[PEN-L:30268] RE: Re: McCloskey & Post-Autism

["Devine, James" <jdevine@xxxxxxx>]

Title: RE: [PEN-L:30113] Re: McCloskey & Post-Autism

It took me a long time to get back to this.  I'm going to keep it short.

I wrote:>>Though I say below that "autistic economics" is bad economics, I don't think autism is "bad" in any moral sense. The latter is only bad in the sense that it's bad _for them_ if some people are unable to survive in society by their own efforts rather than being treated all the time by parents and/or experts of one sort or another. A hard-core individual with autism cannot survive without a lot of help, continuous help. <<

Doyle wrote:> I agree this is not a moral issue.  When I talk bigotry I mean the social structure that reinforces oppressive structures.  The prejudicial thinking process that cannot bend and accept reality.  Moral thinking gets us nowhere in regard to understanding what happens to disabled people.<

I am going to focus on autism alone.

>However you drift here toward a stereo type about disability. You focus upon the need for support a disability requires, and forget in saying that none of us in this system can survive with a lot of continuous help.  The image you conjure is that an able bodied person  can be turned out into the world naked (without substantial attachment to their society) and survive.  I have a car to drive to work that major industries produce, and a bus to work that I do not drive.  None of that  would I have without the current economic system.  Keep that in mind when you start talking about the tremendous support a disability requires.  Your comment stigmatizes the support system disabled people have in relation to the support system able bodied people use and equally depend upon for their survival.  ...<

Of course all of us are dependent (such says basic economics). It's a matter of degree! But the fact is that most of us not only _get from_ the system (and are thus dependent on) the system, but also _give to_ that system. Given the current set-up, someone with hard-core autism has a hard time doing anything but _getting_. If you're overwhelmed by sensory stimuli and can't prioritize them (as with autism), and the system isn't handling your "disability" well (as per usual), then you're totally dependent. Similarly, those with multiple sclerosis (for example) are more dependent than those who don't have it.  There's nothing "equal" about the degree of dependence.

It's a mistake to deny that disabled people are more dependent than those for whom society is well-adapted  -- i.e., those who have similar physical and mental abilities to those who built the society and, more importantly, those who made the decisions about how to build society.

The bits about "stereotyping" and "stigmatizing" are also totally off-base. First, stereotyping refers to ignoring individual differences to focus on shared characteristics, some idealized picture of a disorder. I do NOT ignore the individual differences among people with autism. One of the basic things one learns in the "autism community" is that every individual with autism is different - just as every "neurotypical" individual is different. Also, no-one fits the diagnosis exactly at the same time that some have more than one diagnosis.  Diagnoses only suggest a set of questions to ask and a set of treatments to try. They don't add up to the sum total of anyone's identity. People have to be treated as subjects (makers of their own lives), not just as objects (victims, products of society and/or nature).

Second, the accusation of stigmatization is just a distraction from the real problem. I once attended an Individualized Education Program meeting concerning my son (who has borderline autism, what's known as Asperger's Syndrome). The folks from the school district said that they didn't want to "stigmatize" him. This was total BS! What they didn't want to do was to stretch the district's budget by spending more on him than they had to. The real issue is NOT stigmatization - though that can be a problem - but (1) the fact that no-one wants to spend any resources on special education, mental health, etc.; and (2) the fact that there are a lot of misguided approaches to therapy and education (e.g. Freudian psychoanalysis) that are still being used.

There are a lot of folks with autism - though they hardly form a majority - who survive or even do well in society, despite their disabilities. But to get them to that situation, a lot of work has to be done, a lot of resources have to be used.

There are also easy and direct educational ways to deal with stigmatization. If other kids meet my son, they very quickly get beyond any stereotypes, so that simply having kids talk about Asperger's helps a lot. Unlike parents, who tend to reify the diagnoses, the kids seem to care about the most important things (until they get to junior high).

Jim Devine