Autism and genetic “accidents”
July 26, 2007 by Kristina Chew, PhD
Filed under Health
Autism cases due to genetic accidents and, indeed, “freak genetic accidents,” in a Zee News (India Edition) article about the recently published study on spontaneous genetic mutations and autism.
Autism compared to a freak accident?
Sounds a bit in the category of referring to autism as, for example, a train wreck.
To some degree, one might say that we are all “genetic accidents”—-”accident” being from the Latin word accidit, “it happens.” And as I have often stated, I’m very glad Charlie “happened” to me.
Has a Neurodiversity Political Correctness Manual been published yet? Maybe autism researchers should hold off on providing the results of their studies until they have been proofed by the Autism Hub.
Thank you for the information.
As that painting guy on PBS used to say “there are no mistakes just happy accidents”.
I’ve recently had trouble tripping over my words to talk through how mutations may cause autistic symptoms and then ‘corrected’ myself to say traits. I know that the phrase “Hate the disorder, love the child” is looked at with distain within the community. But isn’t it still possible to enjoy the road you are on while still being angered at the detour that caused you to get there?
I’ve learned to appreciate detours, while disliking the extra time taken for some and, too, the stress at finding oneself a bit lost. I’ve made some good discoveries, though sometimes ones does find oneself in unknown (to me) neightborhoods, as in the time a semi pulled in front of me as I was trying to get onto Highway 78.
While I abstain from the neurodiversity political correctness debate (I could care less whether “person with autism” is a better choice of words than “autistic person”) I do think that the use of the word “freak” in conjunction with a discussion of autism or any disability is a bit offputting, because that word (although proper in a sense in this context) also has an unfortunate connotation of “circus sideshow freak,” a situation in which persons with physical disabilities or unusual savant skills were routinely exploited.
I was indeed thinking of the “freak” word, in the “freak show” context.
Terms like “freak” are not scientific terms. It’s not a matter of holding off on scientific findings, but the way things are communicated matters. The way findings are prematurely interpreted sometimes also matters.
Are we supposed to magically stop being offended because the phrase “political correctness” is thrown around?
Imagine a scientific study about black people where they used the term “negroes” or something, or a scientific study about gay people where they referred to them as “fags” or “freak hormonal accidents”. Would it matter or not?
“Freak” is an unfortunate choice because of the sideshow implications. I guess I took it in the other possible meaning of “an occurence that is highly unusual or irregular”, or more correctly in this context–spontaneous mutation…also not to be confused with the derogatory term “mutant”. (ay-ay-ay).
I haven’t seen the PNAS paper to see if the actual term “freak” is used in there. The press has a way of seeking a sensational grabber to pull you into a complicated (and possibly boring to the average person in the original) story.
“Has a Neurodiversity Political Correctness Manual been published yet? Maybe autism researchers should hold off on providing the results of their studies until they have been proofed by the Autism Hub.”
Harold, stop being an anus. It might suit you perfectly, but we don’t want to be faced with one that often.
Gah, David, you’ve reminded me of my friend’s way of not calling an asshole an asshole — he used WPS, for “winking pink sphincter”. And he used it well.