|
Calling a cure for autism "murder" or "genocide" just reeks of scare-mongering of the exact same variety that Autism Speaks uses. People with autism are not a race, nor is autism their sole defining trait (except perhaps in the severe or most extreme cases) any more than depression or OCD is the sole defining trait of those that have it. If someone who is autistic were somehow cured they would be the same person, just no longer autistic. If that was the same thing as killing them then there are millions of murders ever day whenever drunks and druggies sober up.
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
SedanChair posted:Yes, medicate all who are guilty of thought deviance. So obviously we should withhold and suppress the existence or discovery of treatments for these things, even if the affected want them.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:42
|
|
|
Continuing the thought process of what makes someone a "person", how would one view someone with an addiction? These people can act wildly differently before, during, and after indulging in their addiction. And what about if someone goes through addiction therapy? If successful, they will think and act very differently than when they suffered from their affliction, so does the treatment effectively kill the addicted personality and replace it with the new one? If not, then how is curing something like autism effectively killing them? -EDIT- Xyven posted:This is such a bizarre opinion that I don't understand how you can hold it without collapsing from the contradiction inherent in that statement. If you really considered it a disease you would kiss someone offering to fix it. Break their hand from shaking it. e: Or what Captain_Maclaine said. Who What Now fucked around with this message at 23:06 on Jun 28, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:There is the issue of consent here, talk therapy is a lot different than forcibly medicating someone or doing some brain surgery without getting their input. No one's saying that. But I believe some people are saying that we shouldn't even search for a cure because it would akin to murdering anyone who did elect to take it. Ogmius815 posted:I'm definitely not trying to advocate that people who don't want to be cured should be forced to undergo treatment, only that pursuing a cure is worthwhile. I'd also say it's fine for parents to make children undergo treatment just like it's alright for them to make other medical decisions on their children's behalf. I'm not so sure I would be fine with an adult making this decision for their child after a certain age. It would be one thing to allow parents to administer a cure to their child before the child reaches it's formative age, but another to give it to an autistic child of, say, 11.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:00
|
|
|
splifyphus posted:Rewiring the brains of autistic people would fundamentally change who they are as people, and even they themselves can't effectively make that decision, having no idea what it's like to be anything but what they are. It's not like having a neurotypical brain is so loving wonderful all the time either. Wait, are you actually saying that autistic individuals are completely unable to decide for themselves whether or not they wish to seek treatment for their autism?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:12
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:I'm also not sure the question of who gets to make treatment decisions for autistic individuals is a particularly interesting question- the scenario doesn't seem to raise any issues different from the normal circumstances of individuals with reduced capacity and proxy care decision-making, an area that's pretty well defined legally, at least in the US. Does this include everyone on the autism spectrum, or just the ones who have the most sever symptoms?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:32
|
|
|
Caros posted:Same thing happened with my aunt and my cousin. She is his sole caretaker since her marriage collapsed a decade ago (I don't know why so I won't point fingers). He's got a reasonable level of functionality, he can hold down a mcjob, do basic functions but living on his own would be impossible. In 2010 he got on the wrong bus due to a change in route and he sat on the bus for four hours until the driver had to stop and try and sort things out with him. She is utterly terrified about what his life is going to be like when she's gone and has absolutely given up her own life and dreams to try and make him comfortable. This sounds about the level that my brother-in-law is at. He holds down a simple menial job, and can operate a car just well enough to drive short distances (to work or the store, which because his family live in the country are too far to walk to). But he can't read without someone sitting next to him to read words longer than four syllables to him, he can't monitor his own finances, he can't plan more than a few days in advance without help, and he'll also never live on his own. And when my in-laws grow older, maybe even I'm just 16 or 20 years, he'll have to move in with me and my wife because his other siblings sure won't step up to the plate. And that's a heavy burden that weighs on his parents, not because they hate him or resent him, but because they love and worry about him. They've confided in us a few times that they had prayed every day after they discovered he was autistic that one day he would wake up normal, for his own sake of having a better quality of life than he will ever be able to now. So I feel for those caretakers. Autism Speaks as an organization sounds like total poo poo, but the people they supposedly represent aren't awful people.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 02:57
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Holy canoli git over yourselves. Quit it with the hair-trigger sensitivity to suggestions that the ethics of abortion might, in some cases, be complicated. Every mother, in every single instance, has the right to an abortion, and no one else on earth has the right to interfere. OK? No, it's not ok. But no one can do a single thing to stop them from making that decision for bad reasons, so what's your actual point? Who What Now fucked around with this message at 03:04 on Jun 29, 2014 |
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:01
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Do we normally base our ethical judgment in specific matters on whether or not we can do anything about them? That often plays a role, yes.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:06
|
|
|
It's true that autism is a pretty useless label and does nothing to give anyone a good idea of what to expect, but that doesn't seem like good enough justification to start hand-wringing over the ethics of abortion.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:25
|
|
|
AVeryLargeRadish posted:How so? My personal view is that a woman should be able to abort for any reason at all. But I still think exploring the possible social and ethical issues of enabling people to choose what their child will be like ahead of time is a pretty interesting line of discussion. I'll ask a question I asked in the other thread: is the only way to avoid these supposed ethical issues to only allow abortion if the mother doesn't do any pre-natal testing first?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:30
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Of course, that's exactly how she explained it. But it does mean that there are lots of parents going around saying "my child is autistic" when it isn't true. That's what the words "made up" and "pretend" mean. "Pretend" implies willfully believing, or at least acting as if you believe, something that you know for a fact is not actually true. So no. Parents don't "pretend" that their child is autistic.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 03:59
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:The question devolves into where we draw the line on 'extraordinary suffering' and 'quality of life' as the result of a 'genetic defect'. Something like Tay-Sachs that has a 100% mortality rate within ten years of horrific pain is an easy choice, but where does autism fall? Its a spectrum disorder, not binary, so there are many different degrees. Those falling on the moderate to high functioning end can lead self-sufficient, fulfilling lives and contribute much to the happiness of others and the advancement of society; conversely those on the low-functioning end are often sadly long-suffering. None of this matters when discussing abortion, like the poster your quoting was.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 1, 2014 00:36
|
|
|
Does anyone know about the book "A Shot In The Dark"? My father-in-law just mentioned reading it and wondering about the causal link between vaccines and autism. I'm 100% sure it's bullshit, but has there even been a mass debunking of the book?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 6, 2014 01:39
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:I would have left too if you talk like this at home. Don't neuro-shame.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2014 19:02
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 10, 2024 14:22 |
|
|
GROVER CURES HOUSE posted:Do they even give cows penicillin anymore? I thought pretty much everything a cow could get was already resistant. Maybe he's 75? Did they still use penicillin in the 1940s? Or maybe he had a big bowl of Wheaties before he posted.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2014 15:27
|
|