A "cure" for Autism:

Total posts: [189]
1
2 3 4 5 6 ... 8
1 IanExMachina7th Jan 2011 08:29:25 AM from Gone with the Chickens
The Paedofinder General
Let's say that scientists developed a method of developed a way to alter the neurology of those on the autistic spectrum so that they become "neurotypical".

This would be hailed by some as a "cure" for autism that allows them/their family/others to have a higher standard of living.

For others this would be seen as treating a difference as a disease that needs to be cured and, effectively changing someone personality.

What would your opinion on this be if it occurred?

Personally I don't agree with the idea of autism as a disease or anything that needs to be "cured".
However as long as the procedure was only allowed to be carried with the the person's consent I'd let each individual choose.

Edit: As for those who are low functioning, whoever has the power/right to their consent then would have to make the choice.

edited 7th Jan '11 9:08:14 AM by IanExMachina

By the powers invested in me by tabloid-reading imbeciles, I pronounce you guilty of paedophilia!
2 storyyeller7th Jan 2011 08:36:34 AM from Appleloosa , Relationship Status: RelationshipOutOfBoundsException: 1
More like giant cherries
What about low functioning people?
Life is simple: it has no nontrivial normal subgroups.
3 IanExMachina7th Jan 2011 08:37:59 AM from Gone with the Chickens
The Paedofinder General
[up]

If there were unable to legally give consent, I'd guess whoever supported/had the power to give the consent would have to weigh it up.
By the powers invested in me by tabloid-reading imbeciles, I pronounce you guilty of paedophilia!
4 Bur7th Jan 2011 08:56:40 AM from Flyover Country , Relationship Status: Not war
Yeah, I automatically thought of low-functioning as well. For that it's not just a difference, it's a massive disability and a very heavy burden, though some people, through delusion or just being saintly, don't think of having to take care of someone until their dying day a burden.
Is it right to get plastic surgery? Is it right to take drugs to make you feel happier? Is it right to do anything that alters who you are profoundly in order to make yourself into a "better" person?

I don't know, personally. :p
See ALL the stars!
All newborns with the diagnostic should be cured, IMO. Not sure about anyone whose lived with the condition/disease/oddity.
Da Rules excuse all the inaccuracy in the world. Listen to them, not me.
7 IanExMachina7th Jan 2011 09:30:08 AM from Gone with the Chickens
The Paedofinder General
[up][up][up]

Well I've edit/fixed my OP. Would you suggest to those that care for people who are low functioning to give consent for the treatment then?

By the powers invested in me by tabloid-reading imbeciles, I pronounce you guilty of paedophilia!
8 Pykrete7th Jan 2011 10:27:50 AM from Viridian Forest
NOT THE BEES
The problem with this is that if you're going to cure it, it would by necessity have to be very early on, prior to social development. Saying "wait for their informed consent" means waiting until after they've already lost their most crucial years of learning social interaction. I can say from experience that particular area of development is by far one of the hardest to fix after the damage has been done.

edited 7th Jan '11 10:30:06 AM by Pykrete

9 IanExMachina7th Jan 2011 10:34:17 AM from Gone with the Chickens
The Paedofinder General
[up]

I honestly am stumped about what I feel should happen around birth, as on one hand it takes away their choice (and seems pretty eugenicy). On the other hand it may improve their quality of life significantly.

By the powers invested in me by tabloid-reading imbeciles, I pronounce you guilty of paedophilia!
Mate Griffon To Mare
I'd refuse the cure.

All newborns with the diagnostic should be cured, IMO. Not sure about anyone whose lived with the condition/disease/oddity.

But that's long before you can determine if the individual is high or low functioning. High-functioning autism may confer disadvantages in social skills, but it also provides complimentary advantages in systemizing. Plus, most high-functioning autistic people have a lot of focus and determination when working on a subject that interests/fixates them. And a lot of those people have, due to that focus and determination on a subject of obsession/fixation/interest, a lot of high-functioning autistic people have made important contributions, like those of Temple Grandin and Albert Einstein. You wouldn't want to remove that from society, would you?
"All pain is a punishment, and every punishment is inflicted for love as much as for justice." — Joseph De Maistre.
I Care Not...
In terms of public policy, overwhelming state interest would be predominate. Treatment should be both state funded and compulsory, much like other children's vaccines.
"I didn't steal it; I'm borrowing it until I die."
12 Deboss7th Jan 2011 11:24:40 AM from Awesomeville Texas
I see the Awesomeness.
Other children's vaccines aren't like that.
13 pvtnum117th Jan 2011 11:25:39 AM from Kerbin low orbit , Relationship Status: We finish each other's sandwiches
OMG NO NOSECONES
My coworker was put on Ritalin for his ADD when he was in high school. Coming from a creative and talented family, his mom freaked out over the personality change he exhibited - no love for music, quit writing poetry, stuff like that. Yes, his grades went up, but she demanded that the doctor ceased the medication treatment.

I'm wondering if we'd run into instances similiar to that with an autism treatment, for the high-functioning ones, specifically. We kill the thing that made them who they were. What is gained as a result? What is lost? Is it tradeoff worth it? Is the beauty of a flawed jewel any more or less than one that has been artificially created?

EDITS - i kant spel

edited 7th Jan '11 11:26:33 AM by pvtnum11

Happiness is zero-gee with a sinus cold.
14 lordGacek7th Jan 2011 11:52:02 AM from Kansas of Europe
KVLFON
I'll say something controversial now. *steps up a soapbox*

Back in the day, when I was a child, autism was about those who have a problem with functioning among people, and Asperger's was unheard of. On the other hand, all the cool kids and their dog had a paper for dyslexia — I was one of the few who hadn't, though I'm pretty sure I could had I tried.

Now the dyslexia is out of fashion, but Aspergers and autisms are all the rage.

So what I'm talking about, is that it's like every single quirk is Someone's Syndrome or Something's Disorder. Nerd, geek? Nah, it's Asperger's. Too lazy to learn your grammar? Nah, it's dyslexia ("soyr fro teh tpoyes im dlysxecic o.O"). Unruly and misbehaving? ADHD.

I understand some people really do have their problems. It's okay. Some have, nothing we can do with it, save for making appropriate treatment available. But it's as if, like in this saying, the world divided into those who have a disorder and those who weren't yet diagnosed.

/rant
"Atheism is the religion whose followers are easiest to troll"
15 rmctagg097th Jan 2011 11:53:09 AM from Brooklyn, NY , Relationship Status: I won't say I'm in love
The Wanderer
While I know that there are autistics that would take a hypothetical cure in a heartbeat, I'm not one of them.
Hugging a Vanilluxe will give you frostbite.

It's typed rmctagg09.
16 BalloonFleet7th Jan 2011 12:07:19 PM from Chicago, IL, USA
MASTER-DEBATER
Probably a good idea to assassinate the people who would find such a 'cure' and hide it/destroy it, rinse and repeat to delay the destruction of tha autistic nation. The more you delay the cure the more likely a critical mass of auties would congregate and manage to build their own society or do something else to preserve their kind in the post-eugenics world. Maybe like, get undiagnosed aspies to donate sperm all over the place (That's an exreme measure but hey!)
WHASSUP.......

....with lolis!
This tiny forest is where all the action is!
As someone who legitimately has autism (I didn't say my first word until I was three, and literally pushed people away who tried to hug me when I was a baby, or so I'm told), I don't know how I feel about this.

Yes, I was a target for bullies in my childhood and teenhood, and I didn't have any close friends either. But I did have fun in my own fantasy world / imagination. Now that I'm both older and more "normal", I get along better with people and can relate better, though I still have problems with it. I'm also less imaginative, and less obsessed with the things I always liked; namely, cartoons and video games. And I still have no close friends, just some people I talk to online.

Maybe being "normal" would have been better in a number of ways.

Btw, I have to say one thing here. I, personally, think Asperger's (but not autism) is way overdiagnosed, but there are some people who I can tell definitely have it or some variant (see: ulillillia, either his personal site or his YouTube account). And sometimes I've met a number of people online who have both very poor social skills and heavy obsessions. I don't ask them if they have autism or Asperger's; I just assume they do.

I can definitely relate to the "don't take away what makes me who/what I am" crowd, but there's no denying I had serious difficulties growing up, and might be better off without them, even if it means taking away the eccentricities I also had and enjoyed having.

edited 7th Jan '11 1:04:18 PM by BonsaiForest

I'm diagnosed, though it took until I was 20, the therapist thought the system sort of failed me for taking so long to recognise it........anyway, count me against being cured.
Dumbo
19 Bur7th Jan 2011 01:28:37 PM from Flyover Country , Relationship Status: Not war
I can greatly understand why anyone who can interact with society, can lead a normal to fairly normal ife, etc would want to stay themselves. I mean, for you guys it'd be practically saying "YES PLEASE LOBOTOMIZE ME", right?

But what about, say, a little kid who has no concept of language, is incapable of being trained out of diapers, engages in self-harming behavior, etc etc? It's likely that since they're beyond those important years for social conditioning they'd always have problems, but I can't help but think that surely their life would be a little better at least.

edited 7th Jan '11 2:01:00 PM by Bur

20 Acebrock7th Jan 2011 01:39:52 PM from So-Cal , Relationship Status: Showing feelings of an almost human nature
"This would be seen as treating a difference as a disease that needs to be cured and, effectively changing someone personality."

This.

And, on a personal note, I was diagnosed with Asperger's at 10, (about 13 years ago), and, looking back, the cause of many porblems I had with people, especially teachers and other students, was a lack of understanding of why I acted the way I did.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence
[up][up] Well, I took Asperger's to be included based on the similar previous topic about the white house guy.
Dumbo
See ALL the stars!
@Leigh Sabio, well, yes, mostly. I wouldn't want to remove what was already there, and I'm not entirely sure it would be "safe" to, anyway. However, unless there's some potential benefit to low-functioning autism, it seems beneficial to cure those, at least.

Depending on the specifics, waiting until you can answer the question "High/low function?" may be too late. In that case, IMO, you should cure anyway, so that they start life with fewest disadvantages. Although socialization isn't the be-all and end-all of peoples' lives, it is a very large factor.

Also, about the "Do you want to get rid of Einstein?"  * argument, we don't have Dr. Manhattan. We can't possibly guess the "potential" of a person before-the-fact, so we shouldn't make any decision based on what they might achieve, only what's in their immediate best interest.

edited 7th Jan '11 1:51:57 PM by Yej

Da Rules excuse all the inaccuracy in the world. Listen to them, not me.
Mate Griffon To Mare
It seems beneficial to cure low-functioning Autism to me as well. That's not what I was objecting to.

If you can still cure them at any time in life, in what sense would it be "too late?" You can usually tell pretty early.

Einstein and Newton have been thought by some to have Asperger's, but there's still some debate.

And here's the thing. I don't think getting rid of high-functioning autism or asperger's necessarily always is in the person's best interests.

edited 7th Jan '11 3:47:26 PM by LeighSabio

"All pain is a punishment, and every punishment is inflicted for love as much as for justice." — Joseph De Maistre.
Unchanging Avatar.
This should be done at a very young age. Doing it to anyone 8 or older without their consent is ridiculous. Except in very high-level autism, where they're not even capable of consenting, I guess.
Except for 4/1/2011. That day lingers in my memory like...metaphor here...I should go.
25 TheyCallMeTomu7th Jan 2011 04:20:44 PM , Relationship Status: Wishfully thinking
Totes Moe
I'd be happy to be lobotomized if it would make me smarter and able to better interact with people-

-but I'd probably change that if it had a great deal of other associated costs.

Total posts: 189
1
2 3 4 5 6 ... 8