Hans Asperger

I have just discovered (entirely by accident) that there is a book just three days away from publication. The author is Edith Sheffer. 'Asperger's Children: The Origins of Autism in Nazi Vienna'.

https://www.amazon.com/Aspergers-Children-Origins-Autism-Vienna/dp/0393609642/ref=mt_hardcover?_encoding=UTF8&me=

A very brief preview read indicates that the author has been in contact with Czech. I also briefly noted that she has a son diagnosed Asperger's, but it would appear both parent and son question that label's usefulness somewhat. I have read Czech's paper twice, but still haven't really found myself too much at odds with either the author or his subject. That might work out the same with this book, I imagine. I probably will try to read it, but not perhaps too soon. Having already had some contact with folks who question the label of a diagnosis on the spectrum, I kind of reckon this book also probably isn't really going to change my outlook that much; although there may well be some benefits from critiquing certain stereotypes.

We should stop saying “Asperger.” It’s one way to honor the children killed in his name as well as those still labeled with it. - Edith Sheffer

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/31/opinion/sunday/nazi-history-asperger.html

I'm concerned that this book could be the most prominent watershed in the evolution of AS and psychology in general since the publication of Uta Frith's book in 1991. The biggest difference is that Uta Frith is from the medical profession and set out to first and foremost publicise a medical condition rather than honour a person. Edith Sheffer is an historian who appears to have first and foremost written a book to vilify a person and obliterate his name from both formal use and respectable conversation.

It's possible that Asperger Syndrome could become an offensive term like referring to people with Down's Syndrome as a Mongol.

We should stop saying “Asperger.” It’s one way to honor the children killed in his name as well as those still labeled with it. - Edith Sheffer

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/31/opinion/sunday/nazi-history-asperger.html

I'm concerned that this book could be the most prominent watershed in the evolution of AS and psychology in general since the publication of Uta Frith's book in 1991. The biggest difference is that Uta Frith is from the medical profession and set out to first and foremost publicise a medical condition rather than honour a person. Edith Sheffer is an historian who appears to have first and foremost written a book to vilify a person and obliterate his name from both formal use and respectable conversation.

It's possible that Asperger Syndrome could become an offensive term like referring to people with Down's Syndrome as a Mongol.

The first person to identify it seems to have been a Soviet doctor. Unfortunately she was a Ukrainian Jew so Asperger wasn't going to refer to her research.

Cassandro said:

Glad it made you smile - it was a deliberate reference both to Georg and Anni Frankl (who fled Germany before the war), and to our reputation for blunt honesty

The deliberate reference to the Frankl's was part of the smile factor for me ~ with the smile content involving their romance starting at the University of Vienna in the 1920s, which I started reading about (on account of Czech's paper) from John E Robison's 2016 paper: Kanner, Asperger, and Frankl: A third man at the genesis of the autism diagnosis:

https://www.wm.edu/sites/neurodiversity/images/Robison%20Autism%20Article.pdf

If that is or has not already been of interest perhaps.

Cassandro said:

Dropping the name 'Asperger' would be nowhere near as severe as editing people from history.

Dropping the name 'Asperger' is though editing the identity of someone from written history.

Cassandro said:

Harvey Weinstein is not going to be edited from the history of cinema, but it's just that we're unlikely to name an award after him now, unless it's ironic and for something nefarious.

I do not relate with how it is an honour for people to have their name mentioned in relation to their work ~ awards as honours for a person's work; yes I relate with that no problems. But dropping peoples names from 'their' work ~ I am not into that personally.

Cassandro said:

By the way, both, it's Oskar Schindler. Otto Schindler was a rower, according to the unreliable Wikipedia.

Ah ~ pedantic collaboration bonus! Thank you ~ your correction is very much appreciated :-)

We cannot choose how we are diagnosed and it is not practical to give Jewish people a different diagnoses.  It is not really a Jewish issue and if it was changed to Wing Syndrome Asperger would not be edited from history.  I am not sure if Hans Asperger was alive today whether he would have prosecuted and if he was whether he would have been found guilty.  Israel would not have been interested in Hans Asperger as he was not accused of killing Jews.  His defence would have been that he did not himself kill anyone himself.  I did read somewhere that Germans who killed disabled people were not dealt with as strictly as those accused of killing Jews. Again what I think does not make any difference to the issue whether Hans Asperger would have been sent to prison.  The point is as Hans Asperger might have co-operated with murdering disabled children he should not be honoured.

We can be sure that Lorna Wing was not involved in Eugenics so we can give the honour to her.

I mentioned Oskar Schindler as he saved Jews by giving Jews jobs and Deep thought said that Hans Asperger saved the lives of high functioning Autistic people by saying they could be  useful to the third Reich.  If that is the case then there is some similarity to Oskar Schindler as Oskar Schindler saved Jews by giving them jobs.

Deepthought said:

I did though smile some with the suggestion of 'Frankly' Syndrome, which in functional terms is quite befitting I thought :-)

Glad it made you smile - it was a deliberate reference both to Georg and Anni Frankl (who fled Germany before the war), and to our reputation for blunt honesty. Here's part of what Neurotribes says:

Like Anni's portrait of Gottfried, Frankl's paper - which has also been overlooked for decades - opens a rare window on the expansive Viennese view of autism that ended up being overshadowed by Kanner's more constricted model.

Deepthought said:

Editing people from the history books is though the mental equivalent of physically editing people from society ~ which may sound in some way familiar perhaps?

Dropping the name 'Asperger' would be nowhere near as severe as editing people from history. Harvey Weinstein is not going to be edited from the history of cinema, but it's just that we're unlikely to name an award after him now, unless it's ironic and for something nefarious.

Deepthought said:

I am rather pedantic about words and names fitting with the objects of their description

Me too. By the way, both, it's Oskar Schindler. Otto Schindler was a rower, according to the unreliable Wikipedia.

David said:

You seem to suggest that Hans Asperger was another Otto Schindler by saving higher functioning Autistic people.

No I was not suggesting that, but being that you have: 

Dr Asperger was not a fully paid up member of the Nazi party, nor was he a manufacturer of tank shells for supporting the German war effort, nor as such the whole spectrum of Nazi enforced malevolence.

By stating this nonsense I am merely showing you how your argument does not stand up to reason regarding the 'crime' of 'collaboration', for in order to do something about problems in societal mechanics ~ getting involved with them and the hands dirty is necessary for some.

Both Asperger and Schindler have had incredible effect on helping people to feel supported and recognised as individuals, and this has been so less during and by far more since their direct and indirect involvements in and with the Nazi DICTATORSHIP of Adolf Hitler.

David said:

There were five million other victims of the Holocaust   who were not Jewish.

The problem is that people are still imagining the wrong doings of others from past times in foreign situations ~ whilst those exact same problems are developing yet further more in the present time and place, more and more as such unnoticed.

David said:

I do not know if Hans Asperger would have been prosecuted  after the war if the evidence had been there in his life time.

Obviously you do as the historical evidence only came to light in April 2018, so Dr Asperger getting prosecuted could not and did not happen, as he died in October 1980.

David said:

I know Otto Schindler saved Jews by being part of the system and employing them.  You seem to suggest that Hans Asperger was another Otto Schindler by saving higher functioning Autistic people.  By accepting his Asperger Syndrome we are implying that it is right to kill people at the lower end of the Spectrum

Not quite, by accepting that Oscar and Hans both signed papers with death being the result in military and psychiatric environments respectively ~ I am stating as I have been all along that the holocaust of blaming and shaming others is still for many carrying on unchecked. The socio-ill-logical mechanics of society as a being an unforgiving elitist dictatorship at large needs to be addressed, and more healthy pro-social behaviour exemplified for everyone regardless of culture, appearance or circumstance.

Obviously your assertion that I am suggesting it is right to kill people ~ is why I keep suggesting that you learn instead to be compassionate with yourself, and as such show respect for others. In this way respect for the dead is shown without further insult or ado for the living. Yes?

David said:

I belonged to the London Autism Rights Movement years ago and the founder said that Autistic people in homes are our brothers and sisters according to that logic Hans Asperger saved us but sent our brothers and sisters to their deaths.  We have to wait and see what they decide to do.

The first problem here is your assumption that sending people to their deaths is accordant to my logic, which is complete and utter nonsense ~ as it plainly contradicts my repeated suggestions that you show more compassion with yourself, and as such show respect for others. Yes?

The second problem, is that Asperger's Syndrome as Uta Frith stated is not an issue as far as scientific nomenclature goes, so it is a matter for the Autistic community to decide regarding themselves as individuals. This is so on the basis that once you have met one person with Autism; you have met one person with Autism ~ rather than some higher authority or moral and ethical cause that all must follow, support or lead ~ but one of personal choice. Yes? 

David said:

I suggested renaming it to Wing Syndrome after the late Lorna Wing.

Editing people from the history books is though the mental equivalent of physically editing people from society ~ which may sound in some way familiar perhaps?

For me personally, I am very much into keeping Lorna Wing's work attributed to her, and other medical and scientific experts work attributed to them ~ otherwise it gets even more Orwellian 1984 "Newspeak" ~ i.e. ambiguous euphemistic language used chiefly in political propaganda.

Anyway, my behavioural traits fitted the diagnostic criteria of Asperger's Syndrome hook, line and sinker, and I am rather pedantic about words and names fitting with the objects of their description. For me then each word and name fits into my linguistic map like a cross-word puzzle, and attempting to fit anything that does not fit ~ does not and cannot work for me.

I utterly respect though that AS does not work as a nomenclature for you, on account of your cultural heritage and personal experiences, just as I utterly respect anybody else who's sensibilities are likewise or otherwise inclined ~ for people's cultural heritages and personal experiences are all sacred to me. And no matter how much I like or dislike what people do, I love everybody and everything as brothers and sisters from other mothers anyway.

P.S. I did though smile some with the suggestion of 'Frankly' Syndrome, which in functional terms is quite befitting I thought :-)

Attwood's undoubted strength is in creating more recent understanding of ASD. All credit to Uta Frith and Lorna Wing, but from what I see here we probably need a system of labelling that is not at all eponymous. I reckon that Asperger, his predecessors, Kanner, Frith, Wing and Attwood have all used terms revolving around the idea of autism; as do DSM, ICD, NAS and many others. It is also an acknowledgement that high-functioners have a great deal of common ground with people with more classic presentations; and I'm personally not really sure where I lie on the spectrum anyway. Obviously, if we stick with 'autism', there will eventually have to be more gradations or more specific forms, but that process is already happening anyway. That also would allow some people to continue using Asperger's if they thought it was appropriate. And as I have said before, the movement towards 'autism' may indicate that DSM had some early indications of impending problems with the eponymous label.

Even if he did move to the US he could easily have carried out exactly the same activities over there. The US was very supportive of eugenics in the early 20th century and there is some evidence that the Nazi government were inspired by it and used it as a prototype for their own eugenics projects.

This now goes back to the issue of whether eugenics in a democratic(?!?) country is acceptable but eugenics under a Nazi government is unacceptable.

We could call it Attwood Syndrome but Lorna Wing is the first  person to have written about it outside Austria so they are more likely to use her name.  They might do  what they are doing in the USA and call it all Autism Spectrum.   Calling  it  Wing  or Attwood would be continuing Asperger's work without using his name.  It is a pity that Asperger did not leave Austria in the same way Leo Kanner went to the USA in 1924 before the Hitler era started.

What about Dr Tony Attwood?

http://www.tonyattwood.com.au/

He wrote a book about AS that is often regarded as the gold standard.

It is very simple all new editions would be called Wing Syndrome and at the beginning there would need to be an explanation of the reason.  That way there would not be much disruption.  WING SYNDROME WHICH USED TO BE CALLED ASPERGER SYNDROME.   Why do you not try to contact the relevant people with your views.  You could write to senior people at the NAS.  Not had a reply yet from Professor Howling.

'Wing syndrome' seems a reasonable suggestion.

Do we think therre's any risk that people might think 'you had to change it because of Nazi/child-murderer connotations', therefore you're hiding something about AS/autistic people?

I like what you say about fraternity with institutionalised autistic people.

I don't see it as about censoring the name. I don't know what you mean by an NHS 'ruling'.  They currently mostly use ASD, which should really change ('spectrum' misleads a lot of people into thinking of a continuum of severity, researchers and advocates prefer 'condition' to 'disorder', and 'autism' is much simpler, and is just waiting on being broadened in the public mind.)

Does this mean that books that mention Asperger should cease publication and be taken out of circulation? Read my post about the Video Recordings Act.

Your proposal is not as easy in practice as you think it is.

I actually think that opposition to Asperger will not be by people with ASD or their close associates but by NT folk who do not have any involvement with ASD or professionals who want to protect their image. It's a case of do not mention that Asperger word - he was a very sick and twisted individual.

Will the NHS impose ruling against Asperger on the grounds that it is potentially offensive even if his name appears in ICD-11?

This is completely different because there are issues about the Doctor Hans Asperger.  .  I have suggested that we keep his research but just change the name from Asperger Syndrome  to WING SYNDROME. after the late Lorna Wing.  That is very simple.  .

Arran said:

It's possible that Asperger Syndrome could become an offensive term like referring to people with Down's Syndrome as a Mongol.

I'd be worried by that abuse. Wouldn't marginalising use of 'Asperger' make it less likely though? It seems the change of name from 'The Spastics Society' to 'Scope' has helped reduce discrimination against people with cerebral palsy.

Or do you think removing something from a medical lexicon means it is out of control? Can teachers no longer ask a class 'Do you know what "Mongol" means?'

I know that Hans Asperger was not breaking the laws of Nazi Germany by sending children to their death.    There were five million other victims of the Holocaust   who were not Jewish.  I do not know if Hans Asperger would have been prosecuted  after the war if the evidence had been there in his life time.  I know Otto Schindler saved Jews by being part of the system and employing them.  You seem to suggest that Hans Asperger was another Otto Schindler by saving higher functioning Autistic people.  By accepting his Asperger Syndrome we are implying that it is right to kill people at the lower end of the Spectrum.  I belonged to the London Autism Rights Movement years ago and the founder said that Autistic people in homes are our brothers and sisters according to that logic Hans Asperger saved us but sent our brothers and sisters to their deaths.  We have to wait and see what they decide to do.  I suggested renaming it to Wing Syndrome after the late Lorna Wing.

Uta Frith wrote a reference book for parents, teachers, and educational psychologists, whereas it appears as if Edith Sheffer is writing what I call a coffee table book for casual reading by people who are intrigued by or hate Nazi Germany that have no involvement with anybody with ASD.

I expect it to be a bestseller.

Sheffer's article is at least informative and well-written.  It is arguing:

Does the man behind the name matter? To medical ethics, it does. Naming a disorder after someone is meant to credit and commend, and Asperger merited neither... We should stop saying “Asperger.”

I would say the terminology has little effect on practicalities, although Sheffer also criticises some aspects of Asperger's description as well:

He also called autistic psychopaths “intelligent automata.”

although Sheffer herself has there adopted Asperger's own 'psychopathy' terminology without acknowledging misleading modern resonances of that term.

ISTR the editorial in Molecular Autism (weird journal title: hey, this molecule has problems communicating, and likes to chill out on its own) suggests clinicians will take into account what self-identifying Aspies themselves choose. I think it is right for them to do that. If we decide to retain Asperger, then it may hang on in ICD-11 in some form.

If AU decides to change its name, that could be influential - but I'm sure previous editions would continue to be circulated under their current name.

Doesn't seem to have had much effect on other reporting yet: www.theguardian.com/.../woman-with-aspergers-ejected-from-cinema-for-laughing-at-western

Arran said:

The biggest difference is that Uta Frith is from the medical profession and set out to first and foremost publicise a medical condition rather than honour a person.

Absolutely :-)

Arran said:

Edith Sheffer is an historian who appears to have first and foremost written a book to vilify a person and obliterate his name from both formal use and respectable conversation.

This person could also learn to be compassionate with herself, and show respect for others.