گفتار درمانی و توانبخشی     پایگاه اطلاع رسانی گفتار توان گستر

             پایگاه اطلاع رسانی گفتار توان گستر          ارائه دهنده کاملترین و جامع ترین اطلاعات توانبخشی             گفتار درمانی      کاردرمانی       فیزیو تراپی          اپتومتری        شنوایی سنجی          ارتوپدی فنی                   

                                           پایگاه اطلاع رسانی گفتار توان گستر          ارائه دهنده کاملترین و جامع ترین اطلاعات توانبخشی             گفتار درمانی      کاردرمانی       فیزیو تراپی          اپتومتری        شنوایی سنجی          ارتوپدی فنی           

autism rights movement (ARM) 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. The ARM advocate a greater tolerance of autistic behaviors, teaching autistic individuals skills that allow them to better cope with the non-autistic world rather than forcing them behave like their neurotypical peers, and objects to treatment goals like extinguishing harmless stimming, forcing eye contact and breaking routines

The ARM is controversial among those whose lives are affected by autism. Objections to the movement include a belief that the benefits claimed to accompany autism are overstated, and that the movement's activities may reduce funding for autism research and treatment. Parents of children with autism state that behavioral interventions used to treat autism help them care for children with aggressive or dangerous behaviors, and that autism exacts a toll on the entire family. These parents have also criticized the movement for representing a minority of high-functioning autistics rather than the majority of lower-functioning individuals who comprise the bulk of those diagnosed with autism

The use of the Internet has made it possible for autistics to present their perspective when they do not have the communication skills to do so offline. These individuals do not believe autism can, or should be cured, instead believing that they deserve the opportunity to use their strengths to to cope with difficulties presented by autism
 

 Anti-cure perspective
The anti-cure perspective is considered a fundamental value of the movement. It is the view that autism is not a disorder, but an alternate variation in brain wiring with its own benefits and drawbacks.[1] The anti-cure perspective supports the model of autism that says that autism is an integral part of the autistic person's personality,[1] and that autism is something that cannot be separated from the person. For this reason, some anti-cure autistics, such as Jim Sinclair and Michelle Dawson, reject person-first terminology and prefer to be referred to as "autistics" or "autistic people" instead of "people with autism" or "people who have autism", because "person with autism" implies that autism is something that can be removed from the person

Jim Sinclair says that curing an autistic person is equivalent to causing the autistic person to cease to exist and be replaced with a different (non-autistic) person.[3] Anti-cure autistics believe quirks and uniqueness of autistic individuals should be tolerated as the differences of any minority group should be tolerated.[4] Autistics.org has responded to Kit Weintraub's wish to remove her son's autistic symptoms so that he will make friends by saying that when someone is bullied or ostracized for a quality, it is because of people who are intolerant and not the fault of people who are different.[4] Anti-cure autistics view talk about visions for a future where autism has been eradicated as a wish for the end of their culture and way of being

Anti-cure autistics say they wish they had fewer difficulties in life, and that they find some aspects of autism (like sensory issues) painful, but they do not want to have to sacrifice their personalities, values, and basic identities in order to make life easier.[4][not in citation given] Anti-cure autistics ask that society become more tolerant and accommodating instead of pushing a cure. Anti-cure autistics say they are in favor of helping make the lives of autistic people easier, but they prefer the word "education" over "treatment", and they support programs that respect the individuality of the autistic person and only try to teach them things instead of change them, and they think that autism treatments should focus on giving autistics the means to overcome the limitations posed by autism, rather than curing it citation needed

The anti-cure perspective is related to much of the controversy of the movement. Some parents of autistic children see autism as something that gives their children great difficulty in life and therefore see autism as a disorder.[citation needed] Parents with this perspective (which is sometimes called the pro-cure perspective in the autism rights movement) believe that a cure for autism is in their children's best interests because they see a cure as something that will reduce suffering.[5][6] People with the pro-cure perspective have been disdainfully labeled "curebies
 

 People in the movement

Organized groups
Organized groups of the autism rights movement include the Autism Network International (ANI)—a self-advocacy organization founded in 1992 run for and by autistic people and which hosts an annual conference called Autreat—and Aspies For Freedom—an activist group founded by Amy and Gareth Nelson in 2004 which started Autistic Pride Day and protested against the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center

 

 Individuals
Amanda Baggs has written for Autistics.org, an anti-cure autism website. She was featured in an article on CNN in Michelle Dawson is an autistic person and autism researcher who has challenged the ethics and science of applied behavior analysis and what she considers to be exclusion of autistic adults in the Autism Society of Canada.
Jim Sinclair is a co-founder of Autism Network International and author of the essay "Don't Mourn for Us," an anti-cure essay
Harvey Blume coined the term neurodiversity
Donna Williams has endorsed the Aspies For Freedom organization
The essays of some individuals in the movement, including Amanda Baggs and Jim Sinclair, have been used as reading assignments in a class at the University of Wisconsin-Madison
 

Neurotypical" supporters
Although this movement is sometimes considered to consist only of autistic people, there are some parents involved in the movement.[4] Morton Ann Gernsbacher, who is a parent of an autistic child and a professor of psychology, said that autistics need acceptance and not a cure and has expressed opposition to the view of autism as a disorder.[10] Estee Klar-Wolfond, the mother of an autistic son, founded The Autism Acceptance Project in support of autistic people.[11] Autistics.org claims that parents can be the movement's strongest allies.[4][12] In addition, some autistic people involved in the movement are also parents.[13] Autism professionals Tony Attwood and Simon Baron-Cohen have sent supportive messages to the Aspies for Freedom organization.[14][15]
 

 History
Autism Network International was founded in 1992. Later in the mid-1990s the world wide web began to emerge and websites increased awareness about the neurodiversity perspective of autism.[16] Autistics.org was founded in 1998 and started Internet campaigns in 2000.

Michelle Dawson's ethical challenges to ABA and the founding of Aspies for Freedom both occurred in 2004. In December 2004, Amy Harmon published an article in the New York Times titled "How about not curing us? Some autistics are pleading" which covered the anti-cure perspective.

 

 Issues
The movement embraces a number of issues and goals that range from challenging the way autistic people are treated by others to challenging the way autism is portrayed. Not all supporters of the movement have the same opinions about the issues and there is controversy about the issues from within the movement

 

 Challenges to autism treatment
Some autistic people have criticized therapy which attempts to remove autistic behaviors because they say that the behaviors that the therapy tries to remove are attempts to communicate

Michelle Dawson testified in Auton v. British Columbia and was cited in the Supreme Court of Canada's ruling in the case.[1] Michelle Dawson has received heated criticism from some parents of autistic children because of her criticism of applied behavior analysis and her involvement in Auton v. British Columbia.[17][16] These critics[clarify] say ABA has been scientifically proven to be effective and gives autistic children the best chance of success in adulthood. Some parents believe that intensive behavioral therapy is the only way to rescue autistic children.[1] Some critics also fear that the movement will prevent other autistic children from receiving treatment. Kit Weintraub has responded to Michelle Dawson's claims that ABA is harmful by saying that it is harmful to deny medically necessary and appropriate treatment to autistic children who need it. Weintraub said she does not want ideology to triumph over the welfare of autistic children

Bobby Newman said in an issue of the Schafer Autism Report that he believes that those without basic skills of self-care would not want those who are capable of communication to speak on their behalf.[19] Baggs, who has been published at Autistics.org, responded to Bobby Newman's argument by saying that she was once in the situation Newman describes and would have wanted activists to stop her from receiving treatment she felt was harmful.[20] There has also been concern that autistic children will be forced into ABA programs where they will not benefit
 

 Opposition to eliminating autism
Since those in the autism rights movement see autism as a natural human variation and not a disorder, they are opposed to attempts to eliminate autism. In particular, there is opposition to prenatal genetic testing of autism in unborn fetuses, which some believe might be possible in the future (see Heritability of autism). Some worry that this can prevent autistic people from being born.[1] On February 23, 2005 Joseph Buxbaum of the Autism Genome Project at the Mount Sinai School of Medicine said there could be a prenatal test for autism within 10 years.[21] However, the genetics of autism have proven to be extremely complex.[22] In any case, the Autistic Genocide Clock was started in response to this, which counts down to 10 years after Buxbaum made this announcement.[23] The public has started to debate the ethics involved in the possible elimination of a genotype that has liabilities and advantages, which may be seen as tampering with natural selection

 

 Perception of autism
The puzzle piece ribbon is used by some autism societies. Some autistic adults find this ribbon offensive and insulting.
The puzzle piece ribbon is used by some autism societies. Some autistic adults find this ribbon offensive and insulting.
Autism has been compared to a disease, rather than the variation in functioning preferred by supporters of neurodiversity, with an attendant focus on the burden placed on society in caring for autistic individuals. Caring for individuals with autism has been compared to treating a patient with cancer, though extended over the duration of a normal lifespan.[25] Autistic children have also been described as being held hostage to a psychiatric disorder.[26] Others have used the term 'mad child disease' to describe autism,[27][28] which some autistic individuals and their parents have found highly offensive.[29] Margaret Somerville, founding director of the McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law, said that with activism there is a direct goal and it is sometimes necessary to sacrifice complexity and nuance to make a point, but some autistic activists don't believe desperation justifies the rhetoric.[17] Bennett L. Leventhal said he understands concern about comparing autistic children to victims of hostage but thinks the campaigns make the point that these are real diseases that will consume children if untreated.[26] Autistic rights activists also reject terming the reported increase in the autistic population as an 'epidemic' since the word implies autism is a disease

Attempts have also been made to place a figure on the financial 'cost' of autism, addressed to both scholarly[31] and popular audiences.[32] These efforts have been criticized by some autism rights advocates, comparing it to the now-reviled eugenics movement in the early 20th century.[33] Michelle Dawson has pointed out that no effort has been made to examine the cost of 'eliminating the disease' to autistic individuals,[34] and she, as well as others, have also pointed out the valuable contributions autistic individuals can, and have made to society
 

Autistic traits
Some autistic rights activists believe some characteristics described as being autistic traits are actually misconceptions.[36] Michelle Dawson has disputed the belief that 75% of autistic people have low intelligence.[17] Psychologist Laurent Mottron of Hôpital Rivière-des-Prairies in Montreal says that autistic people often score much higher on a nonverbal test of abstract reasoning than on a standard IQ test.[37] As of 2006, some people have begun to subscribe to the belief that autistic people lack a "theory of mind"; that is, they are unaware that others do not necessarily think or know the same things that they(autistics) do. Some autistics have claimed that non-autistics are insensitive to their perspectives, and write parodies based on this, addressing non-autism as a mental disorder characterized by lack of "theory of other minds

Jim Sinclair, who has also been target of similar criticism from very early on, goes into detail about "the politics of opposition to self-advocacy".[40] He notes, for example, that a common tactic is denying that "the persons mounting the challenge are really members of the group to which they claim membership". Sinclair illustrates the point with an analogy regarding Frederick Douglass, a nineteenth-century African American who became a well-known abolitionist writer and speaker. Douglass was after some time suspected of being an impostor because he was well spoken and educated, so he did not fit the stereotype of black slaves

Lenny Schafer said that the autism-like lack of empathy of anti-cure activists prevent them from seeing what is in the hearts of pro-cure advocates
 

Functioning labels
The autistic rights movement has contributed to controversies about functioning labels and the distinction between autism and Asperger's in the autism spectrum. In particular, some autistic rights activists are concerned with the functioning labels and the autism/Asperger's distinction making it more difficult to get services for difficulties associated with autism, and they believe the terms such as 'high-functioning' and 'low-functioning' are used as an excuse for their opponents to ignore the viewpoints they do not like.[citation needed] Some autistic activists say it is not easy to distinguish between high and low functioning.[1] Some autistic individuals, in contrast, are supportive of the distinction between the low and high functioning labels as well as autism and Asperger's, and believe it is important in helping individuals get proper consultation and treatment

There is also controversy about how well autistic people of different functioning levels are represented in the movement. Critics of the movement argue that the autistic spectrum people opposed to a cure are high functioning autistic or have Asperger syndrome[1] and that they have the ability to communicate. Lenny Schafer, for example, argues that those in the movement are Asperger autistics, as opposed to Kanner autistics. He says that if they would change every use of autism to read Asperger syndrome the movement might "make sense".[1] They[clarify] argue that low functioning autistic people have much less ability to communicate, but that the movement's activists clearly have the ability to write eloquently, and they believe that those who have less ability to communicate are likely to want or need very different things from those who can communicate more readily. This is re-iterated by Sue Rubin, diagnosed with autism, when she states, 'High-functioning people speak and low-functioning people don't...low functioning people are just trying to get through the day without hurting, tapping, flailing, biting, screaming, etc. The thought of a gold pot of a potion with a cure really would be wonderful

Activists in the movement have responded to criticisms that say they are high functioning or Asperger's by saying that some of them have been called low functioning as children by professionals, some of them can write but have no oral speech, and that some of them have periods of time where any form of communication is impossible. They also say it is not true that all autistic advocates are diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome and that some of the most outspoken ones are autistic. When critics claim that the people in the movement are Asperger's and not autistic, the people in the autism rights movement see this as an attempt to diagnose them via the Internet

Michelle Dawson says that some parents tell her that she is different from their children because she can express herself and live independently and their children cannot. Michelle Dawson responds by saying that she could not live independently when she was a child either.[16] Phil Schwarz has responded to claims that the autistic advocates are higher functioning than autistic children by saying it is not always reasonable to compare the abilities of an autistic child with those of an autistic adult

Some autistic authors such as Amanda Baggs have claimed that this is not always the case that anti-cure autistics have mild difficulties.[43] She says that when the critics assume that intelligent and articulate autistic people do not have difficulties like self-injurious behavior and difficulty with self-care, they affect the opinions of policy makers and make it more difficult for intelligent and articulate autistic people to get services. Baggs cites examples of autistic people who were denied services because they have IQs above 70

A common complaint is that anti-cure advocates are clearly able to articulate complex opinions in writing, which is seen by some critics as inconsistent with a diagnosis of autism. Autistics who oppose a cure say they may experience extreme difficulties on a daily basis, and that they oppose being cured despite these difficulties because they believe autism is a fundamental part of who they are

 

 Status as a social minority group
Amy Nelson of Aspies For Freedom wrote a proposal in 2004 that the autistic community are a social minority group and therefore should be considered as such by the United Nations.[44] The letter expresses concern about the possibility that if a cure were found, autistic people may be forced to use it.[44] They say that if the fact that people on the autistic spectrum are different in their own right was accepted worldwide, instead of their being regarded as simply a faulty version of "normal" people, it would provide greater freedom to the whole community.[citation needed] Without the stigma or pressure to communicate in the same way as neurotypicals, autistics would be enabled to form social bonds in ways that best suit them.[citation needed] It is sometimes the case that typing or signing is easier than talking for autistics,[citation needed] and there is a fairly large autistic community on the Internet, many of whom are socially isolated locally. In February 2007 a petition for UK citizens to Downing street was launched by Aspies For Freedom, expressing the need for minority group status

The Nelson proposal that the Autistic community be classified as a minority group by the United Nations has divided the autistic community politically.[citation needed] Some autistics believe it is self-defeating to receive special status when they are capable of achieving things for themselves as successfully as people without autism.[citation needed] Some autistics also recognize that governmentally-declared minority groups are seen with disdain and opposition by those outside their group, and thus subject to more negativity than those who are not declared a minority by the power of government

 Diversity in autism
The movement has been criticized for its own failure to incorporate diversity, include certain subgroups within the autistic community and that some in the movement are insulting to neurotypical individuals.

 

Controversy
This article needs additional citations for verification
Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed
 

 Criticism
The movement has been criticized by autism professionals and parents of autistic children who believe the goals of the movement will not help autistic children. There are some critics of the movement who still support some of the movement's goals despite opposing other goals
 

Responses from the movement
Further responses of the movement can be summarized as follows

Being able to communicate well in writing is not inconsistent with a diagnosis of autism
Autism does not disappear the moment a person learns to communicate. Successfully teaching to communicate is not the same as "curing" autism
Autism rights advocates believe parents should take into account the self-esteem of their autistic children. Activists ask: "is it better to teach these children that they have a neurological disease requiring intensive behavioral training to correct, or that they have unique and special neurology they should cherish and accept for what it is
Some of the critics' own children have apparently learned to communicate already, so their position is confusing because they argue that the writing abilities of autistic activists is evidence that they are fundamentally higher functioning than the children of the critics

Early origins and continuation of the debate
This section does not cite any references or sources
Please improve this section by adding citations to reliable sources. Unverifiable material may be challenged and removed

The debate is ongoing and critics have responded to the autism rights movement's responses to their original criticisms, and the autism rights movement in turn has responded to those

The autism rights movement and its debates were collaborated online due much in part to usenet's alt.support.autism group (groups.google.com/group/alt.support.autism) which had autistics and people without autism on various sides of rights, cure and treatment issues. Due to the lack of moderation and what they perceive to be the abuse of several autistics on that forum by possible cranks, many have taken up blogging in more moderated communities. Much of the current thought has evolved over time by discussions in these communities and groups. Over time, some internet meme has also resulted because of the autism rights movement, much of which is tongue in cheek criticism of the self-diagnosis issue

Some of the debate continues offline as well. Autistics and people without autism of all ages participating in the autism rights movement may also be expressly excluded from their local autism organizations. Many have, however formed well-connected offline chapters to address the lack of this inclusion by some cure-oriented autism communities. Some groups, however, have been making efforts to include such families, groups and individuals in the movement to increase the level of communication and create mutual understanding

Some of the most critical pro-cure advocates are non-autistic relatives of autistics, e.g. those represented by FAAAS, Families of Adults with Asperger Syndrome.[47] Many such organizations have characterized those in the anti-cure movement as being mostly an adult with Asperger Syndrome phenomenon and object to the anti-cure message as a result of their own personal perspectives of living with autistic adults
 

 Disagreements within the movement
There are disagreements within the movement as well. Some autistics would prefer autism to be seen as a disability, meaning that it would have a status similar to blindness or deafness. Within this context, autism rights would fit within the broader movement of disability rights and autistic culture would be analogous to deaf culture. Those supporting this view are concerned that if autism was to be viewed as simply a way of being or as a non-disabled minority group, the needs some autistics have for aid and assistance would be overlooked