A post by the mom of an autistic about how "Autism Really Does Change Everything"

[conuly]

It's in reference to an article in Parade magazine this week, which I'm not reading. Why? Well, I figure I've been upset enough this week, and if I can just make it tomorrow, the whole week will be over and everything will be good for next week - only six days until my birthday!

If the article really does contain anything shockingly bad, I'm sure I'll be informed sooner or later.

Comments

[leora.livejournal.com]

Oh my, this disorder is affecting thousands of families, why isn't anyone doing more! *Wail* *Cry!*

Well, you know, it's all well and good that she ignored the problem until it affected her personally, but first of all, people are doing things, and second of all, you don't give a damn about the millions of people with chronic fatigue syndrome or juvenile arthritis or multiple sclerosis or countless other issues. You certainly don't care about my health problems (the you being the woman who wrote the Parade article, just to be clear), because it doesn't affect your family.

Did she really not know that some children are born with disabilities? She didn't realize it was possible her kid might not be what she hoped for? How ignorant do you have to be? What if her kid had gotten something life-threatening?

I just don't understand the whole: why did nobody warn me that this might happen? How can you become an adult without knowing that some people get sick and some people are born different?

[lady-angelina.livejournal.com]

Amen to everything you said, Leora. (Btw... long time no see, how've you been? *hugs*)

Also, the notion that autism can be completely "eradicated" during the author's lifetime is... how shall I put it? Utterly foolish and arrogant. >.<; And proves how ignorant the author is. I can't believe that they published something like this. ^^;;

Conuly, trust me, you didn't miss anything by not reading the article. It's nothing but several paragraphs of tripe that is devoid of any real substance.

[conuly]

I'm so glad to hear that :)

[prezzey.livejournal.com]

It can be eradicated... they only need crematoriums and fancy legislation! There is plenty of historical precedent. *SIGH*

I second the "didn't miss anything". (and OMG, Phoenix Wright?)

[leora.livejournal.com]

Sick, but mostly better now. Busy and tired. But basically okay. Dealing with some stressful things, but it should be okay. I've dealt with far worse. Some things are really good. :) I'll try to post some time this week.

[conuly]

That's all mostly sounding like good news. The "mostly better now" sounds promising, anyway.

[thauts.livejournal.com]

Surprisingly, the rest of the article was actually pretty good, and they even went so far as to end it by calling for acceptance and societal change. If they hadn't poisoned their message by including Wright's vitriol as a sidebar in the larger article, I'd probably be applauding them.

[conuly]

What, was it an attempt at balance or something, then?

[thauts.livejournal.com]

I don't think so- I think it's more likely she was included in a misguided attempt to give a non-medical perspective on life with autism. If they'd just left her out entirely I would have been exasperated at the fact that they didn't include input from any autistic people. (Can you imagine them writing an article titled "What Do We Know About Lou Gherig's Disease" "What Do We Know about Breast Cancer" and having such a conspicuous lack of first-person accounts?) The fact that they seem to have chosen something like that to represent our voices.... blecch.

In any case, her bile was a sidebar- the main article was about four or five times the length of her section and mostly discussed 'controversies' like the reason for the rise in diagnosis (which it was ambiguous about) and the whole MMR/vaccine causation theory (where the article ultimately came down on the side of the peer-reviewed science). There was also a brief and not-entirely-accurate-or-comprehensive paragraph about symptoms, discussion about behavioral intervention, and another sidebar of about the same size as Wright's discussing complementary treatments. (Essentially: GFCF possibly good, secretin and chelation bad.)

It wasn't a great article by any means, but there wasn't any hysterical doomsaying or vitriol at all outside of Wright's section, which puts it ahead of most things that get published. And the conclusion was the most pro-neurodiversity/disability rights thing on autism I've seen out mainstream media in a while:

Indeed the road ahead for people with autism depends on the attitudes of the rest of us and our willingness to create opportunities for jobs, for education, and for inclusion.
"We know our son will always have challenges," says Lisa Goring, "but we feel very fortunate that we found people who understood how to teach him. He's different, but his friends absolutely accept him. He has a community."

[leora.livejournal.com]

Oh my, this disorder is affecting thousands of families, why isn't anyone doing more! *Wail* *Cry!*

Well, you know, it's all well and good that she ignored the problem until it affected her personally, but first of all, people are doing things, and second of all, you don't give a damn about the millions of people with chronic fatigue syndrome or juvenile arthritis or multiple sclerosis or countless other issues. You certainly don't care about my health problems (the you being the woman who wrote the Parade article, just to be clear), because it doesn't affect your family.

Did she really not know that some children are born with disabilities? She didn't realize it was possible her kid might not be what she hoped for? How ignorant do you have to be? What if her kid had gotten something life-threatening?

I just don't understand the whole: why did nobody warn me that this might happen? How can you become an adult without knowing that some people get sick and some people are born different?

[lady-angelina.livejournal.com]

Amen to everything you said, Leora. (Btw... long time no see, how've you been? *hugs*)

Also, the notion that autism can be completely "eradicated" during the author's lifetime is... how shall I put it? Utterly foolish and arrogant. >.<; And proves how ignorant the author is. I can't believe that they published something like this. ^^;;

Conuly, trust me, you didn't miss anything by not reading the article. It's nothing but several paragraphs of tripe that is devoid of any real substance.

[conuly]

I'm so glad to hear that :)

[prezzey.livejournal.com]

It can be eradicated... they only need crematoriums and fancy legislation! There is plenty of historical precedent. *SIGH*

I second the "didn't miss anything". (and OMG, Phoenix Wright?)

[leora.livejournal.com]

Sick, but mostly better now. Busy and tired. But basically okay. Dealing with some stressful things, but it should be okay. I've dealt with far worse. Some things are really good. :) I'll try to post some time this week.

[conuly]

That's all mostly sounding like good news. The "mostly better now" sounds promising, anyway.

[thauts.livejournal.com]

Surprisingly, the rest of the article was actually pretty good, and they even went so far as to end it by calling for acceptance and societal change. If they hadn't poisoned their message by including Wright's vitriol as a sidebar in the larger article, I'd probably be applauding them.

[conuly]

What, was it an attempt at balance or something, then?

[thauts.livejournal.com]

I don't think so- I think it's more likely she was included in a misguided attempt to give a non-medical perspective on life with autism. If they'd just left her out entirely I would have been exasperated at the fact that they didn't include input from any autistic people. (Can you imagine them writing an article titled "What Do We Know About Lou Gherig's Disease" "What Do We Know about Breast Cancer" and having such a conspicuous lack of first-person accounts?) The fact that they seem to have chosen something like that to represent our voices.... blecch.

In any case, her bile was a sidebar- the main article was about four or five times the length of her section and mostly discussed 'controversies' like the reason for the rise in diagnosis (which it was ambiguous about) and the whole MMR/vaccine causation theory (where the article ultimately came down on the side of the peer-reviewed science). There was also a brief and not-entirely-accurate-or-comprehensive paragraph about symptoms, discussion about behavioral intervention, and another sidebar of about the same size as Wright's discussing complementary treatments. (Essentially: GFCF possibly good, secretin and chelation bad.)

It wasn't a great article by any means, but there wasn't any hysterical doomsaying or vitriol at all outside of Wright's section, which puts it ahead of most things that get published. And the conclusion was the most pro-neurodiversity/disability rights thing on autism I've seen out mainstream media in a while:

Indeed the road ahead for people with autism depends on the attitudes of the rest of us and our willingness to create opportunities for jobs, for education, and for inclusion.
"We know our son will always have challenges," says Lisa Goring, "but we feel very fortunate that we found people who understood how to teach him. He's different, but his friends absolutely accept him. He has a community."