Re: The best of future Aspie children

[Guest guest]

How is it determined what is radical or not?

Whom is radical and what scale is being used?Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

Since Tom and Rainbow (and possibly many others as well) agree on

this concept, why not analyze it a little bit more?

I think problems appears directly when you start to think about it.

What is the best for future Aspies? I think the answers will vary

widely based on your ideology.

First, there is the guys that think Aspie and NTs are not meaningful,

and that there is no differences between the minds of people. These

are also the ones that comitted horrible crimes to autistics before

the AS (and ADHD/ADD) labels were invented. Refrigerator mothers

were believed to be the cause of these childrens problems, so first

priority would be to place them into foster-care. So, clearly, to this camp

the best for future Aspie children is to place them into foster-care as

soon as they are born (if possible).

Second, there is the "medical" camp. According to them, asperger

is a (dreadful) disease that should be eliminated. Some of the main

advocates of this camp is the CAN site, along with many autism

researchers. Clearly, according to them, the best thing would be

that no Aspies are born in the future, and so a prenatal test would

be their dream come true. If this is ethically unfeasible, they would

probably then lean towards the first camp and recommend placing

children in foster care if parents are affected with this disease, since

they then would be unable to provide a decent upbringing for their

children.

The last camp is the radical aspie-movement, and possibly to some

extent many others as well in the autistic community. They regard

Aspies as mostly being different from NTs, with both weaknesses and

strenghts. To this camp the labels Aspie and NT makes a lot of sense

because they describe the different types of humans. The ideas of this

camp regarding the best of future Aspie children are bound to be very

different from the "refrigerator" camp as well as the "medical" camp.

Since Aspies are assumed to understand each others much better

than they understand NTs and vice verse, placing an Aspie child in

a NT home would be unthinkable and detrimental for the child. If

the parents cannot provide for a child, it must be placed in another

Aspie foster-home.

As can easily be seen, before we can take any actions for the

best of future generations of Aspies, we must decide which camp

is correct.

It is not only the issue of whom is best suited for taking care

of future Aspie children that is dependent on ideology, but also

many other issues, like how to best socialize the child to NTs

and at what age.

Leif

[Guest guest]

How is it determined what is radical or not?

Whom is radical and what scale is being used?Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

Since Tom and Rainbow (and possibly many others as well) agree on

this concept, why not analyze it a little bit more?

I think problems appears directly when you start to think about it.

What is the best for future Aspies? I think the answers will vary

widely based on your ideology.

First, there is the guys that think Aspie and NTs are not meaningful,

and that there is no differences between the minds of people. These

are also the ones that comitted horrible crimes to autistics before

the AS (and ADHD/ADD) labels were invented. Refrigerator mothers

were believed to be the cause of these childrens problems, so first

priority would be to place them into foster-care. So, clearly, to this camp

the best for future Aspie children is to place them into foster-care as

soon as they are born (if possible).

Second, there is the "medical" camp. According to them, asperger

is a (dreadful) disease that should be eliminated. Some of the main

advocates of this camp is the CAN site, along with many autism

researchers. Clearly, according to them, the best thing would be

that no Aspies are born in the future, and so a prenatal test would

be their dream come true. If this is ethically unfeasible, they would

probably then lean towards the first camp and recommend placing

children in foster care if parents are affected with this disease, since

they then would be unable to provide a decent upbringing for their

children.

The last camp is the radical aspie-movement, and possibly to some

extent many others as well in the autistic community. They regard

Aspies as mostly being different from NTs, with both weaknesses and

strenghts. To this camp the labels Aspie and NT makes a lot of sense

because they describe the different types of humans. The ideas of this

camp regarding the best of future Aspie children are bound to be very

different from the "refrigerator" camp as well as the "medical" camp.

Since Aspies are assumed to understand each others much better

than they understand NTs and vice verse, placing an Aspie child in

a NT home would be unthinkable and detrimental for the child. If

the parents cannot provide for a child, it must be placed in another

Aspie foster-home.

As can easily be seen, before we can take any actions for the

best of future generations of Aspies, we must decide which camp

is correct.

It is not only the issue of whom is best suited for taking care

of future Aspie children that is dependent on ideology, but also

many other issues, like how to best socialize the child to NTs

and at what age.

Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> How is it determined what is radical or not?

> Whom is radical and what scale is being used?

In this case it makes little difference. Either you agree that

Aspie children should not be placed in NT homes and should

be socialized at an far older age to NTs than is the norm today

and then, by my definition, you are radical, or you don't, and

I'll label you " medical " . ;-)

Leif

[Guest guest]

> None of that makes sense..

Why doesn't it make sense? It is a simple matter of ideology

and how you view Aspies.

Leif

[Guest guest]

No I do not understand what you are saying..

I do not view aspies any sort of way, I am myself as I am viewing myself.

Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

> None of that makes sense..Why doesn't it make sense? It is a simple matter of ideologyand how you view Aspies.Leif

[Guest guest]

> No I do not understand what you are saying..

>

> I do not view aspies any sort of way, I am myself as I am viewing myself.

Yes, but since we were discussing other things than ourselves (our

children and their children), we need to view more than ourselves.

We cannot let selfishness guide future generations of Aspies. We

must learn how we work in society, and how we differ from others.

We must learn how we best socialize a child so it is not bullied and

keeps it's self-confidence. We must learn who takes best care of it.

We must learn how it develops naturally, and if this is different from

a typical child, what the differences are. We must not miss learning

windows that might differ from typically developping children. If we

ignore these issues, we will cause great harm to future generations

of Aspies. This is not something that " fixes " itself. We must take

active meassures here, because nobody else would do it for us.

Leif

[Guest guest]

One reason why I think bully actions in school should be criminal.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

> No I do not understand what you are saying..>> I do not view aspies any sort of way, I am myself as I am viewing myself.Yes, but since we were discussing other things than ourselves (ourchildren and their children), we need to view more than ourselves.We cannot let selfishness guide future generations of Aspies. Wemust learn how we work in society, and how we differ from others.We must learn how we best socialize a child so it is not bullied andkeeps it's self-confidence. We must learn who takes best care of it.We must learn how it develops naturally, and if this is different froma typical child, what the differences are. We must not miss learningwindows that might differ from typically developping children. If weignore these issues, we will cause great harm to future generationsof Aspies. This is not something

that "fixes" itself. We must takeactive meassures here, because nobody else would do it for us.Leif

[Guest guest]

I'm not a developmental psychologist nor is anyone here an expert in related fields that I know of.

Creating awareness that is both positive and truthful to the whole is important. Accommodations educationally for some and occupational for others.

Of course physical abuse should be criminal and psychological should not be tolerated. School is a place to learn and not be bullied.

Self-viewing is self compartive, that being in relation to another person. I cannot presume to know you or anyone else.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

> One reason why I think bully actions in school should be criminal.I don't think this alone would work. Sure, you might eliminate someof the physical abuse, but psychological abuse might be just asdetrimental to the Aspie child as physical, and I hardly thinkyou could make that criminal.But I do not have an easy solution for this problem. On onehand the child must learn how to get along with the majority,but on the other this should not be filled with failures. Onething I do believe in though is a much later onset of thissocializing process, because an Aspie without sufficientlogical reasoning abilities will not be able to comprehendNTs social rules. It is my impression that before schoolage an Aspie will not learn anything meaningful fromthis experience, but will only acquire psychologic damageof various

sorts.Perhaps an Aspie school teaching social rules in a logicalmanner (by explaining the rules thoroughly) would do it?Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> I'm not a developmental psychologist nor is anyone here an expert in

related fields that I know of.

I think this is where our views differ. I'm not a developmental psychologist

either, but I've brought up two Aspies, and not many developmental

psychologists have done this. Developmental psychologists are not

some kind of super-humans. They need input into what they are

doing, and today this input is mostly (if not exclusively) from

typically developping children. We are the one's that must give

them this input, because we *know* how our children developped.

Leif

[Guest guest]

I really don’t see how our views differ I was just commenting on your post. I really have no one view and will be focusing on opinion polls, surveys and other things.

If your a parent you have experience with your children and there unique ways of being. Autism is a very wide spectrum.

Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> I'm not a developmental psychologist nor is anyone here an expert inrelated fields that I know of.I think this is where our views differ. I'm not a developmental psychologisteither, but I've brought up two Aspies, and not many developmentalpsychologists have done this. Developmental psychologists are notsome kind of super-humans. They need input into what they aredoing, and today this input is mostly (if not exclusively) fromtypically developping children. We are the one's that must givethem this input, because we *know* how our children developped.Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> I really don't see how our views differ I was just commenting on your

post.

Possibly not, but you seem to put a lot of reliance on professionals

in this field, while don't. I'm actively researching alternatives because

I think the professionals have got everything wrong. Not because they

are bad people, but because they haven't got the proper material

to work with.

> I really have no one view and will be focusing on opinion polls, surveys

and other things.

Me too. I do this because I want to know the truth about autistics. I will

also

use this to eventually convince researchers they are wrong, and publishing

the

results in professional journals if necesary.

> If your a parent you have experience with your children and there unique

> ways of being.

I don't agree. This experience is applicable to much more than individuals,

and I intend to prove I'm right about this too. One example of this is the

Aspie-quiz, which I will do follow-ups on.

> Autism is a very wide spectrum.

Yes, but it still has commonalities that can be generalised. It is no good

if every parent need to re-experience what others already have found out.

Leif

[Guest guest]

In some respect professionals need be educated more so.Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> I really don't see how our views differ I was just commenting on yourpost.Possibly not, but you seem to put a lot of reliance on professionalsin this field, while don't. I'm actively researching alternatives becauseI think the professionals have got everything wrong. Not because theyare bad people, but because they haven't got the proper materialto work with.> I really have no one view and will be focusing on opinion polls, surveysand other things.Me too. I do this because I want to know the truth about autistics. I willalsouse this to eventually convince researchers they are wrong, and publishingtheresults in professional journals if necesary.> If your a parent you have experience with your children and there unique> ways of being.I don't agree. This experience is

applicable to much more than individuals,and I intend to prove I'm right about this too. One example of this is theAspie-quiz, which I will do follow-ups on.> Autism is a very wide spectrum.Yes, but it still has commonalities that can be generalised. It is no goodif every parent need to re-experience what others already have found out.Leif

[Guest guest]

We know ourselves, our own minds and cannot legally provide medical advice like a trained medical professional. "Rainbow ." <rainbow@...> wrote:

>Nathon: "nor is anyone here an expert in related fields that I know of."

I disagree! We are experts at/in Aspiness.

Rainbow

[Guest guest]

We know ourselves, our own minds and cannot legally provide medical advice like a trained medical professional. "Rainbow ." <rainbow@...> wrote:

>Nathon: "nor is anyone here an expert in related fields that I know of."

I disagree! We are experts at/in Aspiness.

Rainbow

[Guest guest]

, we are not providing medical advice. Only posting our individual opinions.

Inger

Re: The best of future Aspie children

We know ourselves, our own minds and cannot legally provide medical advice like a trained medical professional. "Rainbow ." <rainbow@...> wrote: >Nathon: "nor is anyone here an expert in related fields that I know of."

I disagree! We are experts at/in Aspiness.

Rainbow

[Guest guest]

Yes that I know. It was in response concerning not opinions nor medical advice itself but the reality of A.S as a whole. Even if one has A.S they do not know the whole of those with A.S and certainly not as a medical professional does whom works with such individuals.

Another reason why the N.T concept is so very absurd and can be distructive to an individual in his or her own world view if taken to the extreme. It can be made out to where the N.T's are the oppressors, a certain way, completly different, and the group condition (it's influence) can be a negative one to the psyche (perhaps?). It is more a mechenism of psychological seperation, making one feel more so different and everyone else that much more different. Its a belief and nothing more.

Especially children as I think back now that when I was a child if I would have wanted to make this idealogy part of of my reality. I know I wouldnt and as is I am very uncomfortible with the N.T term anytime its used. Its really seems to be a non-reality that can be at times for some distructive.

Individuals with A.S are not are not a species, culture, social identity group or otherwise. They are people like anyone else that deserve to be part of society as a whole (in real life) and I dont believe the indoctrination (not religious just a term that came to mind) of this type of human neuro-typological philosophy is completly safe psychologicaly.

, we are not providing medical advice. Only posting our individual opinions.

Inger

Re: The best of future Aspie children

We know ourselves, our own minds and cannot legally provide medical advice like a trained medical professional. "Rainbow ." <rainbow@...> wrote: >Nathon: "nor is anyone here an expert in related fields that I know of."

I disagree! We are experts at/in Aspiness.

Rainbow

[Guest guest]

>Nathon: "....they do not know the whole of those with A.S and certainly not as a medical professional does...."Correct, Nathon, but each of us has some of the characteristics that define APT, and in as much as we are here with you in this dialog we are experienced if not professional. Together we do know the 'whole'.  Rainbow

[Guest guest]

I think people misunderstand what I say or what it is intended to be, your speaking from the group mentality and what is common within the group.

I don't really want to be seen as not promoting communication / dialog. The free exchange of ideas are good things.

Sometimes I just think topics are to complicated for words that is why I am going to try and goto college to learn better ways of articulating."Rainbow ." <rainbow@...> wrote:

>Nathon: "....they do not know the whole of those with A.S and certainly not as a medical professional does...."

Correct, Nathon, but each of us has some of the characteristics that define APT, and in as much as we are here with you in this dialog we are experienced if not professional. Together we do know the 'whole'.

Rainbow

[Guest guest]

:

> Yes that I know. It was in response concerning not opinions nor medical

> advice itself but the reality

> of A.S as a whole. Even if one has A.S they do not know the whole of those

> with A.S and certainly

> not as a medical professional does whom works with such individuals.

I disagree. People who have been part of the autistic community, exchanging

experiences with

others over extended periods of time, probably are more knowledgable than

medical professionals.

Have you ever seen a medical professional educating himself / herself by

participating in the

autistic community? At least I haven't, but if some have, please report that

too me.

As I wrote before, becoming knowledgable requires information, and you won't

get that by carrying

out experiments without background information in a clinical environment.

It's as absurd as if an

autistic would carry out experiments on non-autistics in a laboratory

environment where these

would not be allowed to socialize with others of their kind. All the

information in psychology

has been gained by watching people interact, while autistics are studied in

isolation, often doing

tasks they are known not to being able to do and doing PET-scans for

identifying the deficits

origin.

There simply hasn't been done any basic psychology research on autistics.

The autistic community

has tons of information about this, but many researchers probably are

totally ignorant about this,

and instead focus on the differences as if they were deficits.

If you use the wrong methology in soft-sciences, you are very likely to end

up with the

wrong conclusions too. Psychiatry is currently using the wrong methology in

their

autism research, and won't get anywhere until they realize this and change

methology.

Leif

[Guest guest]

If participation means it is just online then it is not the same as real life. Also I do not know of many whom openly say they talk to other persons with A.S in real life. Even so knowledge is not the same as real medical experience or persons that work with individuals with autism on a daily bases or educationaly.

I was told reading college textbooks was not the same as going to college no matter how many I have read through the past 6 months.

Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> Yes that I know. It was in response concerning not opinions nor medical > advice itself but the reality> of A.S as a whole. Even if one has A.S they do not know the whole of those > with A.S and certainly> not as a medical professional does whom works with such individuals.I disagree. People who have been part of the autistic community, exchanging experiences withothers over extended periods of time, probably are more knowledgable than medical professionals.Have you ever seen a medical professional educating himself / herself by participating in theautistic community? At least I haven't, but if some have, please report that too me.As I wrote before, becoming knowledgable requires information, and you won't get that by carryingout experiments without background information in a clinical

environment. It's as absurd as if anautistic would carry out experiments on non-autistics in a laboratory environment where thesewould not be allowed to socialize with others of their kind. All the information in psychologyhas been gained by watching people interact, while autistics are studied in isolation, often doingtasks they are known not to being able to do and doing PET-scans for identifying the deficitsorigin.There simply hasn't been done any basic psychology research on autistics. The autistic communityhas tons of information about this, but many researchers probably are totally ignorant about this,and instead focus on the differences as if they were deficits.If you use the wrong methology in soft-sciences, you are very likely to end up with thewrong conclusions too. Psychiatry is currently using the wrong methology in theirautism research, and won't get anywhere until they realize this

and change methology.Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> If participation means it is just online then it is not the same as real

> life.

Yes it is because we are talking about real life experiences. Also, some of

us live in families with more than one autistic. That is real life, and we

are

talking about that too.

> Also I do not know of many whom openly say they talk to other persons with

> A.S in real life.

I've done from time to time, in addition to my family which is autistic.

> Even so knowledge is not the same as real medical experience or persons

> that work

> with individuals with autism on a daily bases or educationaly.

Depends. Some of them only do this for work, and never gain better

understanding.

Others are non-diagnosed autistics, and do have a great deal of

understanding.

> I was told reading college textbooks was not the same as going to college

> no matter how

> many I have read through the past 6 months.

Not true either of course. If I read a college course textbook or

participate in a program

using the same book, really doesn't matter. I've been both to college and

university, so

I think I know what I'm talking about.

Leif

[Guest guest]

:

> If participation means it is just online then it is not the same as real

> life.

Yes it is because we are talking about real life experiences. Also, some of

us live in families with more than one autistic. That is real life, and we

are

talking about that too.

> Also I do not know of many whom openly say they talk to other persons with

> A.S in real life.

I've done from time to time, in addition to my family which is autistic.

> Even so knowledge is not the same as real medical experience or persons

> that work

> with individuals with autism on a daily bases or educationaly.

Depends. Some of them only do this for work, and never gain better

understanding.

Others are non-diagnosed autistics, and do have a great deal of

understanding.

> I was told reading college textbooks was not the same as going to college

> no matter how

> many I have read through the past 6 months.

Not true either of course. If I read a college course textbook or

participate in a program

using the same book, really doesn't matter. I've been both to college and

university, so

I think I know what I'm talking about.

Leif

[Guest guest]

Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> If participation means it is just online then it is not the same as real > life.Yes it is because we are talking about real life experiences. Also, some ofus live in families with more than one autistic. That is real life, and we aretalking about that too.

It is not the same as real life.. that simple. Sitting in front of a monitor is not the same as a person in the same room. this is logical.

> Also I do not know of many whom openly say they talk to other persons with > A.S in real life.I've done from time to time, in addition to my family which is autistic.

That is unique, I have never met anyone else with autism nor have I paid much attention to anyone I have ever met.> Even so knowledge is not the same as real medical experience or persons > that work> with individuals with autism on a daily bases or educationaly.Depends. Some of them only do this for work, and never gain better understanding.Others are non-diagnosed autistics, and do have a great deal of understanding.

There is the perspective of one whom has a form of autism and the perspective of autism from someone without autism. Persons highly experienced in a specialized field conerning autism will be both experienced and knowledgable.

Question: If someone has autism are they autism thus they are identitified as autistic? Does one agree to such a label as well or is it automaticaly given to them?> I was told reading college textbooks was not the same as going to college > no matter how> many I have read through the past 6 months.Not true either of course. If I read a college course textbook or participate in a programusing the same book, really doesn't matter. I've been both to college and university, soI think I know what I'm talking about.Leif

Nothing is better then a lecture as well as a textbook.

Did you take any psychology classes?

I can think for myself, so I know what I am talking about as well.

[Guest guest]

Leif Ekblad <leif@...> wrote:

:> If participation means it is just online then it is not the same as real > life.Yes it is because we are talking about real life experiences. Also, some ofus live in families with more than one autistic. That is real life, and we aretalking about that too.

It is not the same as real life.. that simple. Sitting in front of a monitor is not the same as a person in the same room. this is logical.

> Also I do not know of many whom openly say they talk to other persons with > A.S in real life.I've done from time to time, in addition to my family which is autistic.

That is unique, I have never met anyone else with autism nor have I paid much attention to anyone I have ever met.> Even so knowledge is not the same as real medical experience or persons > that work> with individuals with autism on a daily bases or educationaly.Depends. Some of them only do this for work, and never gain better understanding.Others are non-diagnosed autistics, and do have a great deal of understanding.

There is the perspective of one whom has a form of autism and the perspective of autism from someone without autism. Persons highly experienced in a specialized field conerning autism will be both experienced and knowledgable.

Question: If someone has autism are they autism thus they are identitified as autistic? Does one agree to such a label as well or is it automaticaly given to them?> I was told reading college textbooks was not the same as going to college > no matter how> many I have read through the past 6 months.Not true either of course. If I read a college course textbook or participate in a programusing the same book, really doesn't matter. I've been both to college and university, soI think I know what I'm talking about.Leif

Nothing is better then a lecture as well as a textbook.

Did you take any psychology classes?

I can think for myself, so I know what I am talking about as well.

[Guest guest]

,

I agree.

The neuro-typical designation is NOT completely completely safe

psychologically as long as the meaning of the term can be flexible,

or interpreted in different ways.

I think when people deal with science, there should be exact words

for exact meanings so there can be no room for misinterpretation and

no room for assigning additional meanings to words.

The felxibility of language is half the reason understandings flare

up between people, which is why I STILL think it's best to steer

clear of labels if possible unless that particular label has a

universally understood meaning that cannot in any way be changed.

Inflexible words with inflexible meanings would leave no room for

confusion in communication. Therefore if a label was universally

understood tobe a simple designation with no goodness or badness

implied, that would be fine.

But such a word can never occur in the English language which is why

labeling people or social segments ought to be kept to minimum, or

used only in the place of other, less specific terminology.

Tom

Individuals with A.S are not are not a species, culture, social

identity group or otherwise. They are people like anyone else that

deserve to be part of society as a whole (in real life) and I dont

believe the indoctrination (not religious just a term that came to

mind) of this type of human neuro-typological philosophy is completly

safe psychologicaly.