AspieCentral.Org: Last 35 Posts

AspieCentral.Org: Last 35 Posts http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/ AspieCentral.Org: Last 35 Posts en Sat, 22 Nov 2008 10:43:00 +0000 gitchel on "On Eugenic Abortion and the Right to Choose" http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/topic.php?id=8#post-9 Thu, 28 Feb 2008 23:31:04 +0000 gitchel 9@http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/ This was written in response to a discussion elsewhere about the possible future testing and subsequent abortion of those with Autism or Aspergers - - - - - - - - - On Eugenic Abortion and the Right to Choose The questions of abortion, genetic testing, and contraception all come down the disagreement between those who believe people have a right to privacy and those who don't believe people have a right to privacy. If looked at outside this debate, abortion is clearly a bad thing, since it results in the death of a fetus and a possibly significant risk to the mother. Genetic testing is clearly a neutral thing, since it's simply information about statistical probabilities. And contraception is a good thing, since we certainly need parents to be more responsible about how many people get created. If we ignore the question of privacy, then we would obviously outlaw abortion, fund genetic testing, and provide free contraception to every single human. For people who do not believe in the privacy of others (leaving aside their common firm belief in their own privacy), discussion of all these issues revolves around just how intrusive we want the government to become. For others, there is a lot more to say about the ethical, emotional and real damage that can be done. Past rulings of the US Supreme Court have affirmed our right to some degree of personal privacy. It is not the case - as some misunderstand - that women have been given the right to abortion. Not directly, at any rate. The truth is that women have a recognized right to have other people stay out of their physical and reproductive business. Regulating the choice of whether to give birth or not would be the same as seizing a woman's body, relieving her of any dignity and self-control, and using it to birth children for the State. Some prefer to get around the governmental aspect of this seizure by doing it in the name of the fetus, but even then the woman's body has been removed from her ownership and given over to another person - and, again, the government steps in to represent that person. To control a woman's reproductive organs is to remove her from her body. Surely that must have emotional, psychological and spiritual effects similar to prison, paralysis or death. Abortion will always be an unfortunate choice. And society should work hard to put into place any and all resources necessary to prevent a woman from feeling compelled to make that choice. Make adoption easier and less stigmatized. Provide contraceptive training for all young women. Enforce laws pertaining to child and spousal support. Provide healthcare and daycare for all children. Provide free and excellent education to all regardless of family income. There are many ways we can work to prevent abortion; restricting a woman's control over her own body is not one of those ways. Contraception, like abortion, is a decision made by those who wish to maintain personal control over their own bodies, families and homes. Though it may offend outsiders on a philosophical or religious level, these private decisions are usually made while considering such personal things as family finances, personal lifestyle, availability of support, future plans and hopes and, simply, whether one wants to undergo pregnancy, birth, and child-rearing. Since it is unlikely that those offended outsiders are willing to step in and provide the money and manpower to alleviate the concerns arising from these considerations, it seems doubly inappropriate for them to exercise control over the final decisions. Many people want to override a woman's right to privacy in a selective way, trying to dictate some of her choices but unwilling to take over any of the liabilities that go with those choices. Both abortion and contraception have to do with a woman's control over whether or not she births a child. Prenatal genetic testing is different in some important ways. In this case, there is a direct reading of the fetus' genetic information which is then, usually, used to determine the relative value of his or her continued life. This is no longer a simple question of whether a woman prefers to be pregnant. Instead, it's a matter of whether this particular child is worth the effort and resources of the mother or the family AFTER the birth. Sometimes it is a parent making the determination of whether it's worth the efforts of the CHILD to struggle and survive after being born. At any rate, it has nothing to do with whether or not to have a child, since a satisfactory genetic test is the only barrier to the decision to bear the child. It no longer has to do with the woman's right to privacy. It now has to do with the child's right to privacy. Aborting a fetus because of a judgement about his or her future life is no more ethically positive than making the same determination at 2 years old, after a diagnosis of autism. When you add in that these decisions are based on statistical probabilities derived from laboratory tests that contain small but real error, it can be assumed that many children - with and without the specified genetic profile - will be aborted who would have become very successful human beings. Eugenic abortion - the choice to abort children with a certain genetic profile - is a clear violation of the child's right to privacy at the very least. It can't be excused under the umbrella of parental custody, since it is a decision that has most of its effect after the child would have become an adult. The decision isn't simply not to allow the child to exist, but to disallow the ADULT as well. The fact that the violation of the fetus' genetic privacy takes place far before his or her adulthood doesn't make it less of a violation. In fact, it is even more egregious because of the defenselessness of the victim, and the summary preemption of a defense he or she would certainly have made successfully at a later time. So, if you believe in an innate right to personal control and privacy, then it's clear that a woman's right to choose is sacred, while the right to genetic privacy extends more to the fetus than to the mother. Of course, this entire quandary could be mitigated by a mix of well-applied contraceptive policy and a great deal of education against the currently popular myth that autistics lead painful, miserable, wasted lives and would all prefer to be relieved of the burden of their lives if only they could manage to ask. Barring that kind of educational movement, then it is incumbent on our legislature to prohibit doctors from taking and sharing the genetic profile of a fetus with anyone. If, on the other hand, you do not believe that every individual has the right to exclude the interference of others - and the government - from their most personal information and decisions, then nothing I say here is going to penetrate your self-indulgent duplicitousness. -- Jeff Gitchel <a href="mailto:jeff@turtlemoon.org">jeff@turtlemoon.org</a> <a href="http://flickr.com/photos/trainorphans/" rel="nofollow">http://flickr.com/photos/trainorphans/</a> <a href="http://turtlemoon.org" rel="nofollow">http://turtlemoon.org</a> gitchel on "READ THIS FIRST!" http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/topic.php?id=5#post-6 Wed, 20 Feb 2008 17:00:00 +0000 gitchel 6@http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/ This site is dedicated to those with Aspergers Syndrome and to those who care for them. We believe that those with Aspergers (Aspies) deserve to have every resource and opportunity to live productive, exciting, fulfilling lives. Our goal is to collect as much valuable information and discussion as we can, in order to help make this happen. We are also dedicated to the principle that Aspergers Syndrome is not a disease to be cured. We are as we were made, and the fact that we process and experience the world differently does not make us broken, disabled, or diseased. Life is harder for some than others, and aspies are apt to have it harder than most, but that doesn't make them worthless or pitiful. It simply means they may need a hand from time to time. Humans have accomplished remarkable things before, and aspies are as human as anyone - perhaps even more so. Although the primary geographic focus of this site is around Central Iowa, all visitors are welcome. Since this is a support site first, and a social site second, the first rule is that all visitors will be treated with respect, and the expectation of personal responsibility. There is no case where abuse - of anyone - has helped our cause, and we can't afford to allow it here. As you can see, it is early days here. There are many hazards to navigate and resources to gather, and - hopefully - many suggestions to ponder. Please let us know, any way you like, what you think. This is your tool. Let us know how you need it to work. -- Jeff Gitchel Site Admin aspiecentral.org <a href="mailto:jeff@turtlemoon.org">jeff@turtlemoon.org</a> gitchel on "My Intro" http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/topic.php?id=4#post-5 Wed, 20 Feb 2008 15:02:07 +0000 gitchel 5@http://aspiecentral.org/bbpress/ I have come to realize that my family has a long tradition of Autism. It is probable that my Grandfather was autistic. My father was certainly Aspergers. A brother I can't remember, in an institution I can't recall. At least one more Aspie brother and, of course, my lovely Aspergian sons. Most of my life, I simply thought I was damaged in some way. Many "educators" classified me as retarded, or lazy, or poorly disciplined, or simply insignificant. A few teachers wept in frustration because they thought I would be brilliant, if only they could convince me to care, to look them in the eye and show them some small expression of realization. But nothing worked. I passed through the entirety of my schooling scoring near perfectly on tests, and failing utterly in every other respect. This did, indeed, set me up for a difficult life. And that's been hard for my Beloved Wife. And it hasn't helped that my grand preoccupations don't seem to care whether they are lucrative, or just plain useless. I'm very lucky, I suppose, that one of them happened to be computers. I doubt we'd have survived on the guitar, or the poetry, or the Science Fiction, or the theatrical lighting, or the comic strip, or the hitchhiking. (A few of my fixations in the 70s were even more non-productive.) As I said, I spent most of my life confused about myself. It wasn't until just a few years ago that we had a name (at least a polite name) for my peculiar perspective. Asperger Syndrome. I admit that the label was scary at first. And, for a while, I just tried to ignore it. But I eventually realized that it wasn't a disease, or an amputation, or some sort of cancer. It was simply a different type of person. Some are tall, some are short. Some are strong, and some are graceful. Some are sociable and easy to talk to - some are able to see unusual things in unusual ways, and to put them together and take them apart surprisingly and sincerely. I come from a long line of unusualness. And it doesn't look like it's ending soon. Most of us never knew how valuable we were, and we're still surrounded by those who doubt we are. But I'm convinced the world would be a much cheaper place without us, and may someday come to understand how much it needs us. And when I think this way, I actually wish I could go back and reassure those weeping teachers, puzzled counselors, startled school psychologists, and angry relatives. I'd tell them it's OK, that there's nothing wrong after all, and I really could hear how much they cared. That, ultimately, there's nothing to fix but the reactions of strangers. That someday I would know myself for what I am and find some freedom, finally, from the constant self-doubt and the vulnerability to others' abrupt and angry judgments. So, no. I do not believe there will ever be a cure. There may not actually be anything to cure. And if it meant I'd have to give up my unique space in the universe, even for an easy "normal" life, I'd have to leave it go anyway. It may be harder for me to get where I want to go, but it's a much more beautiful and interesting place I'm struggling to reach. I don't need pills, surgery, behavior modification, lobotomy or electroshock. I need my fellow travelers to slide over just a bit to let me travel along with them. I need to be allowed my own adventures. And I need someone, occasionally, to listen to the stories and look at the snap shots and marvel at the things I've seen. -- Jeff Gitchel aspiecentral.org turtlemoon.org <a href="mailto:jeff@turtlemoon.org">jeff@turtlemoon.org</a>