable to try to convince women with potentially aspergic children to kill them, yes.

[Modu]

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?

It is despicable to try to convince women with potentially aspergic children to kill them, yes.

It isn't pressuring them per se, it's informing them and giving them a choice. Not to mention, abortion does not result in the death of children. By definition, fetuses are not children. They are fetuses.

[Agarntrop]

It is despicable to try to convince women with potentially aspergic children to kill them, yes.

It isn't pressuring them per se, it's informing them and giving them a choice. Not to mention, abortion does not result in the death of children. By definition, fetuses are not children. They are fetuses.

a) your previous statement certainly suggested otherwise and b) I said "potentially aspergic children," implying they aren't born yet.

[Thermodolia]

There are no words that can describe how utterly depraved and despicable that idea is.

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?

Ya no that’s fucked. Like seriously fucked. That’s some Aktion T4 level shit

It is absolutely not. Aktion T4 was forced and government sanctioned euthanasia of people deemed unfit to live by the Nazi regime in Germany at the time. What I just proposed was a pre-natal screening option. In Iceland, the government offered the option of pre-natal screening for Down syndrome. In nearly 100% of cases where it was detected, the fetus was terminated. As a result, they successfully practically eliminated Down syndrome without any coercion. Morally clean, and socioeconomically efficient.

If the same could be done for mental illnesses and developmental disorders, we could free newer generations of having to deal with them.

You're acting as if voluntarily abortion is somehow even remotely comparable to state-sanctioned euthanasia of the disabled.

Eugenics is bad no matter how you slice it. Aborting people because of a possible development disorder is wrong

[Modu]

It isn't pressuring them per se, it's informing them and giving them a choice. Not to mention, abortion does not result in the death of children. By definition, fetuses are not children. They are fetuses.

a) your previous statement certainly suggested otherwise and b) I said "potentially aspergic children," implying they aren't born yet.

Yes, by informing them that their offspring will be born with a developmental disorder, it is very plausible that information alone will be enough to convince them to terminate their pregnancy and try again. And fair enough on your last point.

It is within the interests of the state to promote the birth of healthy offspring. Developmental disorders carry economic costs and if these economic costs can be liberated through voluntary means, why shouldn't society take full advantage of that? It isn't just about striving for a healthy viable workforce, but also freeing up resources to spend on things that cannot be prevented.

Anyway, so far, the exact causes of autism are not known, and there is no pre-screen test available for it as it is not certain what exactly causes it genetically and or environmentally. You should note that I have advocated for direct stipends for those suffering from autism and public funding for research for treatment.

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?



It is absolutely not. Aktion T4 was forced and government sanctioned euthanasia of people deemed unfit to live by the Nazi regime in Germany at the time. What I just proposed was a pre-natal screening option. In Iceland, the government offered the option of pre-natal screening for Down syndrome. In nearly 100% of cases where it was detected, the fetus was terminated. As a result, they successfully practically eliminated Down syndrome without any coercion. Morally clean, and socioeconomically efficient.

If the same could be done for mental illnesses and developmental disorders, we could free newer generations of having to deal with them.

You're acting as if voluntarily abortion is somehow even remotely comparable to state-sanctioned euthanasia of the disabled.

Eugenics is bad no matter how you slice it. Aborting people because of a possible development disorder is wrong

That's up to the person carrying the fetus. And how is aborting a fetus wrong? If it will not develop correctly, isn't it better to restart and try again? The rearing of children is very expensive and time consuming. It is best to give that opportunity to the most viable candidates. As long as it is voluntary of course. Never have you seen me here advocate for forced abortions, or anything remotely like that. All I advocate is for informed decisions.

[SD_Film Artists]

There are no words that can describe how utterly depraved and despicable that idea is.

Why is it despicable? Does a woman not have a right to decide she wants to terminate her pregnancy?

That's more of a question for an abortion thread, but as someone who's normaly pro-choice I don't think that people should be allowed to have abortions based on prejudiced reasons, such as the sex or neurotype of their child.

Also...

I don't identify with the social characteristics assigned at birth, does that make me disabled? I think comparing aspergers to down syndrome and hoping for its eradication is really extremely offensive, and some people with aspergers have contributed to the fields of mathematics, science and art more than they ever could if they were neurotypical.

Yes, ultimately I hope for the eradication of Asperger's, but to clarify, I mean the treatment, curing, and or prevention of the disorder itself. Not say... Killing those already born with the disorder.

But it's still killing future autistics. That's eugenics.

The fact that some people with the developmental disorder have made contributions to society is irrelevant.

Since eugenics is supposedly all about the betterment of society, I'd say that the contributions (which are arguably directly linked to the person's autism) are very important. As with most eugenics supporters, you're being counter-productive towards your own goal.

Overall, it causes dysfunction in ordinary life and thus is classified as a developmental disorder.

That's a very sweeping statement to make. How do you know my life or the lives of other aspies/autistics?

You don't need autism or Asperger's to contribute to society.

You also don't need to be neurotypical to contribute to society. Indeed in some areas it's actually worse to be neurotypical; so should we prevent neurotypicals from existing?

[Necroghastia]

Calling autistic people "not developed correctly" is one of the grossest takes I've ever seen ngl.

[Agarntrop]

Calling autistic people "not developed correctly" is one of the grossest takes I've ever seen ngl.

In-fucking-deed, it's even more despicable when you are advocating for their genocide.

[SD_Film Artists]

But it's still killing future autistics. That's eugenics.

Technically no. If we made a 100% treatment for autism effective from birth then that’s not really kill future autistics but just the disorder.

But you would cease their existance so in a way still 'kill' them. Unless you mean removing the autism but keeping the child, in which case they are still not themselves as it's a myth that autism is a kind of 'shell' with a neurotypical person inside. If someone looks like you but does not have your mind then wouldn't you be dead? That's one reason why it's more acceptable to say "autistic person" rather than "person with autism" as the latter implies that the autism is something which is carried around as an accessory. "A man with Americanness"

Also the vast majority of people who contribute to society are nerotypical so yes in a sense you have to be norotypical to contribute or it at least makes a big difference especially in jobs that require social skills

If the demographics were changed then you'd "have to be autistic to contribute to society".