Green Gecko wrote:Karl wrote:
As a scientist how do you feel about this sort of thing? I think it's comparable to eugenics trying to cure, or promoting a made up effort to "cure" in no way supported by any science whatsoever, neurodivergent conditions like autism in order to effectively eradicate people with a permanently different type of brain. It presents a real threat to turning parents and adults away from the care they and their children need and all legitimate socially progressive movements of inclusivity and diversity in the past 50+ years, such as the Autism Act and the work of charities such as Scope and the National Autistic Society to raise awareness.
And yes, the same group running the venue are super into anti-vaccination and blaming heavy metal poisoning and microwaves for every health condition known to man, because, Fa cebook told them so.
I think exactly the same as you do on this, I think:
1. "Alternative medicine" is a very dangerous movement. People should seek real medical advice if they need it.
2. I think that disorders such as autism should be treated with social support and, if necessary, medication for management of secondary symptoms like anxiety.
If there were a magic pill an expecting mother could take to make sure the baby is neurotypical, that would make me feel very uncomfortable. I think in general we should celebrate neurodiversity, recognising that yes it can be challenging to be a neurodivergent person, but that those different ways of seeing the world are inherently valuable.
However, I recognise very severe, extreme autism can result in fundamental learning disability and a limited quality of life. That isn't typical of autism but it can happen. If a line could be drawn and only these very most severe cases "cured", I would at least consider the argument for it, that maybe the person would be thankful ultimately.