Re: Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

[Guest guest]

Maybe if these folks actually had to go through the battery of testing it takes to get diagnosed they would realize it's not something that just gets tossed around flippently. Sure there are poor professionals out there but just like anything else it isn't likely that all of them are completely incompetent and unprofessional.

Jennie AS

Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

Denis Leary says 'Your kids aren't autistic. They're stupid or lazy.'

Some of “Rescue Me” star Denis Leary's rants in his new book, "Why We Suck: A Feel-Good Guide to Staying Fat, Loud, Lazy and Stupid," are not going to endear the actor to parents of autistic children or the Autism Society of America.

Leary writes: "There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks . . . to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don't give a [bleep] what these crackerjack whack jobs tell you -- yer kid is NOT autistic. He's just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."

The Autism Society has responded with: "For Mr. Leary to suggest that families or doctors conspire to falsely diagnose autism is ridiculous. . . . [His] remarks reflect the same misconceptions of autism being caused by bad or unemotional parenting that were held over 50 years ago."

In Vanity Fair, Leary mentions the autism chapter as his "favorite" and hopes that autism activist McCarthy will picket his book tour.

"That would be really good for me," Leary told VF interviewer Wayne. "It will help sell more books."

What do you think about Leary's autism statements? Is he trying to be funny? Did it work? Or should he be taken out and shot?

Photos: Denis Leary donned a gown at the Fashion Rocks event in September. Jeepers. Will he stoop to anything to get publicity for his book? WireImage

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2008/10/denis-leary-you.html

Denis Leary Responds to Critics of His Autism Writings

Denis Leary says he's been misquoted and misunderstood. The comic actor sparked a firestorm of criticism, even among his Hollywood colleagues, for a passage in his new book Why We Suck: A Feel Good Guide to Staying Fat, Loud, Lazy and Stupid saying that autism diagnoses "help explain away the deficiencies of (parents') junior morons." "The point of the chapter is not that autism doesn't exist – it obviously does," Leary, 51, says in a statement. He says his beef is with "grown men who are either self-diagnosing themselves with low-level offshoots of the disease or wishing they could as a way to explain their failed careers and troublesome progeny."But the Rescue Me star's explanation didn't stop the attacks. "If he was trying to be funny, he failed miserably," says actress Holly Peete, whose son Rodney, 10, has autism. "If he was trying to sound informed, he came off as ignorant." The chapter, which Leary called "Autism Schmautism," also provoked advocacy group Autism United to call for a book boycott and a picket outside Leary's Nov. 12 appearance in Boston. Autism activist McCarthy tells Access Hollywood that Leary is "obviously stupid," but not worth getting upset over.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20234264,00.html

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.1/1730 - Release Date: 10/17/2008 8:07 AM

[Guest guest]

Regarding the Dennis Leary thing.. One question:

Why do we care?

Just my opinion here, but he's a comedian. He makes his living saying what people think but don't say, and for an organization to come out and make a statement against it just gives legitimacy to his position and press for his new book, the latter of which is why people say things in books in the first place.. to make them sell. IMHO, ignoring it does far less damage than publically acknowledging it and recognizing his as a viewpoint worth debating.

Usarian

[Guest guest]

A picture is worth a thousand words and this one says it all. How can he possibly accuse others of stupidity and laziness? Quite honestly I have a million and one better things to do with my time (ie I could take out the garbage, or clean a toilet, or volunteer at the sewage plant) than to even spare him another thought.

e, just my two cents

From: Jennie Unknown

Sent: Friday, October 17, 2008 9:05 PM

To: aspires-relationships

Subject: Re: Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

Maybe if these folks actually had to go through the battery of testing it takes to get diagnosed they would realize it's not something that just gets tossed around flippently. Sure there are poor professionals out there but just like anything else it isn't likely that all of them are completely incompetent and unprofessional.

Jennie AS

Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

Denis Leary says 'Your kids aren't autistic. They're stupid or lazy.'

Some of “Rescue Me” star Denis Leary's rants in his new book, "Why We Suck: A Feel-Good Guide to Staying Fat, Loud, Lazy and Stupid," are not going to endear the actor to parents of autistic children or the Autism Society of America.

Leary writes: "There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks . . . to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don't give a [bleep] what these crackerjack whack jobs tell you -- yer kid is NOT autistic. He's just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."

The Autism Society has responded with: "For Mr. Leary to suggest that families or doctors conspire to falsely diagnose autism is ridiculous. . . . [His] remarks reflect the same misconceptions of autism being caused by bad or unemotional parenting that were held over 50 years ago."

In Vanity Fair, Leary mentions the autism chapter as his "favorite" and hopes that autism activist McCarthy will picket his book tour.

"That would be really good for me," Leary told VF interviewer Wayne. "It will help sell more books."

What do you think about Leary's autism statements? Is he trying to be funny? Did it work? Or should he be taken out and shot?

Photos: Denis Leary donned a gown at the Fashion Rocks event in September. Jeepers. Will he stoop to anything to get publicity for his book? WireImage

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/thedishrag/2008/10/denis-leary-you.html

Denis Leary Responds to Critics of His Autism Writings

Denis Leary says he's been misquoted and misunderstood. The comic actor sparked a firestorm of criticism, even among his Hollywood colleagues, for a passage in his new book Why We Suck: A Feel Good Guide to Staying Fat, Loud, Lazy and Stupid saying that autism diagnoses "help explain away the deficiencies of (parents') junior morons." "The point of the chapter is not that autism doesn't exist – it obviously does," Leary, 51, says in a statement. He says his beef is with "grown men who are either self-diagnosing themselves with low-level offshoots of the disease or wishing they could as a way to explain their failed careers and troublesome progeny."But the Rescue Me star's explanation didn't stop the attacks. "If he was trying to be funny, he failed miserably," says actress Holly Peete, whose son Rodney, 10, has autism. "If he was trying to sound informed, he came off as ignorant." The chapter, which Leary called "Autism Schmautism," also provoked advocacy group Autism United to call for a book boycott and a picket outside Leary's Nov. 12 appearance in Boston. Autism activist McCarthy tells Access Hollywood that Leary is "obviously stupid," but not worth getting upset over.

http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20234264,00.html

No virus found in this incoming message.Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com Version: 8.0.173 / Virus Database: 270.8.1/1730 - Release Date: 10/17/2008 8:07 AM

[Guest guest]

denis leary said:

__,_._,"The point of the chapter is not that autism doesn't exist – it obviously does," Leary, 51, says in a statement. He says his beef is with "grown men who are either self-diagnosing themselves with low-level offshoots of the disease or wishing they could as a way to explain their failed careers and troublesome progeny."___

me here:

you do get synical with attempts to sell a book and a " stand up tour"

but i dotn disagree with hat he is saying.

i am on another list and debate raged over diagnosed versus self diagnoses versus undiagnosed. now this is a debate amongst hard core AS...all the stats, figures, journals you can site. and there does seem to be , on some level, a degree of elitism regarding having/being AS.

the diagnosed look down on the undiagnosed. both dislike the self diagnosed.

This is going to continue and generate momentum. the diagnosed would take leary's stand....."we are diagnosed, stop being crazy and blame something you think you have, we have it, you dont"

its a kind of, we are getting recognized, we are AS and now everyone wants to be AS.

and some in the AS community are trying to divorce the real AS from the wannabe AS.

there are difficulties in getting a diagnosis as an adult and there is always going to be personal choice, a reluctnce to trust shrinks and constant reports of shrinks getting it wrong add to the debate.

i think if AS is going to be hijacked and used as an excuse then, in my opinion

the pretenders must go. Leary is right.

37 m diagnosed AS

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

[Guest guest]

david bailey wrote:

> denis leary said:

>

> " The point of the chapter is not that autism doesn't exist

> – it obviously does, " Leary, 51, says in a statement. *He says his

> beef is with " grown men who are either self-diagnosing themselves

> with low-level offshoots of the disease or wishing they could as a

> way to explain their failed careers and troublesome progeny. "

>

> me here:

>

> you do get synical with attempts to sell a book and a " stand up tour "

> but i dotn disagree with hat he is saying.

>

> i am on another list and debate raged over diagnosed versus self

> diagnoses versus undiagnosed. now this is a debate amongst hard core

> AS...all the stats, figures, journals you can site. and there does

> seem to be , on some level, a degree of elitism regarding

> having/being AS.

>

> the diagnosed look down on the undiagnosed. both dislike the self

> diagnosed.

>

> This is going to continue and generate momentum. the diagnosed would

> take leary's stand..... " we are diagnosed, stop being crazy and blame

> something you think you have, we have it, you dont "

>

> its a kind of, /we are getting recognized, we are AS and now

> everyone wants to be AS./

>

> and some in the AS community are trying to divorce the real AS from

> the wannabe AS.

>

> there are difficulties in getting a diagnosis as an adult and there

> is always going to be personal choice, a reluctnce to trust shrinks

> and constant reports of shrinks getting it wrong add to the debate.

>

> i think if AS is going to be hijacked and used as an excuse then, in

> my opinion the pretenders must go. Leary is right.

>

> 37 m diagnosed AS

Hear! Hear!

To push the issue another direction: It'll be *really* interesting when

a new DSM (and/or new ICD) is produced in a few years. I suspect a lot

of " AS " are going to join the ranks of the unwashed. And a few " NT " are

in for a big surprise.

That could include *me*, ...and and Ron and Jennie, and...

There's no question in my mind I'm *something*, that *we* are something.

But what will it be, I wonder, when the dust settles?

I wonder even, will " they " get it right finally, and place more weight

on *cognition* as a defining criterion?

All the present AS criteria, badly conceived and written though they

are, can be traced to *cognitive* changes: How the brain perceives the

world, and how it reacts to the things it perceives.

All the *emerging* criteria too slot right into a cognitive model. As

do many (not all) of the physical attributes many of us share. The " not

all " left-over co-morbid attributes will remain just that: Co-morbid

conditions and *not* necessary or sufficient parts of the widening

autism-spectrum.

That'll change a *lot* of things for us all: AS, NT, ...professionals

and lay-people alike.

Comes The Dawn... I wonder how we'll feel about ourselves then?

- Bill, 76, dx AS

--

WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

[Guest guest]

I'm with you e. It's a common phenomenon that " new " things can be

overdx'd, it doesn't mean they don't exist. I don't find him funny (or

accurate) in the slightest. I don't enjoy those comedians who rely on

contempt rather than intelligence. He is so desperate to be funny, he ends

up not funny, just desperate. I suspect those who have that kind of humor

have their own personal demons they aren't dealing with and contemptuous

humor becomes the way to hide them (how's that for overpsychology, but I've

been right). I wouldn't enjoy his humor aimed at anything else besides

autism either, it's just the variety that to me is off the mark.

Re: Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

>

>> david bailey wrote:

>>> denis leary said:

>>>

>>> " The point of the chapter is not that autism doesn't exist

>>> – it obviously does, " Leary, 51, says in a statement. *He says his

>>> beef is with " grown men who are either self-diagnosing themselves

>>> with low-level offshoots of the disease or wishing they could as a

>>> way to explain their failed careers and troublesome progeny. "

>>>

>>> me here:

>>>

>>> you do get synical with attempts to sell a book and a " stand up tour "

>>> but i dotn disagree with hat he is saying.

>>>

>>> i am on another list and debate raged over diagnosed versus self

>>> diagnoses versus undiagnosed. now this is a debate amongst hard core

>>> AS...all the stats, figures, journals you can site. and there does

>>> seem to be , on some level, a degree of elitism regarding

>>> having/being AS.

>>>

>>> the diagnosed look down on the undiagnosed. both dislike the self

>>> diagnosed.

>>>

>>> This is going to continue and generate momentum. the diagnosed would

>>> take leary's stand..... " we are diagnosed, stop being crazy and blame

>>> something you think you have, we have it, you dont "

>>>

>>> its a kind of, /we are getting recognized, we are AS and now

>>> everyone wants to be AS./

>>>

>>> and some in the AS community are trying to divorce the real AS from

>>> the wannabe AS.

>>>

>>> there are difficulties in getting a diagnosis as an adult and there

>>> is always going to be personal choice, a reluctnce to trust shrinks

>>> and constant reports of shrinks getting it wrong add to the debate.

>>>

>>> i think if AS is going to be hijacked and used as an excuse then, in

>>> my opinion the pretenders must go. Leary is right.

>>>

>>> 37 m diagnosed AS

>>

>> Hear! Hear!

>>

>> To push the issue another direction: It'll be *really* interesting when

>> a new DSM (and/or new ICD) is produced in a few years. I suspect a lot

>> of " AS " are going to join the ranks of the unwashed. And a few " NT " are

>> in for a big surprise.

>>

>> That could include *me*, ...and and Ron and Jennie, and...

>> There's no question in my mind I'm *something*, that *we* are something.

>> But what will it be, I wonder, when the dust settles?

>>

>> I wonder even, will " they " get it right finally, and place more weight

>> on *cognition* as a defining criterion?

>>

>> All the present AS criteria, badly conceived and written though they

>> are, can be traced to *cognitive* changes: How the brain perceives the

>> world, and how it reacts to the things it perceives.

>>

>> All the *emerging* criteria too slot right into a cognitive model. As

>> do many (not all) of the physical attributes many of us share. The " not

>> all " left-over co-morbid attributes will remain just that: Co-morbid

>> conditions and *not* necessary or sufficient parts of the widening

>> autism-spectrum.

>>

>> That'll change a *lot* of things for us all: AS, NT, ...professionals

>> and lay-people alike.

>>

>> Comes The Dawn... I wonder how we'll feel about ourselves then?

>>

>> - Bill, 76, dx AS

>>

>> --

>> WD " Bill " Loughman - Berkeley, California USA

>> http://home.earthlink.net/~wdloughman/wdl.htm

>>

>>

>> ------------------------------------

>>

>> " We each have our own way of living in the world, together we

>> are like a symphony.

>> Some are the melody, some are the rhythm, some are the harmony

>> It all blends together, we are like a symphony, and each part is crucial.

>> We all contribute to the song of life. "

>> ...Sondra

>>

>> We might not always agree; but TOGETHER we will make a difference.

>>

>> ASPIRES is a closed, confidential, moderated list.

>> Responsibility for posts to ASPIRES lies entirely with the original

>> author.

>> Do NOT post mail off-list without the author's permission.

>> When in doubt, please refer to our list rules at:

>> http://www.aspires-relationships.com/info_rules.htm

>> ASPIRES ~ Climbing the mountain TOGETHER

>> http://www.aspires-relationships.com

>>

[Guest guest]

Thank you e---well said. I've been at my computer here for

days wondering why on earth is everyone giving this guy any

discussion at all. That's what he wants. And when it works, he'll

say these kinds of things again. Enough already. But, <with sad

face> I'm sure some will continue to talk about it and that's their

choice. As for me, I won't be listening. Verleen

>

> Leary writes: " There is a huge boom in autism right now because

inattentive

> mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-

ass kids

> can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps

of

> shrinks . . . to get back diagnoses that help explain away the

deficiencies

> of their junior morons. I don't give a [bleep] what these

crackerjack whack

> jobs tell you -- yer kid is NOT autistic. He's just stupid. Or

lazy. Or

> both. "

>

> This is what HE wrote. His attempt to back peddle brought up self

diagnosis

> and career failure. I don't think anyone on this list would agree

with his

> actual statements.

> Of course self diagnosis and over diagnosis are rampant but do we

really

> need some comedian using our children, who already have enough

hurdles to

> over come, as fodder for his book. Dennis Leary is no more

qualified to

> make these accusations than the people he is accusing of self

diagnosing, he

> is probably less as most of the people on this list who have self

diagnosed

> have spent hours and hours researching and have had exposure to AS/

Autism.

> In my mind, this was an ill conceived publicity stunt and should be

treated

> as no more. Maybe he should have spent more time writing a book

people

> wanted to read. Then he would not have to resort to such

despicable

> tactics.

> I have the greatest respect for both Bill and but on this

topic I must

> disagree.

> e

>

[Guest guest]

I'll have to agree to disagree on this one.

e

From: david bailey

Sent: Sunday, October 19, 2008 7:19 AM

To: aspires-relationships

Subject: Re: Here we go AGAIN... <sigh>

kristine wrote:

Leary writes: "There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive

mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-ass kids can't compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks . . . to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don't give a [bleep] what these crackerjack whack

jobs tell you -- yer kid is NOT autistic. He's just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."

This is what HE wrote. His attempt to back peddle brought up self diagnosis and career failure. I don't think anyone on this list would agree with his

actual statements.

Of course self diagnosis and over diagnosis are rampant but do we really need some comedian using our children, who already have enough hurdles to over come, as fodder for his book. Dennis Leary is no more qualified to make these accusations than the people he is accusing of self diagnosing, he is probably less as most of the people on this list who have self diagnosed have spent hours and hours researching and have had exposure to AS/ Autism.

In my mind, this was an ill conceived publicity stunt and should be treated as no more. Maybe he should have spent more time writing a book people wanted to read. Then he would not have to resort to such despicable tactics.

I have the greatest respect for both Bill and but on this topic I must disagree.

e

me here: i guess it is interpretation of what has been said.it highlights a personal theory of mine that suggests that AStend to focus on what has been said or written. the non-AS tend to focus on why it has been written.for example if you are told by a doctor that , after an operation you have an 80% chance of survival more non-AS will sign a concentform than if the wording is ..." you will have a 20% chance of death"however, if you give the same forms and word it to a group of ASyou will find the percentage of those who agree will be similar. AS arent persuaded by why a particlar sentence is worded.they are concerned by what is said. Journalists seem to know this and word senteces toinvoke a

strong emotional response. why is more important thanwhat in a glossy mag.if leary was picking on Autistics he would receive a raw response from all.he isnt.he is highlighting that fact that AS and autism has no obvious objective criteria, and many people want to join the latest fad diagnosis and get their kid diagnosed to explaintheir parenting shortcomings. he isnt critiscising As or autistic or parents of As or autistics.he is bashing the parent of non-AS kids who cant face realityand want an easy out. this is what he said, this isnt my interpretation of what he said, this is what he said.why he said it will be debated forever.what is said, is, in my opinion accurate.cull the pretenders. this can ge achieved by getting an objective test.once done

the exploiters will find somethign else. 37 m diagnosed AS Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com

[Guest guest]

Not having read the chapter in question myself, I'm not going to try

to divine what " point " Leary might have been trying to make. He first

came into prominence with his early 90's one-hit wonder, " I'm an

a**hole " - from his album, " No cure for cancer. " That should be a hot

clue right there that whatever his point, it's not going to be a very

informed one. Tony Attwood or Simon Baron-Cohen he's not. If THEY

were spouting vitriol like that, THEN I'd be very excited. Leary's

whole currency in life is being an idiot. That's his product. Of him

or his " deep thoughts " - I shall say no more.

However, and Bill, you both present an interesting argument and

one that I (yes, self-dx'd) have often raised a concern about. For

quite a number of years now, AS has been the " flavour of the week. "

I've also called it the " flavour of the decade " ranking it alongside

with ADHD, etc. as conditions with so-called " dire " consequences,

that may have been wrongfully and too frequently diagnosed with

sometimes harmful results. Ritalin was dispensed like candy, the

rationale used (seriously!) was that if it doesn't work, well then

maybe it's not ADHD. New studies reveal that long term Ritalin use

can be a harbinger of psychotic episodes in 10% of its patients,

several years down the road.

Myself, I can spot an Aspie at 100 paces LOL. I can tell one by the

way he/she walks. When they open their mouths, my suspicions are

confirmed. Living amongst us, I know many perfectly functional

people, brilliant, delightfully quirky, and all those nuances of AS

are shining through bright and clear for me! <smile!> They've

definitely got the phenotype. In this type of communication medium, I

may seem more NT to some of you but believe you me, if you met me in

person, you'd know I have AS in spades.

But over the years, I've also read really sad posts from caregivers

of children, teens and young and older adults. Their caregivers were

practically standing on the ledge, at their wits end, with no place

left to turn. When they described their children, yes, one could say

they had some traits in common with autism but it was clear to me

that it was not autism. NOR was it the parent's fault either, but

some MD or child development " expert " had gone and taken the child's

lack of sociability, refusal to bathe, and violent outbursts, and

chalked it up to AS or autism. A nice, handy catch-all.

Upon reading their descriptions of their children's early development

- and the fact that often, there was no autism in the family - I'm

thinking the cause was MOST likely to have been a medical event (eg.

oxygen starvation) occurring prenatally or at birth, not autism. I,

of course, don't say that 'cause I am not an expert and ya can't make

such pronouncements over the internet. But it's a strong feeling down

in my gut that the poor parents and the even more unfortunate child,

have been very poorly served by the medical and educational

community. The young person has a lifelong disability, the child's

needs are NOT being met and the window of opportunity treatment to be

effective is closing rapidly, and a dx of AS is throwing the parents

off the trail, when they should be making long term plans for

providing for this young person.

Then there the likes wack-jobs like Darius McCollum. Their co-morbid

conditions, dangerous obsessions, have not been treated effectively,

thanks to a label of AS absolving the medical community of any

further responsibility to treat the condition. And yes, in some

cases, a parent in denial is enabling the " AS " individual to

habitually repeat the behaviors, and instilling no sense of personal

responsibility to change.

I won't shoot the messengers, Bill and . You both made good points.

- Helen