Autism Speaks Seeks to develop prenatal abortion tests?

Post Reply New Topic

If you prove this statement then the sponsorship toward Autism Speaks will go down. However if it cannot be proven then the rhetoric against them ought to be seen as false. Once the title statement is proven I'd recommend just like I would recommend not doing business with organizations having anything to do with autism in support of treatment while developing prenatal testing with intent to harm developing life. In the same way organizations that use abortion related research development to influence the image of autism I would recommend they being perceived biased to the real-life needs of individuals with autism. Not only that because abortion politics are abortion politics I'd recommend in public relations that mainstream organizations not have anything to do with autism organizations creating sides on the issue of abortion and autism when it is proven to be the case an organization is seeking to create such a test or prevent such a test. These are unrelated mainstream political issues and not in the best interest of people with autism who are alive.

This is the heart (center) of the issue of individuals who seek to evade treatment development rights said as cure or cures for symptoms of autism that are impairing.

Here is an email between a W.P member and Autism Speaks on the issue.

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt134955.html

There is not evidence the email is real however but I am not saying the person is lying or fabricating.

As far as I know the email is real and represents Autism Speaks opinion on the matter. John Browning, seems like a reliable member of the community here, that presented that email.

I see a prenatal test as less than likely than ever, with recent research that suggests that environment plays a role as well as genetics.

And also with continued genetic research that is further diluting potential genetic factors, with over 100 markers now, most having a correlation of 1 in 100; negating much potential for any conclusive markers.

Just don't see it as realistic scenario anymore. And haven't seen much concern over it lately here, either, as compared to when I first got here.

I believe there is a bias with viewing autism in the same mind as attempting to prevent abortion. The mind will attempt to make it more personal for others when they take it personal themsevles. The whole social evolution in some social circles that autism is an idenity rather then simly the obsticles to be overcome and especially when tied to abortion politics. Suddenly when people see autism as the disability and talk about the negative disability aspects it becomes to some more so exreme views as bigotry.

This whole mess is unfortunate and takes a psychological toll on individuals and mutual potentials. Viewing autism as my idenity to me is silly. Overcoming obstacles is common sense logic as far as something being a disability. I am not a disorder label I am much more.

I will be calling the corporate headquarters about the issue and state my concerns. I think they ought to do a PR release on it. To many people in conflict over such small matters instigated by abortion issues. I seriously do not think they will want to provoke attention to the matter.

Are they actually going to do this? If so....YAY!

Do what?

The pre-natal tests. You know, to see if the kid's gonna be autistic. Are they making any progress with that?

It is authentic. Daniel Lightfoot is the director of the autism tissue program for Autism Speaks, and his email reply to me is dated August 13th, 2010. He acknowledged that elective abortions would be an issue with prenatal testing, but nobody, including autism speaks, has investigated the ethical ramifications such testing would create.

For those who know me from the politics or news forums, I treat the forums intended to provide support completely differently.

It's fascinating some would be excited and some would view such a test as enabling abortion. Still however it is covered under the right to treatment advancements. Why if I might ask would you be excited for such a test to exist?

Is this test to you acceptable?

Less autistic kids, more normal ones. I mean I have aspergers, my life growing up was kinda sucky and all I did was waste my mom's money. Hell even now I'm pretty sure that's all I do.

It appears as though Autism Speaks supports research into genetic markers that could be use for such a test. That there has been little success in this venture so far does not change their research interests or intentions.

The only reason that anyone would speak of pre-natal testing in terms of trimesters would be with abortion in mind.

Autism Speaks anticipates the use of pre-natal testing for ASDs for elective abortion.

This is all fairly clear from their email.

I have to go run some errands. I'll try to get back to these questions later tonight. I still have all the emails.

Given the complexity of autism I do not think a prenatal test can be found. I am wondering if their are gene markers that make someone more susceptible to environmental pollution in the womb however. The increase of autism might be explained by increases in environmental pollution along with increased awareness whereas environmental pollution in this time are more dense and collectively in the past fifty or more years have accumulated. It is a theory and not a belief. It does not fit well with pride but I believe in science.

As an issue however it is a back door environmentalism. This by itself may trigger some interest by special interest groups. What environmental groups say should then be backed by facts. However facts still will be very hard to come by in an absolute sense. I have a theory but am not a scientist that if certain genetic manifestions trigger certain responses given certain pollution in the womb altering neurodevelopmental patterns the susceptibility like allergies can also be found in family trees but not necessarily all the time. I still do believe it is potentially remarkably possible autism is several or more different things under one label manifesting broad similarities of potential coincidences.

I like to think out of the box and rid myself of biases for any sort of "emotional" reason.

Ethically if the above proves true even in part should a society ethically alter is industries or tolerate artificial adaptation?

They anticipate the reality that some would use a prenatal test for an abortion, that's a fairly obvious potential with any prenatal test in a country where there is a right to abortion for any reason; the cleft palate analogy in the UK is an excellent one to illustrate this reality, but their specific goal, in the research they support into a potential definitive prenatal test as stated in the email is:




They acknowledge the difficulty environmental influence will make in providing a prenatal test. At the time of the email research suggested that the cause of autism was almost 90% the result of genetics, from a study of twins. Those results have been disputed for years, per Wiki; a recent, much bigger study with twins suggests that environment plays a significantly greater role, potentially greater than 50 percent, along with genetics than previous research suggested.

While their goal continues to be to provide the potential for gestational intervention to correct or temper any developmental abnormalities, through a definitive prenatal test, perinatal environmental factors are now suspected to potentially be an environmental factor, that merits further research. The organization helped support the recent research that led to the findings on environmental influence and autism, as well.

The United States government supports research into a prenatal test, along with Autism Speaks, for this stated goal of gestational intervention to temper developmental abnormalities. With Government support, with or without Autism Speaks contributions in this area, the research will continue, and if the potential is actually there for a definitive prenatal test it will happen regardless if Autism Speaks exists or doesn't exist.

It is likely that many of the same people that support Autism Speaks would continue to support alternate funding avenues for this type of research, if Autism Speaks were to go away. There is already a record of individuals supporting genetic research into Autism, with no affiliation to Autism speaks of at least 1 million dollars. There are are alot of deep pockets out there.

There are estimates of billions of dollars in support that will be needed to meet the future needs of Autistic people with developmental disabilities, by recent governmental reports.

Potential intervention through genetic research or prevention of environmental influence that may lead to developmental disabilities associated with Autism are an area, at this point in time, that the government sees as an issue that must be pursued, per the Combating Autism Act.

First of all: autism/AS is your identity, there's no getting around that. That's not to say it's better than being NT, often it's much more challenging. But just because something makes your life harder doesn't make it a disease or a disability, otherwise we would have to include being female, nonwhite, gay, or transsexual as being diseases/"obstacles to overcome" (in the US anyway). Even if you see it as a negative, without it you wouldn't be you.
The problem with prenatal testing- and it's possible, because every so-called piece of evidence that autism is environmental has either been a hoax or seems trotted out to create lawsuits to me- is that many people, hearing something like "autism," won't do any research and will just abort the fetus. That's their right, but it's just a sad fact of the matter. To find out more about these modern eugenics, read the book "The Short Bus," by Jonathan Mooney.
Most parents want their children to have the easiest, most 'successful' lives possible. That's natural, and it can be a good thing, but when it comes to something like autism, it can be a real setback because they'll make decisions motivated by fear for their child's quality of life, rather than a rational understanding of the situation.

I am a human being and that is my identity. To me to say I am a disorder is insulting to myself but will tolerate others doing it without a fuss. So as long as they do not imply myself. I view autism as the barriers to be overcome so support language like "The war on autism" and "cure".