Autism council.

Post Reply New Topic

Ok, I'm fed up, and I know a lot of you are too, with NT's taking action "for autistic's." Why should NT's, who don't know what is going on in out heads, be in charge of how autism is represented? Shouldn't the autistic community be in charge of debates such as vaccines? I mean while yes having autism does make life hard, if a majority of autistic's support being vaccinated shouldn't that be the end of it? And is aspies want Asperger's syndrome put back in the DSM-5, shouldn't it? Why are blog mom's and celebrities in charge of how autism is perceived? I say that an online body such as wrongplanet be given authority over these matters. Of course a forum board wouldn't be an ideal governing body, I think that the autistic community needs to tell the NT's who's in charge of our lives. I'm not saying that autistic's are better than NT's but I AM saying that the people who should get the final say in matters regarding autism should be autistic's.

I believe what you mean to support is an advocacy group along the lines of the autism-rights movement ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autism_rights_movement ) that got started in the late 1980s to "communicate the anti-cure or autism rights perspective[.]" More recently, the Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autistic_ ... cy_Network ) was created in 2006 to achieve "the goal of autism advocacy should be a world in which Autistic people enjoy the same access, rights, and opportunities as all other people, and that Autistic voices should be included in the national conversation about autism." ASAN has had its successes and helps improve state and federal legislation and regulations, among other things including speaking out against Autism Speaks. Joining ASAN is free to people with ASD, but it relies on contributions to continue its work.

I support ASAN and would enthusiastically support a more strident non-partisan advocacy group.

Since the world's population is made up of people with and without autism, perhaps the most effective Council would be one on which both groups were represented. That way it should be possible to achieve a consensus. But I think that Aspiens should always have the casting vote. A lot of - but not all - autism organisations are run by people on the spectrum and NTs.

For adults it would be be helpful but I do not see the consensus that parental decisions involving their children are sacrosanct(unless their is an extraordinary circumstance) changing.

Just one council to speak for all of us? No. A council to help us speak for ourselves? Yes. Just be careful, as with anything in life, that Autism Speaks people don't infiltrate it.

What do you mean by "authority?" It is a word I've grown to dislike. "The exaltation of the creative will instills an indiscriminate contempt for authority."

Kinda. "Council" sounds great. "Authority" not so much. The following quote seems apropos.

Here's what I had in mind as to what this council would have power to do:
•Reject "treatments" that are proposed

•Reject "causes" that have been identified (i.e. say that vaccines and gluten don't cause autism and that would be the end of it)

•Approve support organization that the majority of the council believes has the right idea and can help make a beneficial difference in the lives of autistics

•Advise legislation on laws regarding autism (and maybe other neurological disorders later on)

•Raise funds and donate them to help families with autistic members who need the support

And those are just some of the possibilites