BBB negatively reporting on autism again (murdered Hexham girl)

Hello AA

Thanks for advocating on behalf of our autistic community!

Reports like this by the BBC and other major media outlets make me really angry too as if any other minority group was deemed relevant to the context of a crime e.g being gay there would be uproar and it would immediately be called out as homophobic but for some reason the same thing doesn’t apply to our autistic community. This kind of reporting is a result of being Autisticphobic - a term coined by Dr Nick Walker (she/her).

Bunny said:

the murder itself.

And also that - in line with NAS guidance on terminology usage - we don't "have autism". We are autistic.

Hi Bunny, yes I always describe myself as autistic (identify first) but I may have been reflecting how the headlines reported it - can't remember now. Of course there is the whole person-first Vs identify-first. I do come from an era where autism was portrayed in a negative light but have embraced my diagnosis which was very late - in my early 60s.

I'm not talking about the news headlines on website. I'm talking about when the news was read live.

Fiona said:

I notice that people are more outraged that there is the possibility that an autistic person has killed someone rather than a man has killed a woman. Most murders are committed by men. It's a fact so boring and normal that it isn't mentioned any more.

Please don't make assumptions that I'm not outraged about men killing women. I was an active member of women's groups back in the 1980s. The outrage is for the conflation of autism with male violence. It certainly wasn't necessary to mention his autism in the headlines and give a distorted and headline-grabbing view of autism to an already misinformed public. You only need subsitute 'black' or 'gay' and you would see why those communities would be rightly outraged. That is not saying that no black men nor gay men commit murder. But to announce it in the headlines is inflammatory

. 

HMO said:

. If it's not in the headline, I don't see the problem

That was the whole point - it was in the headline. Less of a problem if not and there are nuances and gradations 

just a suggestion but if you havnt already it  might also be worth saying your a member of the national autistic society so that they dont think your just a random person that read the article.  it could give what you say in the BBCs view  more credability if you do if you do take bunnys advice 

They rarely mention the gender of the killers, since it's usually accepted that men kill women. At quite an alarming rate. Across the UK, one every 3 days apparently (Fix the System not the Women by Laura Bates). But it's OK, they are 'isolated incidents', usually perpetrated by someone known to the victim rather than a serial killer targeting people randomly. Allegedly this is supposed to reassure us that we are safe.

I am guessing the defence tried to use his male, stereotypical presentation of autism to help the jury understand that some of his behaviour is different from theirs to trigger their sympathy. Since they were both under 18 at the time, I wonder why the killer's parents were not called in as character witnesses in this article, the same way the dead teen's mother was. Why the victim has to be seen as the perfect daughter, student, friend before we get outraged at her murder, and here we are, picking out one part of the murderer's defence to be outraged at. He is the one who brought it up claiming it part of his defence, otherwise who would know....?

I notice that people are more outraged that there is the possibility that an autistic person has killed someone rather than a man has killed a woman. Most murders are committed by men. It's a fact so boring and normal that it isn't mentioned any more. We know that most violent crimes are committed by men. The only way the press can sensationalise it to get readers is to find something about the man to report on, hence a mention of his autism diagnosis. But that's OK as 'boys will be boys', 'he just snapped', 'he was blinded by rage'.

Authistic said:

the defence tried to use his diagnosis to provide context around him saying that he couldn’t recall the incident.

I feel like the press reporting about him being autistic seems reasonable in this context. Because if an autistic person were to commit a crime whilst having a meltdown, then I can appreciate why they might not have any recollection of it.

Interesting - thank you for sharing. I have a couple of thoughts about things you could include if you do choose to reply. These are, of course, extracts from the BBC's response, not yours: 

Authistic said:

his autism and other learning difficulties

You might like to correct the BBC Complaints Team's false assertion here that autism - in itself - is a form of "learning difficulty" / learning disability. Even though it can, of course, be comorbid with them.

Authistic said:

There is no suggestion in the piece that him having autism was relevant to the murder itself.

And also that - in line with NAS guidance on terminology usage - we don't "have autism". We are autistic.

UPDATE. Reply from BBC Friday 13th September

Dear Audience Member

Thanks for contacting us about BBC News.

We were careful in our approach to this story to report with sensitivity. We believe our coverage of this incident to be both factual and fair.

We reflect court proceedings in our reporting, and his autism and other learning difficulties were prominent during the trial; the defence tried to use his diagnosis to provide context around him saying that he couldn’t recall the incident.

There is no suggestion in the piece that him having autism was relevant to the murder itself.

We have shared your feedback with senior editors at BBC News.

Kind regards, 

BBC Complaints Team
www.bbc.co.uk/complaints

NB - I'm not entirely satisfied with their response at all but don't know where to to next with it

Authistic said:

I wonder, would they mention that a killer was of a different race or gender or physically disabled so readily?

I don't think they'd hesitate to mention the gender of the killer, no. 

We can't complain about them merely mentioning the individual being autistic. If it's not in the headline, I don't see the problem. We can't start accusing people of being ableist for their use of context.

Here the word autism is literally used just once. www.bbc.co.uk/.../c8dpyz91vmgo

To be fair, you do have to scroll quite a way down before you even see a mention of autism, and it's clearly just given as context.

Oh I missed that one Amerantin. I could have added that to my letter of complaint which I sent off a week or so go

BBC has done it again today, apparently we're sex offenders now: www.bbc.co.uk/.../c6p2rvxz3v6o

It annoyed me too. They just dropped in he was autistic, like it was relevant. Did they mention if he was left handed, or dyslexic or had blond hair, or any other irrelevancy? 

Yes,  I feel the same whenever I see that kind of report. That is information that may be relevant to the case, and should be available to the jury, but isn't necessarily something that the general public needs to have reported.

I think it's the defence using everything to try and mitigate the truly horrific nature of the crime. It gets lumped together with mental illness and a tough home life/upbringing.

It draws suspicion and scorn and is far from helpful, I suppose it's similar to people of a religion that are demonised even though 99.9% just want to live their lives in peace.