Hans Asperger

Cassandro said:

I don't see your basis for saying 'the clock will also be turned back so that the only autism which counts will be traditional Kanner autism'.

AS is a useful diagnostic label when it comes to trying to acquire support and services for people with the condition. There is a real danger that if AS is folded into ASD then people with AS (and other higher-functioning ASD) will be pushed to the bottom of the pile when in comes to trying to acquire support and services as people with traditional Kanner type autism will be given much higher priority. This already happens within the NAS.

David said:

The war was started because Hitler invaded Poland and refused to leave Poland

If you get your knowledge of history from school and TV documentaries.

It's more complex than this in reality.

Do not forget Hans Asperger was not accused  of Killing Jews and do not forget most of the world was at War with Nazi Germany.  Hans Asperger was accused of not only been a member of the Nazi party but also referring disabled children to a clinic in Vienna to be murdered.  He would not refer a child with Asperger Syndrome to be murdered because it could be made use of but if the child was profoundly Autistic I expect it would be sent to the clinic to be murdered.   Do you want to be regarded as one of Hans Asperger people?

  The war was started because Hitler invaded Poland and refused to leave Poland.  It was not a Jewish War.  I know that there has always been abuse of disabled people but the Nazi era was uniquely horrible.  I am sure that if  Hans Asperger had not lived we would be aware that you can be on the Spectrum without being Autistic.   Asperger Syndrome has been replaced with Autistic Spectrum Disorder so it should not make that much difference.

Herwig Czech is a historian, and the motivation is presumably being researching history. Uta Frith and others have issued statements agreeing that this was valuable research.

I'd agree the media seem to have over-reacted, and would suggest it's probably worth reading Czech's paper in full (which I haven't yet) before coming to a firm opinion.  I wouldn't read too much into it as regards the status of AS.  The autistic community absorbed AS years ago, although the term 'aspie' is still used.  As the editorial suggests, Wing could equally have credited two Jewish members of Asperger's team, Frankl & Weiss.

I don't see your basis for saying 'the clock will also be turned back so that the only autism which counts will be traditional Kanner autism'.  The dividing line was always quite blurry - some people speak under some conditions, and not others.

Who exactly is this Herwig Czech and what are his motivations for carrying out this research?

Something that I'm concerned about is how this is spread like wildfire through the mainstream media. It seems like every English language media source has run away with the story. In contrast Lorna Wing's 1981 paper remained a near secret outside of a small circle of academics for over 10 years. It was referenced by media sources in her obituary but how many journalists even knew of its existence back in the 1980s? Even references to the milestone books about Asperger syndrome by Uta Frith and Tony Attwood have only had a minimal mention in the mainstream media and often years after they were published.

I can't help but thinking that there is some malevolent behind the scenes project going on by certain factions of the Jewish community to discredit Hans Asperger.

It's the beginning of the end of Asperger syndrome. In a few years it will be labelled as just autism but the clock will also be turned back so that the only autism which counts will be traditional Kanner autism. Anybody who still wants to push AS (regardless of what it's called) will be vilified as a sympathiser of a Nazi war criminal.

I suspect that Lorna Wing, Uta Frith, and Tony Attwood will be consigned to the dustbin of history as naïve fools who just wanted to make a name for themselves whilst failing to understand who Hans Asperger was. So will Luke Jackson. I also suspect that JKP will stop publishing books about AS. 

The eugenics is a mere side show. There was plenty of support for eugenics in Britain both during the early 20th century and today. It's collaborating with the *** that's Hans Asperger's crime. This is just as unforgiveable in academia as it is in the real world.

The point is my family and I did not accept I was on the spectrum until 1990 when I was over thirty years old.  In 1990 we accepted I was on the Spectrum as in family therapy it was explained to my Parents that I have ASPERGER SYNDROME.  Before that we were not able to accept I was on the Autistic Spectrum because we could not believe I was Autistic.  All that meant was I had difficulties without a label.  I could not hold down a job or make a proper relationship with a woman.  Having that label helped my Father to understand that I am as I am not because of up bringing but because of Asperger Syndrome.    My Father constantly  blamed my Mother for not being severe enough with me.  My Father was old fashioned and just before he died in March 2006 said it was wrong to cane in the 1930s at his boarding school in Cambridge for talking after lights out  but it was wrong to stop teachers caning all together and that is why children are now out of control.  Anyway now I have my difficulties with a label which makes it easier to know why I have the difficulties.  I do understand the advantage of keeping the label Asperger Syndrome as some people might not accept the word Autistic but I think it is not right now we know that Hans Asperger was really a War criminal.

David said:

I think in the USA they dropped  the term Asperger as they want to reduce the number of people labelled Autistic.

But DSM-5 means that people who used to be diagnosed with Asperger’s Syndrome are now diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder, so it isn’t reducing the number of people labelled autistic.

You keep referring to your early childhood and being given a different meaning of what autism was as to what it is now, and I appreciate that’s probably confusing for you, but it really is very outdated to say that to be autistic means you can’t speak - this hasn’t been part of an autism diagnosis for many years now. You need to find out more about the definition of autism now, and then you will realise that these things you say need to be made clear are already very clear.

Yes that is correct it must be made clear that one can be on the Spectrum and be able to speak clearly.  That is why my Mother when I was nine years old in 1966 did not believe I was Autistic when a Psychiatrist wanted to send me to an Autistic School where I am sure I would not have fitted in.

I think in the USA they dropped  the term Asperger as they want to reduce the number of people labelled Autistic.

David said:

If we drop the term Asperger Syndrome it needs to be made clear that one can be on the Spectrum and still be high functioning but able to speak fluently. 

This is already quite clear and has been the case for a number of years. Many individuals with autism can speak fluently, and it is known that plenty of us at the high functioning end of the spectrum have an advanced vocabulary.

Many people with Asperger probably have mild Autism but not be able to cope with life as they have other Co-Existing conditions.  Do not forget that during that period we also had Dr Mengele experimenting on Jews and others so we do not want to give the Germans and Austrians recognition during the Nazi era.

Sterilisation, but not killing.

Senor said:

Leo Kanner, supported sterilisation for the mentally disabled

...which, logically speaking, makes him Nazi too, surely?

The irony. You really couldn't make this up.

NAS36609 said:

I think it’s really sad, but some people will always hate other types of people

Were you implying "neurotypicals" by way of the former? ;)

I hear one or two sources are now positing a so-called borderline autism. Sub-clinical if you like. Again, autistic traits without actually being autistic. A spectrum that could encompass almost anyone to some degree......until the definitions on when it is enough of a problem to need to ask for support or special consideration for your needs.....well then opinion becomes......slanted. This borderline autism could be for those who could say that autism has touched their lives but it no longer matters. Possibly. 

There used to be PDD Nos of course. But maybe that came about because the Konner checklist for autism was too strict and meanwhile three were parents wringing their hands over children whose autism meant horrific issues at home, but we're still not autistic enough to qualify got help. 

In the past, I get the impression now that children who didn't fit the Kanber model close enough got categorised as suffering fromchildhood schizophrenia instead. And anyway Kanner's autism was classed as a psychosis. I remember watching a documentary in the 70's where that was clearly stated. Asperger's rescued children from the S word being applied to them, then. Or PDD Nos did. 

Since then I see the waters have Bern muddied again. with Oprah drawing attention to the plight of January Schofield, who was definitely.ity diagnosed with schizophrenia at 6. She had autistic_like obsessions with days and numbers, but also definitely had auditory and other hallucinations too. 

No I do not want to honour Hans Asperger who worked for Hitler.  Many people are not going to forget who the man was.  Some of you have miss placed empathy by saying that Hans Asperger is not here to defend himself.  The Judges at Nuremburg rightly did not bother about their excuses and hanged many of them.    I do not think what Hans Asperger would say for himself would be very convincing.  I have now contacted the senior people in the NAS and we will see what is going to happen.

Well it sounds like the end of the conversation.  To me 'semantics' means 'meaning'.  It's a part of grammar that is not to do with syntax but the logical structure of a what a sentence conveys.  However, some people (I think particularly in the US) use it to mean 'splitting hairs'.  I suspect Cloudy Mountains and Deepthought were using it in almost opposite senses.

For the substantive point, I don't think this is about the modern-day researchers much.  There's no reason a mental health worker or a journalist should know everything about history.  I don't think it's about use of 'scientific' information obtained with coercion even.  It's really a question about whether we want to continue to almost 'honour' someone about whom new material has come to light.  By the way, I don't think DSM-V dropping 'Asperger Syndrome' is related to history, since that was decided some time before the latest publications.  It's more that 'Asperger Syndrome' was always intended as a stepping stone to enlarge the diagnostic categories.

Cloudy Mountains said:

You are basically saying that you have been in a a bit of back and forth and expressing your opinion in the manner you do.

The 'back-and-forth' thing, as many notice, is because I do not hold to a singular perspective on any point of view, but seven, and as such my first diagnosis at 12 years of age, after my first mental and emotional breakdown at school, was that I was quote, "Psychopathic and or Schizo-effective."

So basically I am embodied by seven personalities, with each one offering a different perspective, and we attempt to convey a singular perspective or opinion together.

Due though to having regular stressed induced seizures, reaching a written consensus can involve some very muddled states of affairs for others.

After for instance having a seizure, I was asked a question involving a complex answer, and it was recorded and written down. Once I had recovered, I was asked the question again, and I answered it again. In the first recordings, I had achieved what was a referred to as a, "Complete fruit salad" with no word being in any particular order. In the second recordings I used exactly the same words, but in the right order.

Cloudy Mountains said:

Burying it in further semantics and language that can be confusing to some.

and

Cloudy Mountains said:

You seem to need semantics.

Basic semantic example, in the structure of a word ~ are vowels in the 'toe-mar-toe' or 'toe-may-toe' sense of 'tomato', and as an example in the structural arrangement of a sentence, "The busking musician plays 'live' in order get money to 'live'.

Everybody therefore uses semantics to communicate, whether they need or want them or not, and the burying thing is not therefore my attempt to confuse or manipulate anyone, it is just what happens when I am hung-over from a seizure.

Cloudy Mountains said:

It was a need for me to repeat it because you kept rephrasing the opinions you had in reply to me. If anyone reads this it is plain to see. I really don't see what the rest of the worlds perspective has in relation to anything, it's just diversion.

In fact a divergent course of consideration from that of your divergent consideration ~ so no diversions at all. The reason that I mentioned the individuality of every-ones place on the earth was in respect of individual points of view. You saw no relevance to this as I previously described it. This might not of changed.

Cloudy Mountains said:

Czech had an opinion of Frith, so did you. You also had an opinion on the damage the paper could do to Frith's reputation. Opinions aren't facts. You can form an opinion on facts. We've just took facts to form different opinions.

When you state that we just took facts to form different opinions, that is exactly what I was referring to in that I respect and support the concrete facts of science and nature, and those reporting and experiencing them.

Cloudy Mountains said:

I'd disagree. This certainly isn't benefiting anyone.

A basic and long standing fact of life regarding human sense and sensibility; is that ~ as the expression goes:

"You can please some of the people all of the time, you can please all of the people some of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time."

So when I state that this is for the benefit of all, I mean everyone reading this thread and learning about what it means to have autism, and the psychological processes we use in communicating with each other, and others on the NAS website forum.

And when I state that I do this for the detriment of no one, I mean by this that I have no plans in mind to cause any problems for anyone. I am diagnosed as having problems with interaction, communication and imagination, and as such that is much a fact for you as it is for me and anyone else in the community, to various degrees, recalling that, according to Dr Stephen Shore:

“If you've met one person with autism, you've met one person with autism,”

Cloudy Mountains said:

I'm not going to change your opinion on Czech's attack on Frith, who I have stated is an important part of the Autism reseach community repeatedly.

Thus we are in agreement regarding the same issue, in different ways. Your opinion  of Uta Frith involves her as being in a fragile predicament, and my opinion of her involves her being in a robust position ~ involving the following facts. 

The facts of Czech's paper in historical terms in the sense of who was where and at what point, very very good. His suppositions of peoples psychological motivations are abstract and not particular to my taste. Czech has been on the go for nearly ten years perhaps at most, and has published as many articles, as far as I have been able to ascertain.

The facts of Frith's pioneering research in autism, dyslexia, theory of mind and so on with others has forty years concrete standing, she has published loads and books too, and has mentored Simon Baron-Cohen in the UK, Tony Attwood in Australia, and other living legends in the field of Austic research also.

If anyone was actually daft enough to try and damage Frith's reputation, there would be serious closing of ranks in the Autistic research community, who would step forward for or with her without hesitation. The fact of this statement has been proven to one extent with Sahil Singh Gujral from the USA on Sunday.

The attack you describe is actually based on the age old and time honoured scientific method ~ of listing old proofs in order to add to or replace them with new proofs.

Those are the facts of my opinion in total to date, and you have the facts of yours. I am sorry that in attempting to assure you ~ I have confused and frustrated you. 

Cloudy Mountains said:

I'm going to step away from this now because I feel it is to the detriment of you and we have taken up enough of each others time.

I have experienced no detriment whatsoever in learning more about fellow researches, the current state of affairs in world wide autism, and all the discussions and varying opinions have been thoroughly fascinating, or if not incredibly intriguing.  Thank you though for your concern though, as it is very much appreciated, and I consider the time very well spent in communicating with you, and everyone else, here and elsewhere on this forum.

Cloudy Mountains said:

This has descended into babble. I'm going to hold my opinion because I don't need your approval. You don't need mine or anyone else's either.

Well the babble thing is not a unusual dismissal in any sense, what with the communication issues as mentioned above in this post. And I respect your opinion that you do not need my approval, and those who need my approval that they are wonderful human beings ~ have it directly when requested as such, and indirectly in my heart unconditionally and perpetually for the duration of  life ~ as being to me sisters and brothers from other mothers. I have that thing called over-friendliness in autistic terms. 

Cloudy Mountains said:

I'm going to let it go, my ego will allow it.

I find my ego to be a projection of focus for my personalities, in the sense of being a vocal range tester for the pitch, tone and volume of my voice ~ whilst speaking with others in near vicinity, or else when calling, shouting or yelling out ~ so as to draw attention from others at a distance. Thus it is that when nobody needs to hear my voice, such as typing here, my personalities answer when written to, or we carry on as we do inwardly.

Cloudy Mountains said:

For the benefit of the forum, and all the best to you

Live long and prosper 

Deepthought said:

I have been as you have here but only in the sense of 'writing' my opinion, being that words and sentences are linguistic architectures as being semantic structures, which are dialectic variations, or accents in the spoken regional sense, by way of conveying meaning according to individuality.

You are basically saying that you have been in a a bit of back and forth and expressing your opinion in the manner you do. Burying it in further semantics and language that can be confusing to some.

Deepthought said:

Of course not ~ when it comes to semantics being used in writing or speech in every way, and this is so regardless of if anybody needs or wants it or not.

You seem to need semantics.

Deepthought said:

If though you think there is no need for repeating opinions in different ways about the same thing, you are entirely mistaken in having done so. This was a need for you, and you needed to fulfil it. This is the nature of many discussions between individuals, as based upon everyone having different perspectives from different locations on the Earths surface, in each and every case.

It was a need for me to repeat it because you kept rephrasing the opinions you had in reply to me. If anyone reads this it is plain to see. I really don't see what the rest of the worlds perspective has in relation to anything, it's just diversion.

Deepthought said:

I respect and support the concrete facts of science and nature, and everyone experiencing and reporting them as such here and elsewhere therefore ~ whether it be Czech, Frith or whomever else ~ scientist or not. I do not take sides.

Czech had an opinion of Frith, so did you. You also had an opinion on the damage the paper could do to Frith's reputation. Opinions aren't facts. You can form an opinion on facts. We've just took facts to form different opinions.

Deepthought said:

This for the benefit of all, and the detriment of no one :-)

I'd disagree. This certainly isn't benefiting anyone. I'm not going to change your opinion on Czech's attack on Frith, who I have stated is an important part of the Autism reseach community repeatedly. I'm going to step away from this now because I feel it is to the detriment of you and we have taken up enough of each others time. This has descended into babble. I'm going to hold my opinion because I don't need your approval. You don't need mine or anyone else's either. I'm going to let it go, my ego will allow it.

For the benefit of the forum, and all the best to you

 GOOD NIGHT I MIGHT CONTIUE THIS DISCUSSION IN THE DAY TIME BUT I NEED TO GO TO BED NOW.