Published on 12, July, 2020
A parent who's eldest son has AS has serious doubts that it is genetic in origin as nobody else in the family has it. She thinks that it is caused by teaching children reading, maths, and academic subjects at too young an age. Her theory is that the human brain of a baby is very 'plastic' but hardens with age. If academics are taught at a very young age then the brain is shaped and wired towards this often at the detriment of people skills. If academics are not taught then the brain will shape and wire itself towards people skills. In other words, teach academics and the child will be able to read a book but struggle to read people. Do not teach academics and the child will be able to read people but will not be able to read a book until later in life.
Her eldest son was pushed with academics at a young age and he could read and do simple sums whilst at nursery – something not taught until reception class – but he rarely interacted with the other children and chose to play with toys alone. His three younger siblings were not pushed academically at a young age but were academically average and have grown up neurotypical.
There is some anecdotal evidence that AS (in Britain at least) is more common in middle class areas where parents value academic education, want their children to do well academically, and have plenty of books in the house, than in lower class areas where parents just prefer their children to muddle along and do not value academic education or have many books at home.
NAS13026 said:What is the issue BTW, you keep changing it. Now apparently the issue is the "teaching of academic stuff" at a very young age of around 3 years old. Can you provide some evidence for this claim other than the experiences of one solitary person? There are reckoned to be around 700,000 autistic people in the UK so if you wish to prove some sort of trends you need to provide more evidence for your theory than one solitary example which, as I've already stated, is countered by the opposing solitary example of my own experience.
Traditional Kanner autism is a mature and well documented subject backed up by a body of research spanning nearly 70 years but it only represents a small corner of ASD. In contrast, high-functioning AS is a subject that has only existed in mainstream psychology in English speaking countries for about 25 years and what is currently known about it is just the tip of the iceberg. There are many unanswered questions about high-functioning AS. The exact cause of the condition is just one of them. I'm not aware of anybody with an official diagnosis of high-functioning AS who has submitted a DNA sample for analysis to determine whether there are any specific genetic markers prevalent in people with the condition. Has the NAS had any involvement in such a project? It's no good analysing thousands of samples of DNA from people with traditional Kanner autism then extrapolating the findings to people with high-functioning AS.