joanna bujes wrote: >>>> I would think it would be relatively easy to determine whether you are right. Surely they must keep statistics that would help you correlate age/medical intervention with incidence of learning disorders, autism, etc.<<<<
Charles J. writes: >>> Not as easy as you might think, since concepts of what is normal and abnormal vary widely (ditto
dyslexia, ditto attention deficit disorder, etc).<<<
I wrote: >> the concept of hard-core autism (Kanner's autism) is pretty clear as these things go. (Concepts such as Asperger's
syndrome and PDD are hard to pin down a lot of the time and often lead to misdiagnosis.)<<
Charles J. > No, it's not. Not as to it's etiology, which was the point of the point.<
etiology is always hard to discover, even when things are measured well. I never disagreed with that, just the implication that it's always hard to measure these concepts. BTW, the California study that showed "Autism on the rise" tested to see if it was on the rise due to definition changed. It wasn't.
Charles:>>> Also, I doubt if anyone tracks a very large number of infants for very long, but a lot of the disorders appear past infancy. And by that time, all sorts of 'psychological' and 'developmental' theories are used to overinterpret what has been manifested (e.g., the theory of unloving parents and the like). <<<
I wrote: >> luckily Bettelheim's Freudian theory of the Refrigerator Mom as the cause of autism ("the theory of unloving parents" -- with the woman taking the blame, natch) has been discredited by almost all studies. Most current theories blame genetics, prenatal "insults," and the like. Autism is seen as a neurobiological disorder.<<
>Yes, but people like psychiatrists and psychologists still have a big stake in dealing with such things. Woe to the social case worker who thinks he can take them on.<
I don't quite get what you're saying here. The psychiatrists are often drug pushers, and would _like to_ treat autism with drugs, but there is currently no widely-acceptable med for autism (though Risperidone and Omega fish oils are rising in popularity). So they can't really do what they'd like to do. BTW, it's not like with ADHD, where there _is_ a medicine that works, at least temporarily (Ritalin, etc.), so the drug companies, school principals, etc., push the ADHD diagnosis in hopes that the med will work to make their jobs easier.
The psychologists that I've encountered -- except for the Freudian jerk (sorry if I'm redundant) who treated my son for awhile -- see autism as a neurobiological disorder with no real cure as yet. (My impression fits with what almost all people in the "autism community" say.) What they try to do is try to help people live with their autism, to connect with society _despite_ their sensory overloads, etc. Given this work, it's possible for those with autism to do pretty well, considering their obstacles. Social workers follow this lead, in my experience.
CJ: >>> I'll keep my eyes open for such a study, though. My brother, who works with a lot of kids diagnosed as 'autistic' and 'learning disabled', thinks it's striking how many of these kids are born to older, middle class parents.<<<
CJ:>>>... One problem in dealing with such parents is that, unlike working class parents, they really do think they've done something wrong and fret a lot about why their family should be stricken (things like this aren't supposed to happen to them).<<<
I wrote: >> My experience, with parents of Asperger kids, is that almost none blame themselves. Instead, they're looking for solutions (new diets, treatments, schools, etc.) or someone else to blame (such as those who require childhood vaccinations). Of course, those who attend our support group are self-selecting...<<
CJ: > My interpretation is different. They care about etiology, however lame the explanations, so long as they can blame anyone but themselves. My point was, though, that there is a lot more activism and concern and fault-finding once it's a middle class cause--whereas, Americans tend to be quite fatalistic about a problem if it doesn't affect the middle classes so much. <
It's true that U.S. politics overwhelmingling and unhealthily reflect "middle class" concerns. And it's true that parents in the autism community are a bit too vehement in their rejection of the Bettelheim "Refrigerator Mom" theory (which blames the parents). [By the way, is that what you're endorsing?] But they are right to reject that theory nonetheless.
What would working class reaction to this phenomenon look like? for those who've attended our support groups, it's very much like the reaction of the middle-class parents. Those who don't attend are likely fatalistic or excessively trusting of the authority figures who tell them what to do. But that reflects the absense of working-class institutions: there is no labor party in the U.S., while labor unions are extremely weak, undemocratic, and/or narrow. Absent a vibrant working-class culture of the sort that sustained and was (for awhile) sustained by social-democratic and communist parties in other countries and times, working class folks are encouraged to emulate the individualistic and often cynical approach of the middle class.
CJ: >>> One paradox is that it turns the most right-wing of them into limited, self-serving socialists once they have to deal with the social services maze of the US.<<<
me: >> we have little choice but to fight the system (the schools, etc.), but without calling for its abolition. One problem is that it's severely underfunded. (The Americans with Disabilities Act talks a nice game, but isn't backed up with the dough.) <<
> Which you could say about ALL social services in the US. The US makes the stingy UK look like a generous country in most areas.<
yup. The only way to change this is for people to mobilize _en masse_ to pressure the government.
Jim
