Autism: A road to recovery?

[flashl]

Questions abound—including whether it is even treatable

To some parents, kidnapping is a near-perfect metaphor to describe the agony of autism. Last year, the Child Study Center at New York University even seized on it for "The Ransom Note" campaign, which tried to raise awareness about autism and other disorders, including depression, bulimia and attention deficit disorder.

"We have your son," read the ominous ransom note, signed by "autism." "We will make sure he will no longer be able to care for himself or interact socially as long as he lives."

The ad, however, was quickly pulled because it generated so much outrage. Though everyone believes a kidnapped child should be returned, a fierce debate is raging over whether autistic children can—and should—"be recovered."

The controversy is baffling and distressing to many parents who understand that there is no "cure" for autism but have found treatments that seem to alleviate some of the physical symptoms and suffering. If your child had leukemia, they think, why on earth wouldn't you try to treat it?

But recovery presumes that autism is something you aren't just born with. Instead, this line of thought goes, you can "get" it, perhaps from vaccines, another controversial notion because mainstream science refutes any link between the ingredients in vaccines—or the number of shots—and autism.

For high-functioning autistics, such as those with Asperger's syndrome, "recovery" is an upsetting concept because it implies they have something to recover from; it's a loss of identity. And for parents, the intoxicating idea that autistic children can get better often adds to the heartbreak. If there's a cure, they're obligated to find it, regardless of the physical, emotional or financial toll on the family.

NY Times

[midnight]

1. This is heartaching to read. For parents everywhere who's

children are not receiving the medical treatment that is possible is a sign in our country that our priorities are unbalanced. To impose on parents this perfect parent syndrom that is exhausting and just wrong no matter if your kids are healthy or not must stop.

[Brotherjohn]

2. My son has Asperger's. I wouldn't change him for anything.

He was different from the day he was born. He does have difficulties because of who he is. Yes, we always work, day in and day out, to alleviate some of his symptoms (to make it easier for him to understand things, to make certain sensory issues more tolerable)... more psychological/neurological than physical symptoms the article mentions. But if I "cured" him (whatever that means) of autism, I don't know what he would be like. Many of the things about his having Asperger's are so intertwined with who he is (the negative AND the postitive) that it would be like losing him.

[juno jones]

3. I have an aspie too.

I feel the same way about him. Thanks for sharing. :hi:

[griffi94]

4. my son is pretty severely autistic

and i don't think i would change him either. i wish he would potty train tho.
the only anguish as far as his autism goes, at least for me. is that he's going to outlive me by probably 40 years. i worry about what will happen to him after i'm released from my mortal coil. but like you his autism is so entwined with him that now i just consider it part of the quirks that make him who he is.

[Orrex]

7. What would you have done if you'd had the option of "treatment" when he was first diagnosed?

I have a terribly difficult time getting my brain around this subject and would value the insights of someone living with it.


Thanks!

[Warpy]

5. When I worked at MIT, Aspies were everywhere

Brilliant in their own fields, they were lost outside them. They were socially inappropriate but always entertaining. I loved asking a question about their field and listening to the "little professor" lecture that followed. It was cheaper than tuition and just as informative as sitting in their classes.

Like all of us boringly normal people, they had strengths and weaknesses. They differed in that their strengths were incredibly strong and their weaknesses were glaringly weak.

I wouldn't change them for the world, either.

[Orrex]

6. I'm really torn about this

On one hand, it seems noble and proper to say that people with ASD are people, so that it's immoral to require them to "recover" from the conditions that define a great portion of their identities.

But...

If someone had a neurological configuration that (for example) rendered her blind or robbed her of her sense of touch, would it be immoral to discuss her "recovery," too? If the individual is capable of making a decision on her own behalf, should she be allowed to do so? What if that person were incapable of feeling or expressing emotions? Would it be immoral to enable her to feel/express them?

And if she is not able to decide for herself, should her guardians/parents have the power to make that choice? Why, or why not?