Statement

When I was 14/15 I became interested in the Neurodiversty Movement, when I read writing by neurodiversity proponents online. Wikipedia describes the movement this way: "The autism rights movement (ARM) (also neurodiversity movement or anti-cure movement or autistic culture movement) is a social movement that encourages autistic people, their caregivers and society to adopt a position of neurodiversity, accepting autism as a variation in functioning rather than a mental disorder to be cured."

I support this statement. First of all, I don't believe that autism can be "cured" the way that a cold can be cured. I agree with Vilayanur Ramachandran and other neurologists that many aspects of autism are caused by mirror neuron deficiency, which would mean that a person is born with it. The popular idea that autism is caused by vaccines seems like a conspiracy theory and doesn't have much science behind it. I think it rose to prominence because people were upset to have a child with a disability and wanted someone to blame.

I think the only way to cure autism would be by figuring out the genes that cause autism and aborting fetuses that have it. I don't believe in trying to eradicate people who are different, even if some of those people need special treatment and support. We live in a society where people take it for granted that it makes sense to abort a fetus that has Down's Syndrome, and I think that's horrible. Anyone who has ever actually spent time with people who have Down's Syndrome can see that they're just as valuable as anyone else, and they don't live lives full of unbearable pain simply because they have a disability.

One reason I don't consider myself a neurodiversity supporter is that a lot of prominent people in the movement are against Applied Behavioral Analysis. ABA is a behavior modification therapy that is often used to treat people with autism. I've seen firsthand how ABA can benefit people; a person who does not communicate using words can be taught, starting with very simple, intense methods, to understand more and more words, to express themselves using communication devices, and finally even to express themselves by typing or speaking. I respect people who don't have language, and I don't think that being unable to use language is the worst fate in the world--but I generally think that the act of using language is good for a person mentally and emotionally, and obviously if a person acquires language that will enable them to live more independently.

This doesn't mean I support every single use of ABA no matter what. You can use ABA methods (and in fact, people have) to try to train a gay person to act like they're not gay. ABA has been, and still is, often used to try to train autistic people to make eye contact, not make noises, and not jump up and down or flap their hands. It is my experience that when people have those kinds of mannerisms and movements, it is for a reason, and the teacher and student's energy should be spent on things that are actually important, like acquiring language, instead of trying to suppress harmless activites like hand-flapping.

Another aspect of the neurodiversity movement that bothers me is that a lot of the people involved in it call themselves "autistic" when they have a diagnosis of Asperger's. I'm not one of those people who thinks that you have to have a disability to express opinions about how people with that disability should be treated, and in fact I think Asperger's people are more equipped than the average person to talk about the experience of having classic autism. But we still don't have classic autism. Some of the things Asperger's and classically autistic people need are the same, but they're not all the same.