This is an interesting editorial...
May. 30th, 2006 08:55 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
About autism, movies, and fear.
'Handiphobia'
Who's Afraid of the Rain Man?
by Chuck Colson
I recently told you about Jason McElwain. He's the autistic high-schooler from Greece, New York, whose feats on the basketball court, in President Bush's words, "captivated our country."
Not surprisingly, McElwain's story is being turned into a movie. What is surprising is that this is not the only movie being made about autistic people.
There are at least three other films scheduled for release or in production about autistic people and their families. The most highly anticipated of them is probably Daniel Isn't Talking, starring Julia Roberts. Based on the novel by Marti Leimbach, it's the story of a woman whose seemingly perfect world is turned upside down when her three-year-old son is diagnosed as autistic.
Leimbach, whose nine-year-old son, Nicholas, is autistic, says that stories about autistic people "[dramatize] the fact that none of us have perfect children." In her estimation, this is why the stories have broad appeal.
As the grandfather of an autistic boy, I'm gladdened by the positive attention being given to people like my grandson Max, who has some amazing qualities. And one of BreakPoint's writers and a valued colleague is a single dad raising an autistic boy. This subject is close to home. But, as a Christian, I cannot help but notice that all of this attention is coming at a time when it's increasingly dangerous to be a handicapped child. They are squarely in the gunsights of those who are conducting what I call a "war on the weak," which is what this present series is about.
The best-known advocate of this war is Princeton Professor Peter Singer. He has justified the killing of a handicapped child if it "leads to the birth of another child with better prospects of a happy life." In this case, "the total quantity of happiness will be greater . . ."
It is tempting to dismiss Singer as a crank, that is, until you recall that, just last fall, the Netherlands legalized the killing of terminally ill children—this despite ample warning that the practice is not and will not be confined to the terminally ill. All Dutch children with birth defects are now at risk.
Outside the Netherlands, the threat is subtler, but no less real. Italian neonatologist Carlo Bellieni has coined the term handiphobia to describe the fear of having a disabled child. According to Bellieni, we in the West see "the fetus, as a means and not as the end they truly are." Thus, "the child is no longer loved unconditionally and respected as a human person."
Instead, we use prenatal testing to detect any identifiable defects in the unborn child. Those with such defects, like Down syndrome, are then aborted. As Bellieni puts it, "[A]s with all phobias, [the object of our fear] must be made to disappear."
Well, that's putting it starkly, but it is true: If a prenatal test for autism were ever developed, it would not be long before autistic people would also be "made to disappear." While Leimbach is right about no one's child being "perfect," Bellieni is also right about how much "imperfection" we're not prepared to accept.
That's why I hope that stories like young Jason McElwain's do more than make us feel good. I hope they also help us to understand the evil that comes from giving in to our fears.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
Also, an article from![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
thornleaf about chelation.
Have at it, guys.
Heavy metals may be implicated in autism
URINE samples from hundreds of French children have yielded evidence for a link between autism and exposure to heavy metals. If validated, the findings might mean some cases of autism could be treated with drugs that purge the body of heavy metals.
Samples from children with autism contained abnormally high levels of a family of proteins called porphyrins, which are precursors in the production of haem, the oxygen-carrying component in haemoglobin. Heavy metals block haem production, causing porphyrins to accumulate in urine. Concentrations of one molecule, coproporphyrin, were 2.6 times as high in urine from children with autism as in controls.
Autism is thought to have a number of unknown genetic and environmental causes. Richard Lathe of Pieta Research in Edinburgh, UK, says he has found one of these factors. "It's highly likely that heavy metals are responsible for childhood autistic disorder in a majority of cases," he claims. The study will appear in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology.
Lathe says these porphyrin metabolites bind to receptors in the brain and have been linked with epilepsy and autism.
The researchers restored porphyrin concentrations to normal in 12 children by treating them with "chelation" drugs that mop up heavy metals and are then excreted. It is not yet known whether the children's symptoms have eased, but Lathe cites anecdotal reports suggesting the drugs might do some good.
'Handiphobia'
Who's Afraid of the Rain Man?
by Chuck Colson
I recently told you about Jason McElwain. He's the autistic high-schooler from Greece, New York, whose feats on the basketball court, in President Bush's words, "captivated our country."
Not surprisingly, McElwain's story is being turned into a movie. What is surprising is that this is not the only movie being made about autistic people.
There are at least three other films scheduled for release or in production about autistic people and their families. The most highly anticipated of them is probably Daniel Isn't Talking, starring Julia Roberts. Based on the novel by Marti Leimbach, it's the story of a woman whose seemingly perfect world is turned upside down when her three-year-old son is diagnosed as autistic.
Leimbach, whose nine-year-old son, Nicholas, is autistic, says that stories about autistic people "[dramatize] the fact that none of us have perfect children." In her estimation, this is why the stories have broad appeal.
As the grandfather of an autistic boy, I'm gladdened by the positive attention being given to people like my grandson Max, who has some amazing qualities. And one of BreakPoint's writers and a valued colleague is a single dad raising an autistic boy. This subject is close to home. But, as a Christian, I cannot help but notice that all of this attention is coming at a time when it's increasingly dangerous to be a handicapped child. They are squarely in the gunsights of those who are conducting what I call a "war on the weak," which is what this present series is about.
The best-known advocate of this war is Princeton Professor Peter Singer. He has justified the killing of a handicapped child if it "leads to the birth of another child with better prospects of a happy life." In this case, "the total quantity of happiness will be greater . . ."
It is tempting to dismiss Singer as a crank, that is, until you recall that, just last fall, the Netherlands legalized the killing of terminally ill children—this despite ample warning that the practice is not and will not be confined to the terminally ill. All Dutch children with birth defects are now at risk.
Outside the Netherlands, the threat is subtler, but no less real. Italian neonatologist Carlo Bellieni has coined the term handiphobia to describe the fear of having a disabled child. According to Bellieni, we in the West see "the fetus, as a means and not as the end they truly are." Thus, "the child is no longer loved unconditionally and respected as a human person."
Instead, we use prenatal testing to detect any identifiable defects in the unborn child. Those with such defects, like Down syndrome, are then aborted. As Bellieni puts it, "[A]s with all phobias, [the object of our fear] must be made to disappear."
Well, that's putting it starkly, but it is true: If a prenatal test for autism were ever developed, it would not be long before autistic people would also be "made to disappear." While Leimbach is right about no one's child being "perfect," Bellieni is also right about how much "imperfection" we're not prepared to accept.
That's why I hope that stories like young Jason McElwain's do more than make us feel good. I hope they also help us to understand the evil that comes from giving in to our fears.
Also, an article from
thornleaf about chelation.Have at it, guys.
Heavy metals may be implicated in autism
URINE samples from hundreds of French children have yielded evidence for a link between autism and exposure to heavy metals. If validated, the findings might mean some cases of autism could be treated with drugs that purge the body of heavy metals.
Samples from children with autism contained abnormally high levels of a family of proteins called porphyrins, which are precursors in the production of haem, the oxygen-carrying component in haemoglobin. Heavy metals block haem production, causing porphyrins to accumulate in urine. Concentrations of one molecule, coproporphyrin, were 2.6 times as high in urine from children with autism as in controls.
Autism is thought to have a number of unknown genetic and environmental causes. Richard Lathe of Pieta Research in Edinburgh, UK, says he has found one of these factors. "It's highly likely that heavy metals are responsible for childhood autistic disorder in a majority of cases," he claims. The study will appear in Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology.
Lathe says these porphyrin metabolites bind to receptors in the brain and have been linked with epilepsy and autism.
The researchers restored porphyrin concentrations to normal in 12 children by treating them with "chelation" drugs that mop up heavy metals and are then excreted. It is not yet known whether the children's symptoms have eased, but Lathe cites anecdotal reports suggesting the drugs might do some good.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 04:26 pm (UTC)It is tempting to dismiss Singer as a crank, that is, until you recall that, just last fall, the Netherlands legalized the killing of terminally ill children—this despite ample warning that the practice is not and will not be confined to the terminally ill. All Dutch children with birth defects are now at risk.
---
Buds, I am from Holland, and I actually did studies on this. And believe me when I say that you are clueless on what you are talking about. We are talking about a process that includes judges, medical teams and a family's will.
Now, the courtsystem here in Holland is quite different from yours. No jury.
Let's see the process of euthanasia performed upon an adult.
Step one: Make it known to the doctors or hospital. There are but few doctors who even wish to jeopardize their job and reputation.
Step two: If you got a doctor to concider it, this man has to write a give or take 50 page form on his medical research. All medical resources must have been used to try and cure the patient. And this form must be signed by 12 total doctors which all vouch for said action. Then there are the family who must approve, as well as the patient.
Now here is where it gets troublesome. Yes I know there are many holes that can be abused here. But I think that 12 doctors will get a bit expensive to get someone killed. Then we have autistic or mentally ill people. Yes, well they are somewhat of a seperate story. This is where court comes in. I just reread a article I had followed on TV.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/616jszlg.asp
(Too lazy to short that)
The process of doing this is hard. You are fighting the goverment on each case. Now as I said, there is no jury. No getting money from Mc donalds because you got fat by eating their food. The patient or family has to prove that the /patient/ is suffering such intollerable pain (mental) that he simply can not live on. That there is no future in your life.
They mention Alzheimers in that article. This is still rare. Only when a person reaches such a stage that he basically becomes a little plant on bed does this become applicable.
And childs. Yes. Ouch. Some parents are mad enough to do this. Of course it is hard to find parents that wish to take a child with the Down Syndrom. Sure, I can easily see why. I mean, why take a 'sickly' and 'stupid' child (not my words) when you can take a healthy kid that came from a professional lawyer?
But there are more options. There are special places in Holland that take care of the less fortunate babies. When they are saying that childs can be opted for Euthanasia, we are talking children that will never be able to live a life. Children that can't move below their head? Okay, that's not autism. What about children that can't think like a regular person? Okay, not things like Down Syndrom. But worse. Things that will make the child be simply unable to communicate with the outside world. These things are rare to begin with. And it takes a lot to convince the judge and goverment's representant(s) that you are right on this. Research done on said cases.
Step 3: Yes, you are not done. The consent is watched by a doctor, excecuted by a professional, and the family must be there. In case of a child, there will be someone that enforces the law to see that all is done as it should.
So yes, just trying to clear something up. It is not as easy as America tends to say it is.
Oh, and a quick number explaination:
According to the report, doctors were killing approximately 8 percent of all infants who died each year in the Netherlands.
Well, those 8 percent aint always the doctor's fault. They do not give the figure for Euthanasia, which was about 3% last year. And child-death in hospitals is rather small to begin with. So we are talking what? 20 children a year? And I won't say I agree to doing this illegally at all. But then, maybe they forgot that that number is higher in other countries that have no legal system for it? (I did a study on it last year, I have lost much of the information, but I believe the number in China to be QUITE high.)
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 07:33 pm (UTC)Arguing that the number is higher in other countries is largely irrelevant. For example, in China, you're also dealing with a law that says you can only have one child. Of course the infanticide rate is going to be quite high there, if you mess up with the first kid, you don't get a second chance.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 09:38 pm (UTC)And the "no possibility of communication with the outside world" is applicable to people who CAN'T communicate. As in... people who can see , yet forget the moment they saw them. In such a way. Prettymuch such far dementia that one'd recognize nobody.
Autism does not stop communication, but instead causes the child to seek /different kinds/ of communication.
(That last statement is based on my own experience though.)
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 09:47 pm (UTC)Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:05 pm (UTC)And to be honest, I too see how foolish this world has become, or maybe has become less?
I know too little about the history of this world, as I have never studied the subject at my highschool. But if memory serves me right, autistic children were shunned even worse than now in some cases.
Child misses a finger? Must be useless... let's waste it.
Child seems not to likes girls but boys? Wrong child, waste it.
Child does not understand parents in a chaotic way? Let's waste it!
Some of these things sadly still happen. There are so much misconceptions.
Just lately my mother said: 'You can't possibly believe you could have a relationship with another person who is autistic. That never works.' Sure, she had no way of giving proof! But she heard that from some other person.
Or what about this one: 'Oh my son? He cares about nothing or nobody'. Well, I can point her to many people who would beg the differ, but she often misunderstands the way in which I try to communicate to her.
Too many misconceptions in this world bring too much evil. And we can all see what they end up with.
People winning at court for killing their child because it was driving her mad? Hello? Anybody in that jury ever heard of different possibilities? Special childcare? Sure, I have no report of said lawsuit. But it sickens me that people can think of people with autism as it being a disease. I have known people who think that autism is a disease that has to be eradicated! Now imagine such people in your jury ^.~.
I just wish some misconceptions were out of this world....
That is why I could not stand the post you had made ^^; It was flawed. It missed information.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:20 pm (UTC)1. I didn't make the post. While (despite appearances, and I apologise for that), I'm always happy to be corrected on my misconceptions, you should write to the source as well. There's a linky, right? *checks to make sure*
2. Honestly, I don't have the energy to confirm what you say about euthanasia in the Netherlands today. So I've been dodging the issue, because all I have to go on is my little information on it now, and what you say. And I don't know you, I believe, and I tend to trust people more that I know. I doubt anybody'd go around intentionally trying to deceive me over this, but... Just today, I read a comment on somebody else's blog that "nobody is intentionally killing autistic kids", by somebody I *know* should know about the recent murders. People can believe a lot of things, and say a lot of things, without them being true. Until I can confirm what you say for myself, I don't want to put forth my own opinion on the subject.
3. I have reports of such lawsuits. Lots of them. Growing Joel has indexed a number of them on his website. It's sickening, it really is.
4. I can imagine it already. CAN anybody? Ugh, ugh, ugh. Autism != disease.
5. In some cases, autistics definitely were treated worse. In others... I'm not sure. However, it's not a aspect of the subject I've studied very much, so I'll leave that to other people.
I think that's everything. I'm sorry I'm so curt right now, I'm just... really hot, it must be in the frackin' 90s now, and really in a bad mood.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:39 pm (UTC)I did read about the case of Sanne, a baby born unable to be touched, because any form of touch would cause pain and physical damage. Her body was in a constant state of damage from having to lie down. Plus, babies need touch to survive. Touch has affects on the immune system. Failure to thrive is often caused by lack of physical contact. And everyone knew she was going to die - it was just a matter of time. But they couldn't kill her peacefully, even though she was in constant physical pain and her parents asked for her to be euthanized. She died before her first birthday without any assistance.
I don't want a system that won't consider these cases. There are rare and horrible things. There are less rare but still horrible things that make it better to be allowed to die peacefully.
However, I also agree that it is a dangerous and slippery slope and if you start to go down it at all, mistakes will be made. There will be cases of wrongful deaths. But it's the real world, and we cannot be perfect. I think I'm okay with a system with many checks and balances that does its best to make sure that only the cases where it is really justified end in the killing of a person. Because erring on either side can be a horrible tragedy, and there's no way to never err on either side.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:58 pm (UTC)But I think I tried not to voice a real oppinion towards Euthanasia because I can be very torn. At this moment, there are times that with the law... you can't really write the exact things down. It's more of a: 'But if... but if... and in that case... but if this then not that, but otherwise this...'
Such cases are very reliant on the moment and situation, things that sometimes might be too variable.
Anyhow, thank you for having answered my rambling. And I knew you had not written that thing, I realize you quoted it. But still I wanted to say something on it ^^;
Catboy out.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 11:08 pm (UTC)Yes, I am silly, I think of worst case scenarios. But so does the goverment, it tries to make it so that the system will not be abused.
But, as you said it yourself, and I must totally agree to: We live in the real world, we can not be perfect.
Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 04:26 pm (UTC)It is tempting to dismiss Singer as a crank, that is, until you recall that, just last fall, the Netherlands legalized the killing of terminally ill children—this despite ample warning that the practice is not and will not be confined to the terminally ill. All Dutch children with birth defects are now at risk.
---
Buds, I am from Holland, and I actually did studies on this. And believe me when I say that you are clueless on what you are talking about. We are talking about a process that includes judges, medical teams and a family's will.
Now, the courtsystem here in Holland is quite different from yours. No jury.
Let's see the process of euthanasia performed upon an adult.
Step one: Make it known to the doctors or hospital. There are but few doctors who even wish to jeopardize their job and reputation.
Step two: If you got a doctor to concider it, this man has to write a give or take 50 page form on his medical research. All medical resources must have been used to try and cure the patient. And this form must be signed by 12 total doctors which all vouch for said action. Then there are the family who must approve, as well as the patient.
Now here is where it gets troublesome. Yes I know there are many holes that can be abused here. But I think that 12 doctors will get a bit expensive to get someone killed. Then we have autistic or mentally ill people. Yes, well they are somewhat of a seperate story. This is where court comes in. I just reread a article I had followed on TV.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/004/616jszlg.asp
(Too lazy to short that)
The process of doing this is hard. You are fighting the goverment on each case. Now as I said, there is no jury. No getting money from Mc donalds because you got fat by eating their food. The patient or family has to prove that the /patient/ is suffering such intollerable pain (mental) that he simply can not live on. That there is no future in your life.
They mention Alzheimers in that article. This is still rare. Only when a person reaches such a stage that he basically becomes a little plant on bed does this become applicable.
And childs. Yes. Ouch. Some parents are mad enough to do this. Of course it is hard to find parents that wish to take a child with the Down Syndrom. Sure, I can easily see why. I mean, why take a 'sickly' and 'stupid' child (not my words) when you can take a healthy kid that came from a professional lawyer?
But there are more options. There are special places in Holland that take care of the less fortunate babies. When they are saying that childs can be opted for Euthanasia, we are talking children that will never be able to live a life. Children that can't move below their head? Okay, that's not autism. What about children that can't think like a regular person? Okay, not things like Down Syndrom. But worse. Things that will make the child be simply unable to communicate with the outside world. These things are rare to begin with. And it takes a lot to convince the judge and goverment's representant(s) that you are right on this. Research done on said cases.
Step 3: Yes, you are not done. The consent is watched by a doctor, excecuted by a professional, and the family must be there. In case of a child, there will be someone that enforces the law to see that all is done as it should.
So yes, just trying to clear something up. It is not as easy as America tends to say it is.
Oh, and a quick number explaination:
According to the report, doctors were killing approximately 8 percent of all infants who died each year in the Netherlands.
Well, those 8 percent aint always the doctor's fault. They do not give the figure for Euthanasia, which was about 3% last year. And child-death in hospitals is rather small to begin with. So we are talking what? 20 children a year? And I won't say I agree to doing this illegally at all. But then, maybe they forgot that that number is higher in other countries that have no legal system for it? (I did a study on it last year, I have lost much of the information, but I believe the number in China to be QUITE high.)
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 07:33 pm (UTC)Arguing that the number is higher in other countries is largely irrelevant. For example, in China, you're also dealing with a law that says you can only have one child. Of course the infanticide rate is going to be quite high there, if you mess up with the first kid, you don't get a second chance.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 09:38 pm (UTC)And the "no possibility of communication with the outside world" is applicable to people who CAN'T communicate. As in... people who can see , yet forget the moment they saw them. In such a way. Prettymuch such far dementia that one'd recognize nobody.
Autism does not stop communication, but instead causes the child to seek /different kinds/ of communication.
(That last statement is based on my own experience though.)
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 09:47 pm (UTC)Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:05 pm (UTC)And to be honest, I too see how foolish this world has become, or maybe has become less?
I know too little about the history of this world, as I have never studied the subject at my highschool. But if memory serves me right, autistic children were shunned even worse than now in some cases.
Child misses a finger? Must be useless... let's waste it.
Child seems not to likes girls but boys? Wrong child, waste it.
Child does not understand parents in a chaotic way? Let's waste it!
Some of these things sadly still happen. There are so much misconceptions.
Just lately my mother said: 'You can't possibly believe you could have a relationship with another person who is autistic. That never works.' Sure, she had no way of giving proof! But she heard that from some other person.
Or what about this one: 'Oh my son? He cares about nothing or nobody'. Well, I can point her to many people who would beg the differ, but she often misunderstands the way in which I try to communicate to her.
Too many misconceptions in this world bring too much evil. And we can all see what they end up with.
People winning at court for killing their child because it was driving her mad? Hello? Anybody in that jury ever heard of different possibilities? Special childcare? Sure, I have no report of said lawsuit. But it sickens me that people can think of people with autism as it being a disease. I have known people who think that autism is a disease that has to be eradicated! Now imagine such people in your jury ^.~.
I just wish some misconceptions were out of this world....
That is why I could not stand the post you had made ^^; It was flawed. It missed information.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:20 pm (UTC)1. I didn't make the post. While (despite appearances, and I apologise for that), I'm always happy to be corrected on my misconceptions, you should write to the source as well. There's a linky, right? *checks to make sure*
2. Honestly, I don't have the energy to confirm what you say about euthanasia in the Netherlands today. So I've been dodging the issue, because all I have to go on is my little information on it now, and what you say. And I don't know you, I believe, and I tend to trust people more that I know. I doubt anybody'd go around intentionally trying to deceive me over this, but... Just today, I read a comment on somebody else's blog that "nobody is intentionally killing autistic kids", by somebody I *know* should know about the recent murders. People can believe a lot of things, and say a lot of things, without them being true. Until I can confirm what you say for myself, I don't want to put forth my own opinion on the subject.
3. I have reports of such lawsuits. Lots of them. Growing Joel has indexed a number of them on his website. It's sickening, it really is.
4. I can imagine it already. CAN anybody? Ugh, ugh, ugh. Autism != disease.
5. In some cases, autistics definitely were treated worse. In others... I'm not sure. However, it's not a aspect of the subject I've studied very much, so I'll leave that to other people.
I think that's everything. I'm sorry I'm so curt right now, I'm just... really hot, it must be in the frackin' 90s now, and really in a bad mood.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:39 pm (UTC)I did read about the case of Sanne, a baby born unable to be touched, because any form of touch would cause pain and physical damage. Her body was in a constant state of damage from having to lie down. Plus, babies need touch to survive. Touch has affects on the immune system. Failure to thrive is often caused by lack of physical contact. And everyone knew she was going to die - it was just a matter of time. But they couldn't kill her peacefully, even though she was in constant physical pain and her parents asked for her to be euthanized. She died before her first birthday without any assistance.
I don't want a system that won't consider these cases. There are rare and horrible things. There are less rare but still horrible things that make it better to be allowed to die peacefully.
However, I also agree that it is a dangerous and slippery slope and if you start to go down it at all, mistakes will be made. There will be cases of wrongful deaths. But it's the real world, and we cannot be perfect. I think I'm okay with a system with many checks and balances that does its best to make sure that only the cases where it is really justified end in the killing of a person. Because erring on either side can be a horrible tragedy, and there's no way to never err on either side.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 10:58 pm (UTC)But I think I tried not to voice a real oppinion towards Euthanasia because I can be very torn. At this moment, there are times that with the law... you can't really write the exact things down. It's more of a: 'But if... but if... and in that case... but if this then not that, but otherwise this...'
Such cases are very reliant on the moment and situation, things that sometimes might be too variable.
Anyhow, thank you for having answered my rambling. And I knew you had not written that thing, I realize you quoted it. But still I wanted to say something on it ^^;
Catboy out.
Re: Bullshit
Date: 2006-05-30 11:08 pm (UTC)Yes, I am silly, I think of worst case scenarios. But so does the goverment, it tries to make it so that the system will not be abused.
But, as you said it yourself, and I must totally agree to: We live in the real world, we can not be perfect.