Re: Need facts about Tito ( The CAN toy)

July 31, 2003

> The short story: I need to get to the bottom of the " Tito "

> story; Tito being the fellow who CAN is exploiting, who types independently.

> I have been told that his mom employed some abusive methods in getting him

> to do this and now hear that she is working with other children.

<snip>

> I thought I heard some discussion of Tito here. Maybe it was on

> the advocacy list. If that is the case, will someone please forward my

> request for information to there?

It would have been this list, and you had actually sent a message in

that discussion and then gone away to a conference.

The two main pieces of evidence I cited were Tito's own book and the New

York Times article about him. ( " A Boy, A Mother and a Rare Map of

Autism's World " .)

His own book said that when she was teaching him, if he tried to look

away from her, she hit him hard enough that her husband left the room

and her mother accused her of being a bad mother. (This is on different

pages depending on whether it's the British edition _Beyond the

Silence_, or the overhyped and disgustingly-CAN-marketing-filled

American edition _The Mind Tree_. I have a standard copy of the British

edition and a review copy of the American edition. *Part* of what he

says about this is on the web in his article, " When Silence Speaks: The

Way My Mother Taught Me " , written under the name " Rajarshi Mukhopadhyay "

with no " Tito " at the front of it.)

The newspaper article stated that she would often refuse to let him eat

until he'd done certain things the way she wanted.

Someone else here said the two of them had done an interview that

provided greater detail on this. I have not seen it, and I do not

remember anyone ever posting a satisfactory reference on it. I would

still like to see a reference.

Then everything kind of got derailed into a " do the ends justify the

means " sort of argument.

Does anyone still have that reference from that interview where Soma

apparently went into detail?

, whose main surprise in this matter -- not that she necessarily

*should* be surprised, given the things people get away with -- is how

publicly this is discussed by Tito and others and how few people seem to

object

--

A little experience often upsets a lot of theory.

July 31, 2003

Is this the boy that was featured on 60 minutes a few weeks ago?!

His mom (from India) had him communicating via a lap top and writing-

they never mentioned that she hit him. She was shown to be a hero

and discovered that severely autistic children are not retarded-

they just need help learning to communicate. She used a special

speaking technique, according to the story.

God, if that is him, and she really is beating him- 60 min made it

sound like a wonderful breakthrough. I thought they were finally

realizing that abuse isn't the answer. I should have known it was

too good to be true.

I'll check the web and see what I can find.

Jeanette

>

> > The short story: I need to get to the bottom of

the " Tito "

> > story; Tito being the fellow who CAN is exploiting, who types

independently.

> > I have been told that his mom employed some abusive methods in

getting him

> > to do this and now hear that she is working with other children.

>

> <snip>

>

> > I thought I heard some discussion of Tito here. Maybe

it was on

> > the advocacy list. If that is the case, will someone please

forward my

> > request for information to there?

>

> It would have been this list, and you had actually sent a message

in

> that discussion and then gone away to a conference.

>

> The two main pieces of evidence I cited were Tito's own book and

the New

> York Times article about him. ( " A Boy, A Mother and a Rare Map of

> Autism's World " .)

>

> His own book said that when she was teaching him, if he tried to

look

> away from her, she hit him hard enough that her husband left the

room

> and her mother accused her of being a bad mother. (This is on

different

> pages depending on whether it's the British edition _Beyond the

> Silence_, or the overhyped and disgustingly-CAN-marketing-filled

> American edition _The Mind Tree_. I have a standard copy of the

British

> edition and a review copy of the American edition. *Part* of what

he

> says about this is on the web in his article, " When Silence

Speaks: The

> Way My Mother Taught Me " , written under the name " Rajarshi

Mukhopadhyay "

> with no " Tito " at the front of it.)

>

> The newspaper article stated that she would often refuse to let

him eat

> until he'd done certain things the way she wanted.

>

> Someone else here said the two of them had done an interview that

> provided greater detail on this. I have not seen it, and I do not

> remember anyone ever posting a satisfactory reference on it. I

would

> still like to see a reference.

>

> Then everything kind of got derailed into a " do the ends justify

the

> means " sort of argument.

>

> Does anyone still have that reference from that interview where

Soma

> apparently went into detail?

>

> , whose main surprise in this matter -- not that she

necessarily

> *should* be surprised, given the things people get away with -- is

how

> publicly this is discussed by Tito and others and how few people

seem to

> object

>

> --

> A little experience often upsets a lot of theory.

July 31, 2003

Hi,

They have a little blurb about who constitues their membership and

don't mention any who have autism, just the parents of kids with

autism, basically. Then they mentioned Temple and Tito in one

sentence. I didn't see any comment about Donna , but then I

didn't look at their board of directors or whatever. Maybe she

dropped out. ?

Anyway, they are ridiculous to me, and might I add that in their

video that I saw a couple of years ago they illustrated what it was

like to have your kid " stolen " by autism by using a camera trick to

show kids disappearing from a playground.

" See, here is johnny, sliding down the slide, a perfectly normal

child. He will grow up to be a movie star, or the president of the

United States, >poof< autism got him, now he is gone. "

The kid really disappeared! I guess it was the evil gnomes.

Camille

July 31, 2003

> My guess would be that you would have to contact Tito, his mother or

> CAN and get a statement from them and if it is offensive comment on

> it, OR wait to see if they speak ahead of you and react to whatever

> they say.

Tito has already made very concrete statements.

> One thing I would like to slam CAN with is the fact that they don't

> mention any adults with autism among their supporters, and only

> mention Temple Grandin and Tito as examples of what can be done (!).

Actually, they got hold of Donna a long time ago. She's an

honorary board member.

Of course, she also equates wearing Irlen lenses with " fighting autism " .

, who's wearing Irlen lenses [insert note that this is *not* an ad

for the Irlen institute, which she finds pseudoscientific in its claims

and attempted-monopolistic and overexpensive in its practice] and not by

a longshot fighting autism

--

" Professional advocates talk about empowering their clients when they're

actually, at best, acting on behalf of their clients' expressed

interests and, at worst, making decisions of their own on behalf of a

client whom they feel is not capable of making 'responsible' decisions "

-Rae Unzicker

July 31, 2003

> They have a little blurb about who constitues their membership and

> don't mention any who have autism, just the parents of kids with

> autism, basically. Then they mentioned Temple and Tito in one

> sentence. I didn't see any comment about Donna , but then I

> didn't look at their board of directors or whatever. Maybe she

> dropped out. ?

http://www.canfoundation.org/aboutcan/honboard.cfm

It bothers me also that they got Maya Angelou somehow.

--

" Those who lie with statistics have strange bedfellows. " -Pierre Abbat

July 31, 2003

Re: Need facts about Tito ( The CAN " toy " )

> Hi,

>

> They have a little blurb about who constitues their membership and

> don't mention any who have autism, just the parents of kids with

> autism, basically. Then they mentioned Temple and Tito in one

> sentence. I didn't see any comment about Donna , but then I

> didn't look at their board of directors or whatever. Maybe she

> dropped out. ?

No, she is still there:

THE CAN HONORARY BOARD

Honorary Board Members

Maya Angelou, Author

Jane Kaczmarek, Actress

The Honorable R. Rothman Congressman (D-9th NJ)

The Honorable Marge Roukema Congresswoman (R-5th NJ)

Rene Russo, Actress

Jerome Shestack, Esq., Grandparent, Attorney

Brad Whitford, Actor

Donna , Author

http://www.canfoundation.org/aboutcan/honboard.cfm

Interesting that Rene Russo is there - she appears to be on the spectrum,

too.

>

> Camille

>

August 1, 2003

Jane wrote:

An autitic person is

" locked in his own little world, " unable to communicate

with others. NTs are social creatures, above all, and

being alone (involuntarily, inescapably) is an NT idea

of hell. So, if a mother is able to beat her child out

of hell, sure, more power to her. She is " saving " him.

I'm not sure that a lot of NT's see it as " saving " these children in compassion-

that may be how they justify abuse in thier minds, but the real motive is not

about caring. NTs are forever talking about compassionate and other noble

motives for thier selfish, judgemental behavior to cover up thier own fear,

which they are in denial of. I think they ignore and justify abuse out of fear

and hatered- that is what motivates NTs. They see Autistics as somehow not

worthy of the inalienable human rights they have. And they are so terrified and

threatened by anything different that its OK to beat him up- extinguish/ control

the threat.

And I don't think what she did is mild at all. She could have left bruises. I

would never beat anybody up thinking it could " save " them- violence is

inherently destructive- it's purpose is to destroy. I'm sure that NTs know that.

This is just my opinion- and since I've never been an NT, I really can't say

what's in thier heads. But I like my theory!

Jeanette

August 1, 2003

" ... a mother is able to beat her child ... "

O.K., so where's the NT empathy now (that we're not supposed to have)?!

Re: Need facts about Tito ( The CAN " toy " )

> Jane wrote:

>

> An autitic person is

> " locked in his own little world, " unable to communicate

> with others. NTs are social creatures, above all, and

> being alone (involuntarily, inescapably) is an NT idea

> of hell. So, if a mother is able to beat her child out

> of hell, sure, more power to her. She is " saving " him.

>

> I'm not sure that a lot of NT's see it as " saving " these children in

compassion- that may be how they justify abuse in thier minds, but the real

motive is not about caring. NTs are forever talking about compassionate and

other noble motives for thier selfish, judgemental behavior to cover up

thier own fear, which they are in denial of. I think they ignore and

justify abuse out of fear and hatered- that is what motivates NTs. They see

Autistics as somehow not worthy of the inalienable human rights they have.

And they are so terrified and threatened by anything different that its OK

to beat him up- extinguish/ control the threat.

>

> And I don't think what she did is mild at all. She could have left

bruises. I would never beat anybody up thinking it could " save " them-

violence is inherently destructive- it's purpose is to destroy. I'm sure

that NTs know that.

>

> This is just my opinion- and since I've never been an NT, I really can't

say what's in thier heads. But I like my theory!

>

> Jeanette

>

August 1, 2003

Jeanette wrote:

>It's also odd that no one even talks about this in the media, as if it's

>OK to beat the tar out of an Autistic person to make them " normal " . The

>whole thing is really disgusting.

I suspsect that most people, on first hearing about it,

would believe that " mild " (non-scarring, non-fatal)

abuse *would* be okay if the result was that a

(stereotypical) autistic child became able to function

more " normally. " I mean, the stereotype is that being

autistic is a horrible fate. An autitic person is

" locked in his own little world, " unable to communicate

with others. NTs are social creatures, above all, and

being alone (involuntarily, inescapably) is an NT idea

of hell. So, if a mother is able to beat her child out

of hell, sure, more power to her. She is " saving " him.

Jane

August 1, 2003

My point exactly- Itsn't it ridiculous the way they say we have " no empathy "

when it is obvious that NTs are the ones devoid of caring and empathy? We just

don't have the capacity for BS and softening of the truth that they do. We can

know who and what we are, be honest about it and look ourselves in the mirror

each day.

NTs have to lie about everything and sugar coat and soften the whole world just

so that they can feel comfortable with themselves and others. They are

threatened by our ability to be real and honest. Why should the truth make one

so uncomfortable that they have to plunge themselves into denial all the time?

Jeanette

From: Colin Wessels

To: AutisticSpectrumTreeHouse

Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 11:14 PM

Subject: Re: Need facts about Tito ( The CAN " toy " )