Tweet
As far as the cure argument is concerned, it's a bit more complicated than that. See, some people seem full-fledged autistic as children, but as they grow up they decide to come out of their shell on their own. Only there's no way to tell that in advance, and anyway parents don't want the emotional and financial version of raising an incapacitated child, no matter how the kid turns out.
Enter Applied Behavioral Analysis therapy, which involves expensive, very intensive (tens of hours per week) sessions with a shrink as the kid is growing up, being socialized. I've yet to find a consistent, unbiased opinion on the therapy--aspie advocates say it's cruel or doesn't work, behaviorists of course beg to differ. I don't know. But the basic premise of the therapy seems fishy; if you're autistic, you know the disorder is pretty firmly grounded in neurological causes. Some of the major theories have been mentioned in this thread already. Parents of autistic kids often "just know" that there's a normal child trapped inside the autistic core, and they get defensive very quickly if anyone claims otherwise. Personally, I find it hard to imagine that ABA does more than turn the child into an elaborate performing animal.
There are "success stories" for the treatment, but few that cover the long-term. The use of aversives, e.g. physical pain, was only discontinued a little over a decade ago, and there's an argument over whether it works now, or if it ever worked at all. Factor in cases where treated autistics went bonkers later in life, plus the extreme emotional force hanging from both sides, and you've got a really messy argument. And that's just for a form of treatment. There's a whole different ethical mess involved in genetic cures, special diets, and selective abortions.
Enter Applied Behavioral Analysis therapy, which involves expensive, very intensive (tens of hours per week) sessions with a shrink as the kid is growing up, being socialized. I've yet to find a consistent, unbiased opinion on the therapy--aspie advocates say it's cruel or doesn't work, behaviorists of course beg to differ. I don't know. But the basic premise of the therapy seems fishy; if you're autistic, you know the disorder is pretty firmly grounded in neurological causes. Some of the major theories have been mentioned in this thread already. Parents of autistic kids often "just know" that there's a normal child trapped inside the autistic core, and they get defensive very quickly if anyone claims otherwise. Personally, I find it hard to imagine that ABA does more than turn the child into an elaborate performing animal.
There are "success stories" for the treatment, but few that cover the long-term. The use of aversives, e.g. physical pain, was only discontinued a little over a decade ago, and there's an argument over whether it works now, or if it ever worked at all. Factor in cases where treated autistics went bonkers later in life, plus the extreme emotional force hanging from both sides, and you've got a really messy argument. And that's just for a form of treatment. There's a whole different ethical mess involved in genetic cures, special diets, and selective abortions.
Comment