Comments on: What Do You Think About Genetic Testing and Autism?

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 04:10:49 +0000

If you don’t mind my saying so, I’m not demanding it—there are many similiarities between my son and me, and some very real differences.

By: larry

larry — Wed, 14 Nov 2007 03:18:33 +0000

Maybe there is no autism gene. The word is going around that the reason for the recent spectacular jump in autism diagnosis is that it is fashionable. People don’t like to think they have mental illness. Also, mental illness is a defense against internal conflict, and people don’t like to threaten those defenses with enlightenment. Behavior modification is OK, but enlightenment is out.

So, since autism is supposedly a neurological defect–and all neurotic symptoms can fit nicely into an autism diagnosis (look at schizoid personality disorder or NPD for instance)– everybody demands to be diagnosed as autistic!

By: Who’s Afraid of Genetic Testing?

Who’s Afraid of Genetic Testing? — Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:01:09 +0000

[...] more information than we know what to do with, and how to understand? There is currently no known genetic test for autism. Some 30 to 100 genes have been identified as associated with autism. As an article in [...]

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 18:10:51 +0000

As M’s Dad points out, autism—”autisms”—has so many facets, a test would be complicated and complex in and of itself. My son is definitely perfect “as is.”

By: isdeards

isdeards — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 17:21:25 +0000

perfection……does it exist? I don’t think so. What a boring world it would be if everyone fitted perfectly into their societies expectations!
and that would be a huge danger if people made decisions from a genetic test!!!!

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 13:59:58 +0000

And what is perfection anyways…….. What a question for that doctor to ask!

By: isdeards

isdeards — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 08:38:09 +0000

I had genetic counciling when I was expecting my 2nd child…….Due to the fact my 1st child had recently been diagnosed with AS.
The doctor told me there was a high chance that the baby I was carrying had autism also! Then proceeded to ask me if I wanted to terminate the pregnancy!
I must say, that at this point I was almost 20 weeks pregnant, feeling my baby move inside me!
I was horrified, walked out stating “I will get what I am given”.
Yes, both of my children have autism, and also my youngest has severe ADHD aswell, but would I be without them? NO!!!!!
I think a genetic test would be a dangerous thing, the media has managed to raise the public’s awareness of autism, but not always in a good way. So many delightfull children will not be born, So many valuable adults would not then exist!
I mean, come on………how many of us are perfect anyway? We are who we are!

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 05:05:36 +0000

It does seem to me that autism genetics will be complicated indeed—-that more than one gene might be involved, and that combinations of various genes might be involved. Then there is the issue of what exactly would be looked for as regard autism genetics…..

By: M'sDad

M'sDad — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 03:51:47 +0000

It seems to me that the concept of a genetic test for autism presumes that “autism” is a single condition, and in much of the posting you’ve been providing on this blog (and in the excellent work of many other bloggers, especially those providing a perspective on neurodiversity) there seems to be much evidence for a wide variety of “autisms” — indeed, the more I read, the more the notion of “spectrum” (with its essentiallly linear, one-dimensional metaphor) really seems inadequate… I think a two- or even three-dimensional metaphor would be more reflective of the diversity of experience that is collectively labeled “autism” (and at that point, we’re back to the “what counts as…” question[s]).

So I’d be skeptical that a single genetic test — or even a limited battery of tests — could really indicate “autism” unless the definition of “autism” were very much restricted or bracketed, and it doesn’t seem to me that this would be either likely or even desirable…

And indeed, if one is willing to entertain the notion that genetic predisposition is not the only factor in an autistic individual’s abilities, but that environmental (no, not necessarily mercury) or developmental factors can influence “ability to function”, then the genetic info would be of seriously limited use (as Kristina observes even of truly dangerous/lethal conditions such as cancer).

Of course, knowing about genetic predisposition to sensitivity to certain factors might be useful to parents seeking to protect their children from ill effects of those factors (for example, serious life-threatening/anaphylactic allergies to certain foods, etc). And here we’re coming dangerously close to the less dogmatic side of the “mercury/heavy metals” theory, which postulates a child’s ostensible genetic inability to remove heavy metals from the body, process toxins, etc…

By: laurentius-rex

laurentius-rex — Fri, 13 Jul 2007 01:21:28 +0000

A load of old bollox.

Genetic testing couldn’t tell a basilisk from a camelopard.