3 ms·

"A genetic study would be terrifying for lots of autistic people; there’s a long-established and well-known history around eugenics and disability,” - can anyon

"A genetic study would be terrifying for lots of autistic people; there’s a long-established and well-known history around eugenics and disability,” - can anyone help my understand why that would be problematic? We screen for down syndrome and most of the western world don't see abortion as a murder, why would it be problem to screen and let women decide for autism as well?

ghuin 5y ago
Because some people seem to think autism is a cool personality trait more than a disability.
JPLeRouzic 5y ago
> We screen for Down's syndrome Maybe the problem is where a policy, practice or simply prejudice would draw a line. There is autism in my family, some members are officially diagnosed, and while it's not my case (I was born in France in the 1950'), I am certainly not someone with an ordinary world view. Otherwise I managed to have a good enough career, sometimes managing up to 100 people. The idea that I could have been "suppressed" because some prejudice is frightening.
- Dma54rhs 5y ago
  I understand it very well from your point of view but a person living with down syndrome is capable enough to understand and ask the same question. And if he can't it still begs the same question because we don't see as unborn until x weeks as human yet, that would cancel it out. Otherwise we could use the same argument for every aborted unborn?
- esyir 5y ago
  You could also have been "suppressed" because of general abortion, something that's typically done for the convenience of the parent. If we support abortion rights, there shouldn't be issues with the termination of foeti for autism/downs/other developmental issues either.
  - inglor_cz 5y ago
    This. Once general abortion is on the table, what sense does it make to restrict some reasons for it? People, after all, are perfectly capable of lying if asked.
- mjbeswick 5y ago
  Even ultrasound scans where the finding could be used as an argument to terminate a pregnancy poses the same ethical problem.
ojkelly 5y ago
You have met/know of more autistic people than you would think. Some more well known people: - Dan Aykroyd - Anthony Hopkins - Satoshi Tajiri (creator of Pokémon) - Greta Thunberg Particularly in this industry, autism, ADHD and other's are overrepresented compared to the typical population averages. I don't have autism myself (I do have ADHD), but I've met quite a few people who do. By the time they reach adulthood (and frankly a long time before), they're quite adept at masking [0]. Pretending to be a normal person to fit into a normal world. It affects people in different ways and to different severities, particularly in terms of what kinds of accomodations are required. But they can be some of the most intelligent, caring, hard working people you'll come across. It's problematic because while disabilities suck, people thrive in spite of them. Myself included. Even screening for Down syndrome feels quite problematic. Some of the best ways to help people with autism is accomodate them, let them live without masking the things that often put normal people off. Screening for Down syndrome or autism feels very close to screening for gender. It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. That's not your fault, the general understanding of different neurological conditions is woeful and full of prejudice. There's legitimate reasons to terminate a pregnancy that are completely unrelated to trying to screen for a "normal" kid. But this study does not appear to be coming from a good place, or a place of genuine understanding. This snippet highlights it: > But “there’s a component of suggesting that autistic people don’t have empathy”, she says. “That has been extremely damaging and stigmatizing for autistic people, and is very much at odds with many autistic people’s lived experience, which is often a sort of uncontrollable excess of empathy.” From personal experience some autistic people have incredible capacity for empathy. [0] https://www.healthline.com/health/autism/autism-masking#definition https://www.healthline.com/health/autism/autism-masking#defi...
- simorley 5y ago
  > It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. Nothing about down syndrome, autism or gender qualifies as "very shaky knowledge". It's the woman's choice. It's her body and she has the right to abort for whatever reason she wants. > There's legitimate reasons to terminate a pregnancy that are completely unrelated to trying to screen for a "normal" kid. The only legitimate reason is the woman doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term. If it is wrong to abort an autistic baby, then all abortions are wrong. Think about it. > But this study does not appear to be coming from a good place, or a place of genuine understanding. A good place? You get to decide? If you want an autistic kid, you have one. And if another person doesn't want one, they don't have to have one? What ever happened to the choice in pro-choice?

ghuin 5y ago

Because some people seem to think autism is a cool personality trait more than a disability.

JPLeRouzic 5y ago

> We screen for Down's syndrome Maybe the problem is where a policy, practice or simply prejudice would draw a line. There is autism in my family, some members are officially diagnosed, and while it's not my case (I was born in France in the 1950'), I am certainly not someone with an ordinary world view. Otherwise I managed to have a good enough career, sometimes managing up to 100 people. The idea that I could have been "suppressed" because some prejudice is frightening.

Dma54rhs 5y ago
I understand it very well from your point of view but a person living with down syndrome is capable enough to understand and ask the same question. And if he can't it still begs the same question because we don't see as unborn until x weeks as human yet, that would cancel it out. Otherwise we could use the same argument for every aborted unborn?
esyir 5y ago
You could also have been "suppressed" because of general abortion, something that's typically done for the convenience of the parent. If we support abortion rights, there shouldn't be issues with the termination of foeti for autism/downs/other developmental issues either.
- inglor_cz 5y ago
  This. Once general abortion is on the table, what sense does it make to restrict some reasons for it? People, after all, are perfectly capable of lying if asked.
mjbeswick 5y ago
Even ultrasound scans where the finding could be used as an argument to terminate a pregnancy poses the same ethical problem.

ojkelly 5y ago

You have met/know of more autistic people than you would think. Some more well known people: - Dan Aykroyd - Anthony Hopkins - Satoshi Tajiri (creator of Pokémon) - Greta Thunberg Particularly in this industry, autism, ADHD and other's are overrepresented compared to the typical population averages. I don't have autism myself (I do have ADHD), but I've met quite a few people who do. By the time they reach adulthood (and frankly a long time before), they're quite adept at masking [0]. Pretending to be a normal person to fit into a normal world. It affects people in different ways and to different severities, particularly in terms of what kinds of accomodations are required. But they can be some of the most intelligent, caring, hard working people you'll come across. It's problematic because while disabilities suck, people thrive in spite of them. Myself included. Even screening for Down syndrome feels quite problematic. Some of the best ways to help people with autism is accomodate them, let them live without masking the things that often put normal people off. Screening for Down syndrome or autism feels very close to screening for gender. It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. That's not your fault, the general understanding of different neurological conditions is woeful and full of prejudice. There's legitimate reasons to terminate a pregnancy that are completely unrelated to trying to screen for a "normal" kid. But this study does not appear to be coming from a good place, or a place of genuine understanding. This snippet highlights it: > But “there’s a component of suggesting that autistic people don’t have empathy”, she says. “That has been extremely damaging and stigmatizing for autistic people, and is very much at odds with many autistic people’s lived experience, which is often a sort of uncontrollable excess of empathy.” From personal experience some autistic people have incredible capacity for empathy. [0] https://www.healthline.com/health/autism/autism-masking#definition https://www.healthline.com/health/autism/autism-masking#defi...

simorley 5y ago
> It's an arbitrary choice made on the foundations of very shaky knowledge. Nothing about down syndrome, autism or gender qualifies as "very shaky knowledge". It's the woman's choice. It's her body and she has the right to abort for whatever reason she wants. > There's legitimate reasons to terminate a pregnancy that are completely unrelated to trying to screen for a "normal" kid. The only legitimate reason is the woman doesn't want to carry the pregnancy to term. If it is wrong to abort an autistic baby, then all abortions are wrong. Think about it. > But this study does not appear to be coming from a good place, or a place of genuine understanding. A good place? You get to decide? If you want an autistic kid, you have one. And if another person doesn't want one, they don't have to have one? What ever happened to the choice in pro-choice?