Are you saying that there is no direct link but rather understanding of various areas increased due to the stopping of this practice?
Yes, this absolutely. You can't study something after altering it.
The "treatments" for people with any kind of neurodivergence (real, or imagined) in the past were often interventions that destroyed enough of their brain or body to prevent them from exhibiting any neurodivergent symptoms (e.g. lobotomy, EST/ECT, teeth-pulling[1], etc).
[1]: https://www.amusingplanet.com/2019/01/henry-cotton-psychiatr...
A main thing is that people with autism would just be classified as generally mentally disabled and the rise in autism is highly tied a drop in that general diagnosis. I don't think that covers 100% of the rise but does seem to make up the big majority.
U.S. special-education autism classification was created in 1994 and tied to a big rise in diagnosis.
https://news.wisc.edu/data-provides-misleading-picture-of-au...
If expanding the definition is the feature required action should be taken to mitigate the bug. True?
Not that much.
The difference between now and 50 years ago is that a) we don't just throw them into asylums, b) we actually have accessibility of getting diagnosed, c) employment opportunities suitable for many people with mental disabilities (such as factory line assembly) have gone down the drain.
You're only getting a diagnosis if a) you have access to a psychiatrist and b) you are running into enough issues in your daily life to warrant having it looked into.
Life has gotten a lot more complex over the past few decades, so people run into issues more often - and earlier in life. Someone who would've just been "a bit of a weird guy" 50 years ago is getting an autism diagnosis today, simply because these days they run into issues as a child and are being put in front of a psychiatrist.
Very much so. What we now call Autism Spectrum Disorder was referred to as "childhood schizophrenia" in the DSM-2 [1], things only started moving in the right direction with the DSM-3 [2] when it was finally sort-of recognized as an independent disorder of "infantile autism", but some core elements of ASD like sensory processing differences were only recognized in the DSM-5.
There's a good overview at [3]. It's good that criteria are different today, the criteria from decades ago failed to include majority of ways that autism expresses itself, many of which benefit from support and accommodations even though they're not obviously debilitating.
[1] https://www.madinamerica.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/DSM-...
[2] https://aditpsiquiatriaypsicologia.es/images/CLASIFICACION%2...
> The symptoms do not occur exclusively during the course of a pervasive developmental disorder, schizophrenia, or other psychotic disorders and is not better accounted for by another mental disorder (e.g., mood disorder, anxiety disorder, dissociative disorder, or a personality disorder).
The DSM-V states that they can exist together. In fact something like 28-44% of people with Autism exhibit some form of ADHD. [1]
It just goes to show that we’re still evolving in how we understand things. And then we can get into things like twice exceptionality and Asperger’s…and yeah. Lots to learn.
[0]: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519712/table/ch3.t3/
[1]: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6...
That's an important bit of context whenever RFK Jr. talks about how conditions like Autism and ADHD weren't a thing when he was growing up - his own aunt, who may well have had one of those conditions, was dealt with by giving her a lobotomy and then hiding her away. Those are the supposedly better times he's harkening back to.
https://slowrevealgraphs.com/2021/11/08/rate-of-left-handedn...
The very much same applies here I think.
Combine this with the overzealous focus on transvestites and the so called "illegal aliens" you should see a pattern with where the Nazis began.
There is a reason the constitution was set up the way it was in the light of not having a King and not being unfairly treated.
Not in camps like divided by opinion.
The focus seems to lie on transgender people, not cross dressers.
So let's keep the words we use sensible and devoid from (intended or unintended) bigotry.
Besides, drag queens and kings usually are not transgender¹. It is a type of performance featuring a carefully crafted, over-the-top persona, not a full-time endeavour, and it is, crucially, an act. A transgender person isn't acting.
1: I would guess not more so than other groups of people.
But when it comes to policy actions taken by bigots they pretty narrowly target transgender people. If for no other reason than trying to legislate dress is going to (and has) run into 1A issues for anything not extremely narrowly scoped. Project 2025, arguably the comprehensive policy manifesto for the new GOP only really outlines policy targeting transgender persons.
Having worked directly with autism researchers, I can confidently tell you that RFK is making a wild guess not based in current evidence. All the data we have indicate autism is a multifactorial condition with a genetic/developmental component that may or may not be affected by the environment.
RFK is genuinely a danger to health care in the United States.
> "It's difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends on not understanding it." -Upton Sinclair"
I suspect the US will become like Germany in the next few decades where the paranoia about handing any data over is justifiably high. I hope this burns the unethical side of the tech industry to the ground. It deserves it.
Google is certified and runs the biggest medical database with (I believe without googling this) the biggest hospital operator in the USA.
I have a condition which is rare enough that it doesn't get enough funding and data is missing
That doesn't matter _at all_ when the government comes knocking at Google's door - in the best case, they have a subpoena that can at least be appealed afterwards, in the worst case it's DOGE teens backed by a bunch of heavily armed guys in camouflage.
This has become an issue big enough that the US company I work for is actually removing data from US cloud providers to make it harder to get at. The European divisions have started data sovereignty projects because it's now a principal risk.
I'm out of the cloud as well.
Which is evidentially not this lot. Not even remotely.
I suppose he has a point.
This poster (published in the NSDAP's Office of Racial Policy's monthly magazine Neues Volk around 1938) urges support for Nazi eugenics to control the public expense of sustaining people with genetic disorders. The poster says: "This person who suffers a hereditary disease has a lifelong cost of 60,000 Reichsmarks to the National Community. Fellow German, that is your money as well."
I don't agree. Having unbreakable crypto is the absence of a tool. My point is that a democratic government can create the tool with good intentions, but you are only one election and a few months of backsliding away from the tool being used for nefarious purposes. You are right that technical solutions are just band-aids, but if you never create the tool it cannot be abused by a new authoritarian government.
People sometimes tend to shutdown comparison of any situation with Nazism using the hideous Godwin's law. Apparently it's a sacrilege towards the Holocaust victims to compare their plight with any emerging threats. But there is no guarantee that the horrors of the past won't repeat in the future. In fact, that is one of the reasons we learn history - to recognize the repeating patterns of similar mistakes. And I think the situation is very perilous already. Perhaps I'm paranoid. But remember that people are arbitrarily getting deported to some foreign detention camp and judges are being arrested within 3 months of this regime coming into power. How long before we find ourselves haunted by the dreadful events of the past?
My life is pretty close to this community and I can verify that all of his comments are 100% accurate.
Parents who insist on traveling separately as a safeguard to ensure one of them is able to care for their adult child in the event of an accident, living with the knowledge that both of them passing away will mean the child moves to a group home most likely.
Others who cannot handle the demands as caregiver and simply get divorced over it. Some who call CPS because they can’t handle the danger that their child poses to their other children. Some who are flight risks that will literally just take off running (usually right to bodies of water) given the chance, putting parents completely on guard.
These are just a few of the issues before getting into “the autism diet” and chronic digestive issues. The fact that somehow a gluten free, casein free diet usually results in significant behavioral improvements leading many people to suspect that what we’re eating environmentally is contributing to the problem.
RFK Jr is giving a voice to parents who are scared, confused and fully aware that nobody is listening to them. If you had any idea the number of parents who are afraid to tell you when the symptoms started because they know you don’t want to believe them, it would shock you.
If you want to know what most people in the community believe is the root cause, it’s aluminum.
I realize that all things associated Trump are destined to get this crazy narrative but RFK Jr has been fighting for these families for at least 20 years. His desire to help people is genuine and not something in question.
Has he? That 'cure' part makes it pretty clear what his background with autism is. He has no clue about it. It's certainly not a disease nor a brain injury that can be cured. And it's too complex to be caused by something like a vaccine. All I see is that he has a particular disdain for autistic people and he wants to use autism to target something else - perhaps vaccines.
> My life is pretty close to this community
Do you have an academic or professional background on the condition? Or are you someone with autism? If so, you may claim some credibility. There are even associations of parents of autistic kids who spout pseudo-scientific nonsense about autism. And they routinely get fact-checked and opposed by associations of autistic people themselves.
> I can verify that all of his comments are 100% accurate.
CDC falls under HHS, right? They published the results about a week ago and it clearly said that the higher incidence of autism is due to improved diagnosis. And then he went on to trash those findings publicly. Why should I believe a career politician over a whole bunch of career medical professionals on this? Considering his past and political stance as well, he has exactly zero credibility on this matter.
> Parents who insist on traveling separately as a safeguard to ensure one of them is able to care for their adult child in the event of an accident, living with the knowledge that both of them passing away will mean the child moves to a group home most likely.
Am I to assume that you're a parent of an autistic kid? If so, let me warn you now. You're doing something more harmful to your kid than what you described. And one more thing. Your view of autism is still very narrow. What you're describing is level 3 autism at best. Some symptoms don't even sound like autism, and could be some other condition. You should perhaps check with a specialist or a level 1 autistic to learn what autism really is and what it feels like (higher level kids often find it hard to communicate their feelings).
> Some who call CPS because they can’t handle the danger that their child poses to their other children.
Very much on point with what I said above. Harmful and hurtful behavior is not an autistic symptom. That sounds more like a cluster-B personality disorder. Not that they can't coexist, but this is a very harmful stereotype. But I'm not surprised.
> These are just a few of the issues before getting into “the autism diet” and chronic digestive issues.
Autism is a neuro-developmental condition. Autistic brains are wired differently, if you will. There are many environmental factors that influence autistic people's behavior - albeit temporarily. Food is one of the less important ones among them. And if you think it is a cure, you are in for big disappointment.
> RFK Jr is giving a voice to parents who are scared, confused and fully aware that nobody is listening to them.
Instead of a politician vying for attention, you should try to understand your kid first. If they have difficulty expressing it, try to talk to a specialist or someone with more verbal autism. They are very common - that's why the 1 in 31 statistics. Then you may get some idea about what to really focus on.
> If you had any idea the number of parents who are afraid to tell you when the symptoms started because they know you don’t want to believe them, it would shock you.
I have investigated various matters throughout my career. That statement has all the symptoms of confirmation bias. The way to get an unbiased result is to do a large-scale, randomized (double-)blind study. You need quantified data, not emotional anecdotes. And if you have something specific in mind and the quantified info to back it up, then we can discuss. Otherwise, those assertions are moot. And for that matter, do you know that these symptoms are extremely hard to identify in infants? The timing of recognition of those symptoms is a rather unreliable indicator for anything.
And remember what I said before - a lot of autistic parents' associations are in the business of spreading misinformation. They're widely opposed and debunked by associations of autistic people themselves.
> If you want to know what most people in the community believe is the root cause, it’s aluminum.
Let me guess. The adjuvant in vaccines? I know where that comes from. If you fancy your own research, try searching up the research papers on that topic. Pay special attention to the authors and the citations. Then check the affiliations of those authors, including funding sources. That will tell you a very enlightening story. To summarize the technical argument, the aluminum used in vaccines don't reach neurotoxic levels even for infants.
> His desire to help people is genuine and not something in question.
His actions at the HHS indicate otherwise. I would rather trust the qualified career medical professionals and researchers he fired. And let's not forget the disastrous way in which he's handling the measles outbreak. I can see how you're emotionally invested in this matter. But please don't assume that the people on the other side aren't.
If you have investigated then you already understand the biggest challenge to double blind studies here: control groups because of the variety of issues on the spectrum and the difficulty in measuring the severity of each of them. There’s a doctor in Indiana who’s been trying to categorize them all and has it narrowed to about 140 or so. It’s not an easy group to run studies on.
Autism is very much a digestive issue. People who just observe the behaviors without being close to treatment believe it’s purely neurological.
The core issue with everything you’re saying is that we have an information vacuum. With cancer, for example, we as a society are more than comfortable saying almost everything causes cancer. With autism, we’re not allowed to even speculate publicly. If we do it’s a simple “I don’t know what causes it but it’s DEFINITELY not the thing that I don’t want to believe is involved.”
Autism is a spectrum and there are a lot of severe cases. The severe cases often result in exactly what I’m describing above. Therapy helps in most cases but the experience described above is very real. In many cases it’s much less severe and kids are mainstreamed with some social awkwardness. The violent outbursts described in a scenario above, again, aren’t in most situations but they do happen consistently for some certain kids and when they do it’s a nightmare.
It’s not harmful to tell the truth, but it is to ignore it.
The problem with watching this discussion in real time on social media is seeing people who know one or two people who have a child who is autistic and that shapes their entire perspective. The parents who have children who are more severe on the spectrum often have very few people who know them because just the idea of time to socialize with others is often difficult to obtain.
The information vacuum is very real though and until we get a definitive answer on the cause of autism, people are going to speculate. You watch discussion of it be suppressed for over a decade and it creates trust issues.
Olivier Ray wrote a great book about the history of statistics : Quand le monde s’est fait nombre (fr)
https://archive.org/details/OlivierReynombre/
https://www.radiofrance.fr/franceculture/podcasts/les-chemin....
https://www.fnac.com/a9931250/Olivier-Rey-Quand-le-monde-s-e...
It’s a core tenant of this Curtis Yarvin / neo reactionary ideology that seems to be shared by a lot of VCs
Can't make that crap up...
A tenant is somebody paying to lease property, for example if you have a landlord, you're their tenant, and by analogy e.g. an Azure tenant is an organisation within the Azure cloud with a unique identifier.
A tenet is a belief or principle that is important to some group, for example the IETF's Best Common Practice series are not just RFCs describing a protocol or technology but instead statements of principle such as BCP 188 "Pervasive Monitoring Is An Attack".
Hmm, thank you. This is by far the best pithy argument for privacy I have found thus far.
† The RSA Key Exchange goes like this: We get the public key of a server from their certificate which they sent us, we pick a symmetric key at random and we encrypt our chosen key using that public key with the RSA algorithm, so that only the legitimate owner of the certificate can decrypt it, then we send that encrypted key to the server. Because they know the Private Key corresponding to the public key in the certificate they can decrypt the symmetric key we sent. This symmetric key is used for all further communication. This means if say, the Mad King's Secret Police obtain a copy of the RSA private key for the server at any time the Secret Police can decrypt every communication, even if the communications they're decrypting happened weeks, months or years before they obtain the key.
Also probably Nietzsche (not on Joe Rogan).
That the parents of severe cases eventually pass away and unless they figure out to take the kid with them, he is condemned at best to a life in mental health institutions - and usually they make One Flew Upon Cuckoo's Nest look like Teletubbies.
Add to that more and more people are single kids and usually born out of geriatric pregnancy (which also increases the chances of autism somewhat) - aka above 35, so they really are alone.
There are very good state and society interests in preventing autism. Mental disabilities are way worse than physical in today's society. Thankfully not every case is severe. But severe one's do exist.
In the UK, there are regions where 50% of children born in the early 2000s have special needs, and more children than adults are claiming disability benefits. It is going to have a very big impact on the labour market when 20-30% of these cohorts cannot work and, therefore, need to obtain income support from everyone else.
"Cannot work" has more to do (imo) with the American Welfare Cliff where if you accept disability, you're forced to not have a job because if you make even a small piddling of money (it's something like $600/mo), you lose all your disability.
It's very disgusting, imo, and rejecting people's admission of a very real struggle they have because admission "does more harm than good" is, itself, harmful.
― G. M. Gilbert, American psychologist who worked on the Nuremberg trialsSounds familiar...
That's why so many politicians and C-suite execs are "weasely." They learn to choose their words carefully. The Fed Chair can crash the markets, by wincing at the wrong time.
I empathize with him (see what I did, there?), but he's in a position where his utterances can either do great good, or great harm.
Many of these mega-rich folks keep their mouths shut, and that's for a reason.
Musk: Yeah, [Gad Saad is] awesome, and he talks about, you know, basically suicidal empathy. Like, there's so much empathy that you actually suicide yourself. So, we've got civilizational suicidal empathy going on. And it's like, I believe in empathy, like, I think you should care about other people, but you need to have empathy for, for civilization as a whole, and not commit to a civilizational suicide.
Rogan: Also don't let someone use your empathy against you so they can completely control your state and then do an insanely bad job of managing it and never get removed.
Musk: The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy. The empathy exploit. They're exploiting a bug in Western civilization, which is the empathy response. So, I think, you know, empathy is good, but you need to think it through and not just be programmed like a robot.
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/yes-musk-said-the-...
You could go as far as to say that empathy only occurs in moments where there is no me or other, just an “us“. Which includes me.
His statements and behavior make me question whether he really experiences empathy or whether he lost that too early in his life to consciously remember.
"Empathy" in the form of thoughts and prayers might not be zero sum, but that's probably not the "empathy" that Musk is talking about. He's probably about government spending on refugees or foreign aid, which is zero sum.
Interesting that you talk about “thoughts and prayers“. I am talking about feelings, the foundation of empathy.
What does that even mean? You can't defund USAID without yourself first going on a trip to Africa to dig a well?
>Or he means what he says and expresses the desire to paint empathy in a bad light and by that continue to dehumanize the other to justify violence.
How did you go from "so much empathy that you actually suicide yourself" to "dehumanize the other to justify violence"? Presumably he's talking about refugees and foreign countries, but there's a pretty wide gulf between putting the interests of your own polity ahead of others, and "dehumanize the other to justify violence".
>Interesting that you talk about “thoughts and prayers“. I am talking about feelings, the foundation of empathy.
I doubt Musk is upset all the people tweeting prayer emojis whenever a natural disaster hits a foreign country, when he's talking about "we've got civilizational suicidal empathy going on".
It reads like absolute paranoia to me.
You might not agree with his statement even with the full context, but at the very least it's a very different statement than the initial quote of "The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy".
There's a pretty big difference between "I think the west has too much empathy" and "The fundamental weakness of Western civilization is empathy", even if both are directionally anti-empathy. It's not any different than "I think the US's free speech regulations are too lax" and "The fundamental weakness of the US is free speech". Even though both are directionally anti-free speech, and a free speech opponent would object both premises, it would be wholly irresponsible to paint someone who wants hate speech laws passed as the latter, when their position is more accurately portrayed as the former.
I never claimed that he didn't say that, only that selectively quoting that part conveys an entirely different message than if you quoted the whole thing.
???
How does "there's so much empathy that you actually suicide yourself" violate "Kantian ethics"?
Also, if we accept that "dogwhistle" framing, what should we make of the average leftist commenter saying that greed/inequality is a weakness of US's economic system? Maybe that's actually a "dogwhistle" for hyper-collectivism, radical Bolshevism, and stepping over rich people? Or is the "dogwhistle" characterization only a thing you apply to the Other Side?
It's just the next step on the escalation ladder. They'll come for all of us eventually
I’d say they’re dangerous in the same way as librarians are dangerous.
But hey, considering what happened the last few months maybe Americans have a point for their case. In most of the Europe governments collapse and streets burn for much less all the time, in US they don't appear to have a recourse for at least 4 years.
Maybe its a good idea not to give the data to government affiliated billionaires that can crunch some numbers, feed the data to a machibne and come up with an optimization solutions like "If we can get rid of those suboptimal humans we can pay less income taxes". What are you going to do if the machine tells you that if an autist isn't making x amount of money by the age y it is drain to the society and the formula suggest that a deportation yields better outcomes financially?
The third reich response a lot of other commenters are having is interesting. I'm no expert and have not investigated autism, but if the messaging in response to RFK JR is "yeah he says 1 in 36 kids have autism now but actually that's fine and how it always has been and actually autism is good and he's actually Eichmann" you're going to drive a lot of people right to every unsubstantiated thing he says.
We know, with utter certainty, that the conclusion of this farce will be completely unproven lazy correlations that are so common in the scammer industry. Maybe it's seed oils, or HFCS, or the chemicals, etc. There is no outcome of RFK Jrs farce that won't be an absolute joke.
>The third reich response
Anyone who doesn't see incredible parallels with the rise of Hitler's heinous crimes is not paying attention. Oh look, they're going after the press and judges now, but don't worry until they're not suffixing the Hitler salutes with "my heart to yours" or something it surely can't be real. Further, the "they're going to make me believe this garbage person" argument is always laughable. No one buys it. People who like these creeps should just be honest about it and save the tired "you made me" bit that positively no one believes.
But sure, the only thing I can agree with you on is that the "autism is actually great" fringe is not helpful. Autism is not good, and most people with autism, even the ones who don't need around the clock care, would rather they didn't. ASD is likely basically a manifestation of evolution, and is biology playing random variations to test survivability, as it has done through human history. It gives us some super-intellectually focused individuals that contribute massively to humanity, but it also gives us a lot of very sad people who can't connect and sometimes need enormous levels of care.
Indeed, genetics are widely considered the prevalent "cause" of ASD. It's possible that autism really has become more common -- if it actually has and it isn't simply increased or more inclusive diagnoses -- because our information/engineering age has given people who carry ASD genetics more, errr, marketability on the reproduction market. Instead of being outcasts, what we used to call "Aspergers" sufferers, such as myself, suddenly make lots of money and get to be high status. But that's a lazy guess at most. But we do know that people on the ASD spectrum, including the most successful ones who found ways to make it work, are much more likely to have children on the spectrum, no outside environmental cause being necessary.
Just to give an idea to those not familiar with the difference between high functioning and low functioning autism, high functioning autists face problems like not being able to communicate properly some of the time, and low functioning autists face problems like not even being able to tell their caretaker which part of their body is in pain, or which kid in the group punched them.
Edit: The National Autistic Society is UK based but the situation is not that different in other countries.
It's really not a good thing when people, high functioning or not, are forced to choose between getting the help they need and being targeted by their government.
Since when is wearing smart watches only for autists?
Autistic or not, giving that kind of health information to private for-profit companies who collect that data to use it against you or sell to third parties was never a good idea even before the government wanted to take it for themselves.
Fully agree with you on that, the less data they have, the better.
Also, people have no problem minimizing the things as well, where pain again is a good example. In many situations, if it cannot be seen, secondary parties easily disregard it.
So, in conclusion, this confusion with the autism levels should not be a problem.
First of all, the reason this registry isn't going through is because autistic people who are functioning enough to speak out did so in solidarity with the entire autistic community. So far from polluting anything we are advocating for ourselves and our peers.
Secondly, this "high functioning low functioning" dichotomy is wrong so your framing it as a "us vs them" situation is off. It's a spectrum not a binary.
Third, presumably if they can't speak for themselves, and "high functioning" autistic people are discouraged, then the only people speaking for them are allistic people speaking about what's best for autistic people. When that happens, you get bone-headed characterizations like autistic people "never pay taxes, they'll never hold a job, they'll never play baseball, they'll never write a poem, they'll never go out on a date. Many of them will never use a toilet unassisted." and suggestions of registries, wellness farms, and soon enough genetic cleansings.
Finally, it's autistic acceptance and awareness month, and the autistic community has been under attack for a week. You're spending your Sunday calling autistic people "selfish" and characterizing their input as "pollution". Have some compassion please.
But what if low functioning and high functioning peers share many symptoms, but at different intensities? Won't that make the 'high functioning' peers more capable of understanding and thus speaking for their low functioning peers? In fact, there is a specific term for this - 'the double empathy problem'. Perhaps you should try a less 'ablist' approach to autism.
Are "quirky" and "odd" not labels? How about "weirdo" and "creep", are those not labels?
These romanticized ideas of what autism is (or used to be) hit a brick wall when you consider that 2/3 of people with autism have contemplated suicide and 1/3 of people with autism have attempted it. Most of it could probably be attributed to social rejection, exclusion, and isolation perpetuated by people who don't suffer from these disorders.
Source: I am the parent of a child with autism.
Reducing the conversation to high/low functioning also limits people's understanding and compassion of autistic people. The sibling commenter to you said they believe high functioning autistic people don't deserve to have a say over matters concerning autistic people, which is incredibly troubling because that just becomes and avenue for silencing autistic people; if having the ability to speak up for yourself means your opinion isn't valid, then that gives license to use and abuse a population, as autistic people often are.
No it's not. At minimum this is a horrible invasion of privacy, that I can't believe anyone on HN would defend. At worst this is straight Nazi shit, preparing the ground for extermination.
[1] https://time.com/7002003/donald-trump-disabled-americans-all...
I'm all for shaking our heads at young high functioning people flaunting it, but nobody gets the labels by having a good time. It's very rarely beneficial to disclose, even if disclosure is a choice.
Another matter is that 'high functioning autism' doesn't mean freedom from hardships. They learn and work differently and don't fit well in regular classrooms. If you search online, you'll find several hilarious accounts of puzzled and perplexed autistic students in their classrooms. Despite being 'high functioning', they really could use accommodations. This is true at home too. If you leave them alone, many would simply starve to death without even ordering food online. Another matter is 'masking' - something high functioning autistic people do in public. It makes them more approachable to others. But it also creates enormous cognitive loads that can later develop into other disorders. Diagnosis really helps in these cases.
I understand that sometimes people want high needs autistic people to be the only ones who are visible, because it perpetuates the (false) narratives people have about autistic people -- that we can't function in society, we are essentially children, we need to be "cured" to "save the children", but people need to realize this is a) a spectrum and b) your place within the spectrum is always in flux. Low functioning autistic people can become more high functioning with support, and high functioning autistic people who are abused can become low functioning very quickly.
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/04/25/opinion/autism-rfk-parent...
As a very liberal parent of a profoundly autistic child, there has never been article I've related to more. The condescension of fellow liberals and advocates for level 1 autism for us, much of which is present in this thread already, is incredibly frustrating and in many ways harder to stomach than RFK Jr.
RFK Jr is at a minimum a misguided nutjob - but he's also the only one to ever recognize our plight on a national stage.
<< Autism has become an identity, a different way of thinking and existing.
I think, this sentence, more than anything else in that article aggravates me the most and I am not entirely certain why. It is not some sort of rhetorical question. I simply struggle to understand the obsession US denizens have with identity. Everyone is 2% cherokee indian, 2/5 italian and maybe a little dutch on non-pagan holidays. And this does not spare the parents. They are X parents. Puppy parents. Teenager parents. Autist parents. All in an attempt to establish some sort of identity that can be displayed to the society at large.
<< Children with autism have a right to an appropriate education, to accommodations, changes in the classroom to help them succeed; we have sensory-friendly days at the zoo.
Sure, but at the expense of the non-autistic kids? What does that statement actually mean?
<< I don’t care if my child ever pays taxes
In case there is any kind of doubt, the society does. If the registry is not intended as an intentionally bad thing(tm) by RFK jr himself, you can rest assured it is absolutely seen as a way to ensure that more taxpayers exist ( and this is the charitable parsing of that registry ).
<< She did not destroy my family,
This is an interesting one. There are people who do derive meaning from service such as this, but they do not strike me as a majority of the population. At best, it puts a heavy strain on the familial ties.. and for a very obvious reason.. it is not a light cross to bear. And we do like easy mode. But to actively deny that it is a strain is silly.. because while it did not break the author, the same issue definitely took some families down.
<< I want to know why regressive autism happens
I think most of us on this forum can agree that knowledge can be useful.
The comment is simply sharing an article from someone directly affected. What happened to intellectual curiosity? Diversity of opinion? It's comments like this we need more of on HN, not less of.
viraptor•9h ago
keisborg•7h ago
QuantumGood•1h ago