Comment by Scandiravian | Hacker News Reader

Comment by Scandiravian | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

OP here

The main issue I see with this line of thinking is that there is an underlying/implicit assumption that there is something wrong with being autistic

Society has the mental disorders it creates, i.e. autism is only viewed as a disorder because it doesn't fit into the societal structures we have built

Not long ago being gay was considered a mental disorder - should we try to find a cure for homosexuality?

Most neurotypical people who I see argue for "a cure" want one because they don't want a society where there is room for people who experience the world in a different way and therefore have different views than themselves

Said more plainly, they're bigots and they have no qualms berating, scolding, and making fun of an autistic person until said person believes they are actually in need of fixing. If someone who faces discrimination and bullying every day asked to be "cured", are they actually making an informed choice or are they being forced by society?

There is nothing wrong with being autistic and it shouldn't be necessary for myself and other autistic people to justify our existence based on things like economic output

As I pointed out in my original post, I am conflicted about the potential for a "cure". For asd-3 it could potentially be revolutionary in terms of quality of life, but with the discrimination I myself experience and what I hear from other autistic people, not to mention the political situation around the world, I do not trust that this will actually be used to help us. It would be used to control us because other people somehow believe we're broken

There's nothing wrong with being autistic, that's not my assumption and I don't want to "fix" anyone. You're preaching to the choir about the bigots and you're right to be skeptical. I'd never trust anyone who campaigns against autism the way RFK Jr. did (for example). He's clearly just using autism as a political pawn and whatever their underlying motivation might be, I know they that their real intentions are impure so any research they touch is automatically tainted.

Hopefully that clarifies my position on this?

On the flip side I strongly support real scientific research into the treatments of all causes of human suffering, one of them being autism.

To put it simply before diving deeper: Regardless of everything else, I support research into these treatments/cures because there are people who desperately want them, and because their lives would be saved/drastically improved if they had them.

---

A plurality of people with autism experience crisis-level distress. It's been a while since I looked at the research, but from what I remember, the rate of suicidal ideation is worse for people who have a lower level of impairment/support needs. The rate of suicide among people with autism is something like ~5x higher and in some subgroups (lower support needs, comorbid disorders) I believe it's even higher than that - closer to ~10x.

That is why I want there to be a cure for autism, and ADHD, and every ailment that exists. Without it many people experience so much suffering that they have little choice but to kill themselves.

---

I have ADHD so these sorts of discussions affect me directly. People frequently call it a superpower and talk about how great it is. Public discussion is inherently biased towards perspectives of those who are least affected since they participate more and communicate clearly.

The net effect is that people who suffer the least have the loudest voices, they simultaneously reject the idea of treatment without consideration for those who have it worse, and they tend to antagonize people who are worse off for merely suggesting that the disorder is something that anyone would want to get rid of.

I hope you can see how that's problematic?

I think this is an "correlation does not mean causation" situation

Is the rate of suicide higher among autistic people because they are autistic or because they face discrimination due to the way we've structured society?

One of the reasons why we've seen a large increase in people getting diagnosed with autism in recent years is that society, work environments especially, have become much more demanding. Someone who, 30 years ago, would have been able to function at a high level at home and at work would like struggle much more today

This is not the only reason for the increase in diagnoses, but it's definitely a part of it

The question is then; are these increased demands an inevitability, a law of nature if you will, or is it something we can choose to change?

This is what I mean when I say that society get the mental disorders it creates

There is also a significant higher rate of suicide for the homosexual part of the population compared to the heterosexual part, so again I have to ask: should we "cure" homosexuality?

I have said throughout the thread that I'm conflicted about a "cure". I do believe it could help some people immensely, but for many more people what would help more is a kinder and more compassionate society, where the default assumption isn't that if autistic people don't want to burn out, then they're the ones who'll have to be "fixed"

> should we "cure" homosexuality?

Homosexuality is also on a spectrum, and at no point does someone on that spectrum stop functioning in society because they’re gay. Being gay is only an issue because of those around them, there is nothing to “cure”.

The same cannot be said about being high on the ASD scale. Someone high on this scale will have trouble staying alive without a support system, and medicine could be a component of that system.

For the majority of autistic people (ASD-1), their issues are also solely caused by those around them

As I said in my original post that spawned this thread (and I think in one or two other posts as well), people who are ASD-3 is a case where I would hope we could get better treatment options, but I'm worried about the implications such a "cure" would have for the ASD-1 part of the population

My question about whether we should cure homosexuality is naturally preposterous, exactly because the issues they face are exclusively caused by their surroundings

When the poster I responded cited a high suicide rate among autistic people as support for why a "cure" should be pursued as well as equating it to other "disorders/diseases/illness" in general, I wanted to highlight the absurdity of such a line of reasoning

My main point is that shit is complicated. There are people who need and deserve better treatment options, but ignoring how people who have not conformed to societal expectations have been treated throughout history (and in many cases continues to be treated) is foolish and dangerous

It’s an absurd comparison because homosexuality is not a disorder. Full stop. It’s a non-sequiter to compare it to something that is. I’m not trying to pick on you for this, but it’s something the LGB community has been trying to get across for a long time.

You’re right that it could have implications for ASD-1, and I sympathize, but those higher on the spectrum are also the least able to advocate for themselves. Having another medical option to support them is a good thing.

Whether something is classified as a disorder is imho irrelevant. In the US homosexuality was classified as a disorder until 1973. As I've said repeatedly, society has the mental disorders it creates

In a society where the nuclear family is seen as the highest ideal and the natural state of being, anyone who is not cis and straight will be seen as someone that needs to be changed, which is why homosexuality was considered a disorder

When you have a society where capital is king and a lot of people genuinely believe that your personal productivity is a measure of your worth, anyone who do not function in the resulting "hussle-culture" will be seen as someone that will need to be changed

Yes, being autistic and homosexual are two completely different things, but treating a social construct, such as a disorder classification as natural law is just as idiotic now as it was in 1970

Whether or not people with ASD-1 are more capable of advocating for themselves is completely irrelevant if our concerns can be dismissed outright by anyone claiming to speak for ASD-3

It shows a complete disregard for the discrimination that is already occurring today which affects every verbal autistic person I know, myself included

It's a way to essentially refuse to deal with considerations such as how many people with an ASD-1 diagnosis should we as a society accept being treated, not because they actually want the treatment for themselves, but because they're subjected to social control

> Whether something is classified as a disorder is imho irrelevant. Homosexuality was classified as a disorder until 1973. As I've said repeatedly, society has the mental disorders it creates.

I believe where we’re drifting apart is that ASD *not* just a social construct. Higher levels of ASD are demonstrably more difficult or even impossible to deal without a support system.

This is not the case with homosexuality, where society simply has to stop marginalizing them for liking who they like . There is no issue with being “too gay” that society didn’t create.

Someone at the high-end of the ASD spectrum simply cannot thrive without support.

I’m very much in support of those with ASD1, and do not wish to “fix” them or even think there’s something fix in the first place. However, they’re also the most able to advocate for themselves. We can’t forget the ones that truly need help, and medicine can be one avenue for that.

It's great that you believe that asd-1 should not be fixed. Plenty of people do think we need fixing and this "cure" would be the tool they'd need for that

If this does not at the minimum give pause to consider how societies historically have acted towards people who have not conformed, then I don't think you actually understand the discrimination most people with asd-1 face on a daily basis

You can argue all you want that it's good for people with asd-3. I have agreed with that at every step. Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point, that our concerns will not be listened to and we could end in a situation where people are pressured to treatment through negative social control

> "Using it to silence genuine concerns from people with asd-1 is kind of proving my point..."

If you believe advocating for ASD3 means silencing ASD1 then we'll just agree to disagree, but I do appreciate the conversation.

I don't, but your argument as presented is that the concerns expressed by myself and others with asd-1 are irrelevant because a "cure" could help people with asd-3

Since people with asd-3 can't speak for themselves, others are allowed to speak for them and as a result everyone is essentially allowed to ignore the concerns of people with asd-1 as long as they hide behind representing asd-3

I've argued for asd-3 throughout, so if you respond with a disagreement, the only part you're essentially disagreeing with is my expression of concern about how it will impact asd-1. Pitting me as opposed to treatment of asd-3 is a complete and utter strawman

Reply on news.ycombinator.com