Demographics of who does/doesn't want a cure

Post Reply New Topic

Score yourself based on what others call you for "functioning level." Specifically, others who don't know your feelings about a cure or don't care. If you're NT, I'm asking whether you want a cure for autism, not a cure for NT-ness.

I'm between moderate-high functioning and I don't give a lot of thought for a cure. It just seems a bazillion years away.
I like to joke that the cure for autism will be in the form of a vaccine. But I rarely tell this to people because they may get offended.

There are things I can't stand like not being able to read a single page because I lack focus so I take supplements.
Then there are my sensory issues that make me meltdown a lot. Anything to alleviate that would be great.
Then there is my fear of change which I've got to deal with on my own.

I don't want to be normal though. I love my interests. But I still don't like many of my symptoms.

I dislike the word cure. It implies a simplistic answer to a complex problem. Low function autistics need a lot of assistance. Even high functioning autistics need a combination of things to go right (support, education, opportunity, etc) to navigate this world. Dividing the autistic community into cure and anti-cure camps seems counterproductive. There is plenty of work to be done without fighting over who is doing the best job.

In terms of "looking normal" when walking down the street or talking to me for less than 30 seconds (on most days), I probably fit most people's idea of "high-functioning." (Ok, sometimes I think people think I'm brain damaged, but that doesn't happen too frequently.)

OTOH, I heard a while ago that since I wouldn't be able to help people with their marital or high-level career problems, I would be too low-functioning to run a GRASP chapter. Also on SSDI+SSI, and live with relatives. So, in some people's eyes, I'm apparently "low functioning."

But anyway, I don't expect a cure in my lifetime, so I don't think about it much. And even if there was one, I have 40 years of experience in using my brain as it is. I don't think I'd want to start over at this point. And maybe the result would be realizing a bunch of new possibilities -- that I can't have because I'm told old and missed my chance long ago. In that case it might be better to stay un-cured.

In my darker moments, I figure that if I intend to off myself anyway, then sure, what the hell -- bring on the cure. If it doesn't work out, nothing lost.

A cure for depression would be great, though.

Overall, I don't have a hard opinion about it. I can see the destructiveness of a mindset overly-focused on cure, though. It's too easy to end up neglecting the here-and-now reality while pining away for a cure that may never exist.

Agreed. I guess I'm high-functioning since I got through 50 years without anyone putting a name to my "behaviour" but I can't imagine living life any other way.

I'm high-functioning and I want a cure. If all of my social problems and issues with daily living went away, it wouldn't change who I am. It would just allow me to work a job and live a more independent life.

High functioning and anti-cure.

In my opinion Autism is at least, in part, a developmental condition. I don't think a cure is a realistic expectation for those that already have the condition, but enhanced intervention and treatment seem to be realistic goals, that may be assisted by continued research. Personally I can't imagine a life without Autism; the positives outweighed the negatives, and for most of my life I never wished I was anyone but me. If a cure was available, I would not have accepted it.

My perspective is different on severely debilitating Autism. I can't imagine being trapped in a body with sensory overload and not being able to communicate it effectively. I can imagine being institutionalized for life and to me this seems like a fate worse than death. I had a child born with many congenital anomalies associated with Autism. It seemed possible that one day he might need the care that an institution could provide, but I hoped I would be able to provide the care he needed. He passed away and I was not tested on this ability.

If there had been anything I could of done to provide a cure for him, I would of done it, because he was my child. I can understand the driving force behind the desire for a cure that many parents of severely debilitated Autistic children have.

Does anybody even know what a cure would actually do? We should be careful not to think that a cure is a solution to our difficulties. If autism is indeed neurological and not psychiatric, then it cannot be cured without changing the brain on a physical level. This, by definition, will change how the different regions of the brain interact, how the external world is perceived and processed, what we think and feel. There is enough research to show that even small strokes can effect changes in personality. All a stroke is is a change in brain structure.

I don't want a cure or not want a cure. I just want to be content with myself and my life. Would curing autism cure my unease and frustration? I doubt it. Nothing about my current opportunities, relationships, finances or other facets of my life would change with a cure. I would still have plenty of work to do. I would not be able to go back in time and gain things missed. I have a life time of learned behaviors expressly created for dealing with a world foreign to me. I would have to unlearn these behaviors since the are needed by an autistic mind, not a cured autistic mind.

Cure? I don't think such a thing is possible without changing everything that defines me. Would I lose my non-linear creative thinking? Would I lose my ability to draw photo realistic artwork? Can you say the neurology that makes this world a strange place to me is not the same that also gives me those talents?

Be careful what you wish for.

I wish for things to be better than they are right now. But I will not "pay any price" for that. I reserve the right to choose the course of my life. If something comes along that helps me without sacrificing my essential me-ness I will consider it. But I will not blindly chase after something because I am so miserable in my own skin that I have to be something else no matter the cost.

I would like to see a cure for the most severe cases, in which people cannot perform basic functions in life and rely on their family or the government to take care of them or for whom Autism causes them to engage in self harm or for those who desire to be cured, wherever they may lie on the spectrum. But I am against a cure for those who can function on their own, and who have no desire to be cured. Overall, I think AS has had a positive effect on my life, that outweighs the negative (dyspraxia and executive dysfunction are completely different stories), but there are some behaviors I would like to moderate such as stimming and pacing, which I find incredibly annoying and often inconveniences me. I definately don't want to be lobotomized, but I wouldn't mind taking medication from time to time to control those behaviors.

I am neither pro or anti cure. It is entirely up to the individual what they want done. I don't feel like I need a cure, personally. I have some outstanding qualities I don't wish to lose!

I don't agree with the idea of a cure overall. Not in an autism-specific way, but because of how I view disability in general. There are conditions I do want a cure for but far fewer than people might think even in conditions that most people see as all negative. Society molds our values to tell us that the problems disabled people face are individual and need entirely medical, individual solutions. But many of our problems are caused by living in a society that shuts us out and declares our needs "special" and "medical".

That said I think it should be a person's choice. But even so, many people who think they are making a choice are just repeating the ableist values of the society they live in. And that worries me. Choice isn't always as free as it looks.

So I voted anti-cure. And reluctantly voted low functioning because that's the sort of thing most people who've seen me, call me, including professionals. But I reject functioning labels entirely for my own self-definition.

I am however a person "who cannot perform basic functions in life and relies on the government..." etc. And seriously sick of hearing people describe people like me as if we must need a cure in ways that no other sort of autistic person does. Gets depressing to have people supposedly of "my own kind" with just as many stereotypes as most nonautistic people.

pensieve, could you be more specific about sensory issues? Maybe I or someone else does know what to do.

IdahoRose, does that mean you don't feel that there are good points? Like, for me, I feel like special interests and high tolerance for being alone both go with the territory of being autistically-wired, and I'm sure it has something to do with how I seem to not make the same assumptions (some true, some false) as other people and have to actually figure a bunch of stuff out. I'd never want to change those things.

aghogday, I'm sorry for your loss. This is going to come out really insensitive, but how old was he? I mean, are we talking a kid that was still learning lots of stuff? The other thing that bothers me is that people who have trouble communicating don't get to communicate their wishes on the matter. And that just bothers me, that any cure would necessarily be administered without informed consent. On the other hand, not doing something is itself doing something...

I basically feel pretty similarly to wavefreak58, with the added point that some of the best benefits are probably caused by the same things as the worst negatives, so even if you could pick and choose traits...

Ariela, it worries me that you said "rely on their family or the governent to take care of them OR for whom autism causes them to engage in self-harm OR for those who desire to be cured" but "those who can function on their own AND who have no desire to be cured." Would you support an involuntary cure for someone who relies on other people? Because what you'd be saying then is "people who need other people to help them in life should be forcibly transformed into people who don't." But if I follow that line of logic, extraverts should be transformed into introverts (so they don't need people to socialize with them); people who need other people to grow their food should be transformed into plants (so they can photosynthesize); people who use computers they didn't make should be forced to learn how to create and program their own or made to not use computers... We have to accept that people will need other people, some more than others, because we can't possibly have everyone be totally independent. Society benefits from having a balance between independence and dependence. Overall, some redundancy and self-sufficiency is required and should be done by every individual who can, but you're going to rely on someone. And before you say that it's different if it's the government, what about the roads? What about public schools?

anbuend, odd as this sounds, I don't agree with the idea of functioning levels either. That's why I specifically asked what people are considered by other people; if I asked what you are, the poll would require an infinite number of options on a non-linear scale taking into account life circumstances, desires, type as well as severity of impairment, happiness... too much work. But specifically what you're considered, not what you are. And now I know this is going to sound really odd, but I can see Ariela's point to some extent; if you're not working, not paying taxes, but receiving money and labor from the government, it does look rather unfair. Much as I object to the idea that this puts people in some special category of awfulness, where do you get the money? Why bother? (In your case specifically, I could make the argument that you benefit the society and therefore it's to our advantage to keep you alive, but where does that leave people for whom no one can or will make such an argument? Surely they don't deserve to be stuck in institutions or killed, but the logistics of what to do instead...) Perhaps you could make it the family's responsibility, but not all families are able. Taxes? But then you're telling people who can make money to support a general and vague "those who can't" and not letting them decide which they think deserve their money, which is so not how a democracy should work, but on the other hand why should they object?

...Am I arguing both sides of this debate?

High functioning, and I am so gona take a cure if there is one. The problem is I don't know how can it cure what's already been damaged. Years of AS is years.

DandelionFireworks I am specifically referring to people who are severely autistic who cannot communicate in any form and cannot perform basic functions in life and who rely on the society to provide for them but who cannot give back. If society is required to take of severely autistic people who cannot provide anything in return, than all autistics and autistic traits will be seen as a liability regardless of all the higher functioning Autistics.

Noise and visual stimuli mostly. Photosensitivity. I have a bit of tactile and smell issues too but they're not as bad as noise and photosensitivity. Although everytime I think I smell something I get it wrong and most of the time smell burning.

I'm one of those people that can't take care of myself though people think I can so I'm forced into situations where I'm the only one who can take care of me, unless I ask people for help. My communication skills are pretty low these days so that is not likely to happen.
I'm content in myself though. When people become disappointed in me it makes me want to change.