• Replies 77 replies
  • Subscribers 28 subscribers
  • Views 12601 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

AS people, please can you help me?

classic codger

I am trying, with great difficulty, to understand something. I could really use your help with this, it's literaly taken me over (you know the one) and I need the thinking of others. Call it an intervention!

Before I begin, please can I ask you to look over the following article?;

nymag.com/.../

I have seen many posts from NT parents about 'treatment' for AS.

The question I have asked myself is, 'if I could go back and be changed into an NT by 'treatment', would I choose it?'

My firm answer is 'No'. I am the sum total of a life spent as an AS person. I can't change my past, so my best option is to use the learning that is  'the sum of who I am' to help others if I can, and especially for the next generation. If any of you think that I can be helpful and supportive, understanding and insightful, fine. If you think the opposite, also fine and I am sorry that I wasn't helpful. I do what everyone does - the best I can.

I'm an egalitarian by instinct. I will state my thoughts and opinions, but they are mine alone. When I read other people's posts, I assume the right to agree or disagree, and simply expect the same fairness back.

Thank you for listening this far, and now I've come to my taxing absorption.

I read this post under the title Stem cell treatment for autism: 'Has anyone undergone stem cell treatment for autism?'

I responded with '

This is my personal opinion. I don't argue my personal opinions, just for them.

How about 'tretament' for being NT? Their capacity for being the most illogical, spiteful, self-destructive creature on this planet leaves me staggered. I pity the poor creatures and their lack of insight, but what can you do? No-one is researching 'treatment' for them, because they collectively agree that their unsanity is 'normal'.

The inmates are running the asylum.

Now, I thought that I was humourously disparaging the idea of 'treating' people just because they are different. It is my belief that most people will be able to see that I have reiterated the concepts of the same thing as the poster, with our roles reversed. Here's your mirror, as it were.
I just discovered that I got moderated for this post . Apparently, I should watch my language. A particular word picked out is asylum because it is derrogatory towards past attitudes to mental health (?).
I am totaly confused. I don't know why 'mental health' is being brought into it. Given the various current uses of the word 'asylum' I don't know how it becomes offensive, even in context, 'the inmates are running the asylum' is a common concept and has been the root idea behind several award winning books, plays and films, yet it appears that some ignoramus doesn't like it. And apparently, I'm supposed to know this and understand it in their particular case. Que?
Please, any insights will do. Sooner or later one of you will say something that will help me get a grip on this. You know the one where the more you try, the more you're shaking your head, you're laughing bleakly, you don't know whether to be angry, offended, confused, puch drunk, weakened, disempowered, desperate to understand, shocked, fed up with mods public messages yet again, privacy invaded, and a whole bunch more, and because you can't choose one, you have them all at once instead. That's where I am right now.
Phew! Bit of a maze. Ariadne, the thread!
Parents

  • Another post from someone censored:

    "I am pursuing advice, and am now following up with the Care Quality
    Commission, discretely at this stage. The forum is here to support disabled
    people. The way rules designed for last resort are being used regularly and
    without prior warning to silence people is a matter of failure of public duty
    in care. The forum does seem to fall within that envelope.

    Public reprimands should only be used after private methods have failed. But most
    especially putting all an indiviual's posts in a queue for review is
    according to the rules as written, a last resort. It is being used to simply
    firefight community concern. This is a clear case of bullying of disabled and
    disadvantaged people.

    Obviously no-one will see this unless someone gets the email and reposts it."

    Sorry Technophobe, in short, there has been a lot of instances where the moderators appear to have over-reacted or taken steps to 'shame' or otherwise censor posts by users with ASD to keep the forum in line with their own expectations.

    I am frankly furious as everything I've seen so far that has been removed from the public eye is part of a reasonable debate. Recombiantsocks, I understand where you are coming from. But I haven't seen this sort of scruitiny from the mods on posts by the parents of those on the spectrum, and that in itself if discrimination.

    Yes there should be some safeguards in place, but face it: We have ASD. Debates will get heated. Tempers will be lost. But from looking at other forums I can see NOTHING here that would justify this behaviour by the Mods (and thats even compared to the BBC Have Your Say section). If anything, a lot of the debate here is damn polite!

    Electra has it summed up in my opinion. If the NAS won't let us use our voice then they frankly don't deserve to represent us.

    Suggestions were given for improving the forum. Frankly the mods response was to dismiss those suggestions and continue with what -they- think is best.

    I speak for myself. Until a Mod decides I shouldn't apparently.

Reply

  • Another post from someone censored:

    "I am pursuing advice, and am now following up with the Care Quality
    Commission, discretely at this stage. The forum is here to support disabled
    people. The way rules designed for last resort are being used regularly and
    without prior warning to silence people is a matter of failure of public duty
    in care. The forum does seem to fall within that envelope.

    Public reprimands should only be used after private methods have failed. But most
    especially putting all an indiviual's posts in a queue for review is
    according to the rules as written, a last resort. It is being used to simply
    firefight community concern. This is a clear case of bullying of disabled and
    disadvantaged people.

    Obviously no-one will see this unless someone gets the email and reposts it."

    Sorry Technophobe, in short, there has been a lot of instances where the moderators appear to have over-reacted or taken steps to 'shame' or otherwise censor posts by users with ASD to keep the forum in line with their own expectations.

    I am frankly furious as everything I've seen so far that has been removed from the public eye is part of a reasonable debate. Recombiantsocks, I understand where you are coming from. But I haven't seen this sort of scruitiny from the mods on posts by the parents of those on the spectrum, and that in itself if discrimination.

    Yes there should be some safeguards in place, but face it: We have ASD. Debates will get heated. Tempers will be lost. But from looking at other forums I can see NOTHING here that would justify this behaviour by the Mods (and thats even compared to the BBC Have Your Say section). If anything, a lot of the debate here is damn polite!

    Electra has it summed up in my opinion. If the NAS won't let us use our voice then they frankly don't deserve to represent us.

    Suggestions were given for improving the forum. Frankly the mods response was to dismiss those suggestions and continue with what -they- think is best.

    I speak for myself. Until a Mod decides I shouldn't apparently.

Children
No Data