This blog is about the science behind autism and does try to
avoid political agendas, which may make it seem somewhat cold and unemotional.
Thanks to the internet, there are plenty of places to go and read about other
views on autism.
I was reading one of the few scientific blogs about autism
recently and I was surprised how much time was spent attacking neurodiversity
and in the end it detracts from the science part of the blog.
Political agendas, like “America first”, or “Brexit means Brexit”
and indeed “Neurodiversity” usually start with some truth and then everything
gets lost in gross over-simplification. The more we move away from getting our information
from serious considered sources and move to catchy snippets of information, the
more people there are that think they have the knowledge to form a considered
opinion, but the less valid those opinions may be.
Neurodiversity sounds like a nice idea; people are all a
little bit different. Anyone who went to a non-selective school will already
know just how different people can be. By studying the gene expression of people
with autism, schizophrenia and bipolar we know just how varied people are and
that almost everyone has an element of one observational behavioral diagnosis
or another.
Neurodiversity only gets a bad name when one group at the
extreme, that is defined by the lack of empathy and understanding for others,
starts to hijack the debate; just like some intelligent person with Asperger’s
may want to talk endlessly about his pet subject.
Fortunately, science and scientists clearly pay little
attention to neurodiversity and so in countries like China, Canada and the US
autism is very much seen as a medical disorder in need of potential treatments;
that
is why thousands of research papers have been published. However many people
there are out there adamant that autism is just a difference, and does not need
treating, has no effect whatsoever. Science is elitist rather than
democratic, you have to prequalify to get a say.
Not all doctors are scientists and so clearly they do absorb
some of the background autism chatter. You will find doctors who are adamant that
autism will remain untreatable.
Politicians, who often associate more with agendas rather
than values/truths, are of course a different matter and they do count because they
determine where your tax money gets spent. So the uninformed public debate can
often lead to poor decision making and allocation of resources.
The truth sometimes can be boring and sometimes even dangerous, and is unlikely to win
you an election or a referendum, but in the long run the truth is usually the
best strategy. So ideally you want a politician with genuine values,
compensated for by a good PR team to generate those memorable sound bites.
Many people writing about autism, even award
winning authors, not surprisingly seem to have mild autism themselves and so while
they may have strong opinions, they may lack the ability to take in new information
that might cause them to modify their opinions. So while you might want to
check your math homework with one of these people, best not to try and debate
anything with them.
In spite of the wave of autism awareness, most vaguely
neurotypical people have little interest in the subject and so rarely express
an opinion. That seems pretty much the way it should be.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Some people with mild autism are happy the way they are, but many people with disabling autism need help. Some people with mild autism also chose to seek help. Some people do not seek help until it is too late.
If this blog has an agenda, it is to promote the better use
of the scientific research that has already been published and to take more control
over your own health, just how much more and who should decide the limits are debatable points.