Things to Come

Attempts to "cure" autism, or to use the less offensive terminology, "unlock" autism, are often focused on identifying "an autism gene". More specifically, the efforts are toward determining if the child will be born with autism. This would be determined prenatally or at birth.

("The Spectrum" generally means the autism Spectrum, including Asperger's syndrome, HFA, PDD and Kanner's autism. Many of us are comfortable with the generic reference of "autistic".)

Abortion as a Cure

"Commercial Eugenics" involves the suggestion that it is possible to identify autistics, a significant aspect of which is prenatal identification and identification of genetic tendencies toward autism.

This is not an anti-abortion site

To the contrary, this considers the mainstream view that abortion should be freely available, including as a means for contraception. If someone is opposed to abortion for religious or other reasons, that is their decision.

Regardless of belief concerning abortion in general, abortion for sex selection and eugenics is quite another matter. This is where the sensationalist treatment of autism as a "tragic defect" is relevant. In order for eugenics to target autism, it is necessary to convince mothers that autism is a defect best treated by termination.

"... or at birth"

While early detection of autism may be useful in helping the child adapt, neonatal detection would have no particular benefits in that regard.

The problem with this is an issue raised by groups who do not distinguish between abortion and infanticide. The terminology "fœtus" is avoided in favour of "baby". The purpose is to eliminate the distinction between the two (baby and fœtus). While the intent may be anti-abortion, it is clear that a majority of the public accept the legality of abortion.

Semantics - "Aborting Babies"

The "baby" terminology may seem like a good idea to anti-abortion groups, and seems elegant in its simplicity. The problem is that it makes a basic presumption which has unintended consequences.

The presumption is that the listener is at least minimally opposed to abortion. Therefore if abortion is immoral when applied to a "fœtus", it would be more immoral if applied to a "baby"; i.e., "Abortion is the same as killing babies."   The problem with these semantics is that it ignores the fact that some people will continue to consider legal abortion to be moral. If those people accept the premise ("fœtus" and "baby" are the same) the "baby" terminology suggests the converse is true -- it's okay to kill newborns because it's by definition it's just a late term abortion. (The anti-abortion movement is unwittingly advancing this concept with a series of "Jill Stanek" stories.)

Therefore when the distinction between "baby" and "fœtus" is erased, infanticide will become an accepted practice. This is particularly relevant to autism because it is unlikely that autism will be detected prenatally. Alternatively, it may be possible to detect a possibility of autism prenatally, but confirm this neonatally.

I leave the semantics of abortion to the R-T-L and Abortion Choice movements. What's relevant here is the result of the "Autism = Tragedy" propaganda, and purpose of the related research.

In the case of autistics, if on organization can convince parents that having an autistic child is a tragic occurrence, then we are looking at eugenics either by abortion or (more likely) at birth.

The "We Speak for Them" Industry

The "Commercial Eugenics Industry" (Autism "Cure" Organisations) are promoting the idea of a cure in terms of:

1. "Unlocking the Autism Puzzle
2. Finding out what took your child away and gave you an autistic child instead

   This has historic precedent in the "Changeling" legend. The "Changeling" concept has metamorphized into such explanations as the thimerosal vaccine controversy. (Autistics may be particularly sensitive to mercury, but there is no basis for the claim that the MMR vaccine or thimerosal can cause autism.)

3. Finding the "Cause" of autism
4. A "Cure"

Accommodation; Not Termination

The "Commercial Eugenics Industry" is harmful to autistics because it sidesteps accommodation with the concept of, "unlocking the Puzzle of Autism". Autism is no more a puzzle than any other personality type. It's the way the person is.

Some autistic children are "difficult". That doesn't mean they should be terminated, anymore than a "difficult" NT child should be terminated. The particular aspects attributable to autism are very easily addressed by understanding the nature of the child; more particularly by understanding the nature of some of the child's autistic traits. The "cure" is to rear the child.

---

Links

US Presidential Campaign

More on the index page for this site

The McCain campaign claims to be anti-abortion, but pointedly has taken an official position of promotion of "early screening" when it comes to autism. Presumably, they're anti-abortion except when it comes to autism.

"As President, John McCain will work to advance federal research into autism, promote early screening..." - John McCain - Combating Autism in America

opposed to eugenics

Commercial Eugenics   (also here (Tripod.com site))

From "Whose Planet Is It Anyway?"   The abortion debate that wasn't - Under the radar, pregnancies increasingly are being terminated when fetuses are prenatally diagnosed with disabilities"

Autistic Genocide Clock

examples of the "cure" approach

"Ready or not, here come genetic tests for autism"

This article indicates that, except for conditions such as Retts syndrome, the testing is limited to "hindsight" searching for a genetic cause. It also states that the information may be harmful. Nevertheless, they state:

"Genetic tests 'are absolutely ready for prime time,' says Arthur Beaudet, chair of molecular and human genetics at Baylor College of Medicine in Houston, Texas."

The obvious conclusion is that "early screening" means a very serious attempt at eliminating autistics.

back to index

Written 4-Feb-07 and first posted 20-Jul-08. Last revised 1-Oct-08.

Questions - see FAQs.