Never Say Never

In Saturday's Guardian was an short piece called "What I'm really thinking: the grandmother of an autistic child" in which a woman describes an outing with her 7 year old grandson Jimmy. Obviously we need to have some insight into the difficulties this causes her because that's the standard narrative for any and all articles on autism which centre on a family member and not autistic people themselves. So Grandma describes how "the red-faced Jimmy who is almost out of control" is "screaming and lunging violently at the locked doors" of some public toilets.

Later when Jimmy has settled Grandma discloses that she "like[s] to imagine" that they look normal and admits that few of her friends know that she has an autistic grandson in case they offer what she describes as "well-meaning but inappropriate advice" such as a book recommendation by an autistic author. "It breaks my heart because I know that Jimmy, even with the best help in the world, will never be able to read or write or lead a “normal” life."

I have not bothered to comment on a Guardian article for a few years but I wanted to reach out to this woman. I swallowed my distaste for the assumptions and probably unexamined attitudes regarding disabled lives and the potential to learn and develop. So doing my best to be considerate and temperate, I left a comment:

"If your friend's advice is to read books by autistic authors, then it is both well meaning and appropriate. Also, you cannot possibly know that Jimmy, aged only 7, will never be able to read or what kind of life he will lead. Your love and the time you spend with him coupled with good education and natural progression will help him live up to his potential. Take heart!" 

The most helpful thing to me in knowing how best to help my son has been listening to people who know what it's like to be autistic. Dismissing advice to read autistic writers is to my mind, ill-considered. Also it bothers me to read comments of the "my child will never" variety and we've all seen them numerous times in autism discussions. Sparrow Rose Jones wrote about the damage such statements can do:

"So . . . what is it that you are actually saying when you look at my life and say that I am not like your child? In a very real sense, you are saying that you don't believe in your child. You are saying that your child cannot grow to be what I am, do what I have done. You are signing off on a package that has not been delivered yet. You are dismissing your child's potential for amazing growth and change."

My autistic son will be 15 this year. I can't possibly list all the skills and knowledge he has amassed since he was 7 and like all of us, he will continue to learn and progress throughout his life.

(A couple of detractors took issue with my comment, but they showed so little insight and understanding that their views are beneath my regard.)

Assembly Manual for Autism Articles

I haven't seen one of these for a while- a newspaper article on a parent's view of autism that adheres rigorously to the template I wrote in 2008. Today offering is titled Autism and ABA: 'My beautiful, fun little boy was slipping away from me'. In this, we learn how wealthy, beautiful and accomplished Tanja Gullestrup uses tough-love therapy to "stop her losing [her three-year-old son] to this isolating condition".

So here's Step 1-4 of the Autism Article TM Template (Step 5 is optional and refers to vaccination-bashing autism articles) :

1: Baby is born
2: Everyone rejoices
3: Baby grows
4: Mum realises baby is somehow different, something is not quite right,

And lo! the template it doth predict the story most accurately as we learn that the "usually smiley and playful" child "wasn't making eye contact with anyone and didn't appear to be taking in anything going on around him. It was like someone had flicked a switch in his head" and he "had begun to withdraw into his own, self-contained universe".

Step 6: Mum struggles to get anyone to take her concerns seriously. Her husband might think she's worrying about nothing and that no child of his could possibly be anything less than perfect. All the doctors she encounters are callous and all the other professionals are harsh and unhelpful. Eventually, one special therapist or teacher (but not a medic) comes along who understands and for the first time, really listens.

And as outlined in step 6, this parent is convinced that the NHS would fail her son:

" Left in the hands of the NHS, she points out, Konstantin would so far have had little more than speech and music therapy, ‘neither of which would be giving him the skills that he needs to survive and have a life of dignity. Children on the autistic spectrum need to be taught how to fit into society, and the real cruelty comes from neglecting to do that.’"

My autistic son has never had any form of ABA(TM) and yet he is living a life of dignity. Nor is it cruel to ask that society accepts neurological diversity. 

Step 7: After much effort and heartache, Mum is devastated to learn that the explanation for all the child's problems is this terrible curse known as Autism.

And here comes the devastation: 

"a developmental paediatrician confirmed what she had not wanted to admit, even silently to herself – her son was indeed on the autistic spectrum. ‘I felt as though my heart was being ripped out,’ Tanja recalls. ‘My mother was with me, thank goodness, and as we left the hospital, I was physically sick. I am a fighter by nature but in those darkest hours I definitely became unhinged.'"

Step 8: Just so we know how hard their lives are, how terrible this Autism thing is, several examples of the child's terrible behaviour are described, the tantrums and self-harm, the strange humming and abnormal interest in trains. This makes the book "gritty" and "unflinching" in the newspaper book reviews and is generally thought of as a good thing.

This child is so young that no Step 8 examples of violence are provided. Instead, his strange otherworldly behaviours are outlined:

"his speech regressed and he no longer responded readily to his name", and "in the weeks leading up to [the child's] diagnosis he had begun to walk on tiptoe and repeatedly pull his hair. He also opened and closed doors incessantly and became obsessed by pushing buttons on electronic toys."

Step 10: The warrior phase commences. Mum finds out stuff the doctors don't know or didn't want her to know. She arms herself with superior knowledge, garnered from a motley crew of brave mavericks or comes up with some self-directed plan, and goes medieval on the autism.

Step 11: Mum is a lone crusader, challenging authority and staying strong and calm in the face of what to ordinary mortals would be insurmountable obstacles. But Mum reveals the real terror she felt, the depression and anxiety, the tears and sleepless nights, all due to the autism which has seized her child and holds him or her hostage.

"[Mum's] quiet confidence is centred on the conviction that, while there is no ‘cure’ for autism, she is providing the next best thing for Konstantin – a radical, tough-love therapy known as Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA)." 

"However as she began to seek help, Tanja also realised that she was facing an uphill struggle. In the US, ABA is tried and tested – successive studies have shown that half of children given full-time ABA tuition early enough start school  and many need no further therapy at all. The other half make significant progress, too, reducing their need for special needs support. ABA is endorsed by the American Medical Association and in the majority of US states health insurance companies are mandated to cover ABA therapy. But in the UK, the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence has yet to provide ABA as an option for the treatment of autism. Its official line is that it cannot recommend ABA because a review has found no evidence to support it."

It is true that NICE, after a thorough investigation of the claims and the actual evidence, decided not to recommend ABA. But another claim in this paragraph needs to be countered: there is NO evidence whatsoever that 50% of children who receive early and intense ABA ever become "indistinguishable from their peers" (whatever that means). That is an utter fabrication based on a poorly written study from way back in *1987* which combined 40 hours of intense therapy with harsh punishments. Do ethics matter? As I have written before, why are standards so very low when it comes to autism?

And another point to make, when lauding Lovaas as a pioneer, bear in mind that he first trialled his ABA as a gay/trans conversion therapy.

Step 12: The intervention phase commences. The child gets older and matures, hopefully with lots of love and good education as well. But the intervention is credited with effecting a miraculous cure.

Step 13: The story ends by recalling just how far they have all come and how it would never have been possible without x,y or z (ABA, the companionship of a Golden Retriever or certain biomedical treatments). The child is said to be normal or recovered, as measured by a place in the Valhalla of this type of autism parent - mainstream school.

So this child, aged just three years old, is undergoing seven hours of ABA tuition, five days a week. Instead of calling social services the Daily Mail asks that we donate to her charity so that yet more little autistic kids will be subjected to the same. "‘He is using every ounce of his brain to do the work and, by the end of the day, he is exhausted,’ says Tanja."
I do not admire or condone this.

But let's see how if the template still holds:

"'...the transformation has been astounding.’ Before starting ABA, Konstantin had become so unsettled, he was incapable of sitting still to eat, read or watch TV. ‘If you took a toy away from him, he’d scream for an hour, and when he woke at night, he howled the house down,’ says Tanja. ‘Within a week of starting therapy, he was making eye contact and engaging again, and within a couple of weeks he was toilet trained, which I had begun to think would never happen.’ Eighteen months on, he is content and compliant and plays happily with his sister"

The child is only three years old! How much of this can be attributed to ABA and how much to natural progression? My son is 14 and can do all sorts of things he couldn't manage when he was 2! Also, I strongly oppose any treatment that has "compliance" as a goal. Too many disabled people have suffered as a consequence of early compliance training.

I have decided though that my template though needs another step:

Step 14: pay now or pay later!

This step is exemplified in the following horrible paragraph:

"ABA is undeniably expensive. A full programme, whether carried out at home or in one of the handful of ABA schools in the UK, requires intensive teaching for up to 40 hours a week, 49 weeks of the year, and costs £45,000 annually, ‘which sounds a lot, but it is less than the £150,000 to £200,000 a year costs of residential care for young autistic adults once they become too big and aggressive to live at home,’ Tanja points out. (A recent study by the London School of Economics and Political Science estimated that autism costs Britain £32 billion a year, more than heart disease, strokes and cancer combined – making it the nation’s costliest medical condition.)"

"Too big and aggressive to live at home"! What a revolting statement. This sort of argument is particularly galling. There will be a high cost to provide appropriate lifetime support structures for some autistic people, and so what? Early ABA for all will not change that. People are entitled to the help they need as citizens whether they have a disability or not. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities points of the problems of  "putting a price tag on the basic human rights for a significant segment of the population".
Furthermore, "it is actually good economics to ensure that disabled persons are able to live up to their potential. When there are no obstacles in their way, disabled persons are employees, entrepreneurs, consumers and taxpayers, along with everybody else."

The article ends:

"For Tanja, life may no longer be whimsical and carefree, but it has resounding purpose. ‘I believe there is a reason why Konstantin was given to me,’ she says. ‘He is the most sweet-natured and loving boy and he is living proof of what can be achieved. If he can deal with the challenges of autism, then so can I. So every day, we carry on and we count our blessings.’"

Life has purpose for all of us. Being mother of a disabled kid makes you no more special or worthy than anyone else. I count my blessings every day too. I just wish that the sort of autism-mum story exemplified by this article would no longer be given a platform. It's beyond time to amplify the voices of the real autism experts, the people who are themselves autistic. 

Ryan Movie Maker

I asked Ryan if I could write a blog post about him and as long as he didn't have to write anything himself he was happy enough. So I'm going to try to tell you about my boy and think the best way is to share some of his creations.

He has always loved films and PC games and has been fascinated by all the different characters. He has learnt so much from wanting to find out more about his favourite characters from Disney films, Thomas the Tank Engine and even Kinder egg toys. He learned to type, read and write because he wanted to be able to Google their names, he learned colours and numbers from Thomas and his Friends. In the past few years he's become fascinated by cinema and is working on a few feature films of his own that he's convinced will be shown in our local cinemas at some stage. We go see a film together at least once a week (and thank the stars for the Cinema Exhibitors Card allowing his carer free entry) and he knows and is known by almost all the staff. In one cinema they even arranged for him to visit the projection room a couple of times. He takes photos of each screen after the movie ends and knows in which screen of which cinema on which date and with whom he saw every film he's ever seen.

Ticket for Ryan's forthcoming Minecraft movie

He's also kindly detailed running order of ads and trailers for the benefit of the cinemas and has a poster letting us know who else is involved in this work of creative genius:

Most recently he's been animating a Minecraft movie in association with Pixar. The boy thinks big! He's even adapted the Pixar logo to fit.

He has also invented a load of new characters and has been making films about their trials for a while too. My favourite thing about these folk is the "wiki" style character breakdowns he created (click each picture to read):

All about King Elton

All about Malcurtis Eves

All about Zunarmny- best bit of this is his dislikes ;-)

He definitely prefers the bad guys, I mean look at those lists of personality attributes! I've had to explain what they all mean lately so we've had lots of talks about character and how people think, feel and behave. It's all very high concept stuff but when he asks the questions, he's ready to learn.

He spends hours working on these and I am quite happy to let him indulge in his hobby. I love how he draws the characters and then creates their Minecraft version:

I enjoy the detail he inserts in his images, most of which seem to focus on sword fights and desperate battles! 

That's Robin Hood 3D (Ryan's alter ego) fighting the evil Zunarnmy- IN HELL!!!

I'm sharing just 2 of his more recent creations. First we'll see Merida battling the evil Lord Elton:

 

And let's end with the grisly demise of one of the bad guys: 

So that's a snippet of what Ryan has been at when he's working away on his laptop. I don't know what what he'd be at now if he wasn't autistic- but that would mean the Ryan I have and love wouldn't exist so I really would never want to find out. 

Action not Awareness for Autism

It's World Autism Awareness Day and autism is all over the papers and radio. Some of the stories are great such as this by Fiona O'Leary, an Irish self-advocate explaining why she opposes the Light it Up Blue campaign and seeking an end to negative rhetoric:

"Any research that will bring positive benefits to people on the autistic spectrum is welcome. However, the propaganda used by Autism Speaks is instilling fear and hatred about a condition that is struggling to find acceptance in society."

Some stories attempt to tug at the heartstrings such as the story of a 9 year old girl who wrote in school about her dearest wish- that her 4 year old brother be cured of his autism. In her letter she describes her brother's sensory issues as well as the efforts those who care for him are making at improving his communication skills using Grace App. The little girl comes across as very insightful and caring. It seems to me that she uses the words "cured" and "healed" as shorthand for educated and parented so as to help him to have the best life possible. It's just a shame that the media have jumped on her story as though autistic kids' lives are a tragedy and the only way to help them is to seek a cure.

According to a local autism charity, every council in Northern Ireland is Lighting Up Blue as is Channel 4 News (belying their reputation for thorough research and a good understanding of the background to the stories they report). Have we lost the battle to separate autism activism from the corporate blue of the despicable Autism Speaks?

Then last night BBC aired Horizon, "Living with Autism" presented by Uta Frith, which gave more insights into how autism researchers interpret their findings than on how autistic people perform in their Sally Anne and dancing triangle tests. In every instance the autistic way was coded as impaired, less-than. The language of the programme was inherently pathologising. It worked best when autistic people themselves had the chance to talk- though even then their words and actions were put into context by Uta as to how they differ from "ordinary" people. I liked it a lot less than I expected to.

However a nice thing happened as the show started, my son, my darling Ryan (aka Duncan) came in to say goodnight. I told him I was watching a programme about autism and he said, "Oh autism! I love autism. I'm the autistic boy!"

Ryan with his beloved Granda. 

And that's what matters most to me. My child is autistic. He's here to stay and I need to work to make the world a safer and better place for people like him. That's why I want ACTION not bloody awareness for autism. Yesterday on twitter someone called for a cure for autism as he has seen autistic people locked up for decades in hospital, wiped out on anti-psychotic meds and unable to care for themselves. This doesn't motivate me to find a cure- but to act on behalf of the people who are being treated inhumanely. These people need freedom, they need action to help them communicate better, people who listen to them, and support to experience more of life. Autistic people need better education that doesn't stop when they turn 18 or 19. They need decent paid jobs, places to live with only as much interference from service providers as they need. They need the right benefits to get by, opportunities to engage in sports and hobbies. My boy will be moving into the adult care system in a few years. I'm just starting to look into what options exist and it's heart sinking. I'll do what I can to shake the system and every time we make progress, then call on the media to aware the heck out of whatever has been achieved.
This is what I will battle for and I'm not going to be fighting alone.

Please Don't Light up Blue for Autism

You mean well. I know you hope that by persuading your local council to bathe your town or city's most significant building or monument in blue light, that you are doing a good thing. You have bought into the notion that increasing "awareness of autism" will help your autistic children. But do you know where the notion of "light it up blue" originated? Are you aware how people who are themselves autistic feel about this particular campaign?

April 2nd has been marked as World Autism Awareness Day since the late 80's and in 2007 it was adopted by the United Nations. Light it up blue came along later; in 2010 it was set up by Autism Speaks, a huge and disreputable USA-based organisation. Autism Speaks seeks a world without autism, it does not support autistic people, but bullies and silences them. Autism Speaks regularly makes outrageously hurtful and damaging statements. Many in the autistic community call for a boycott of the organisation.

Blue is the corporate colour of Autism Speaks, that's it. Blue is not associated with autism for any other reason. When you lobby to light up blue or you "wear blue for autism" you are demonstrating your support of Autism Speaks the organisation, not of autistic people or their needs.

Autistic people and their allies are trying to get the word out about how damaging the light it up blue campaign is.

I ask that you take their views seriously and stop lighting up blue.

Autism Biomed Bullshit Booming in Ireland

I didn't expect that the promoters of uncontrolled and unethical experimentation on autistic children would be allowed to sell their services on RTE TV. Thanks to Suzy (who alerted me to all this stuff) I was able to catch the Morning Edition show of 21 March (segment starts at 57 minutes) when USA-based Great Plains Laboratory boss William Shaw was interviewed as an "expert in biomedical interventions" along with Karen O'Connor, boss of home-grown organisation The Child Development Centre. Shaw wasn't challenged despite claiming that they had "reversed" autism in many children with their treatments. The RTE reporter provided no balance or probing of these claims- just bovine acceptance. William Shaw's lab is one of those places where quacks send samples of urine and blood to be tested for the terrifying toxins that proper doctors and real hospitals can't find because they aren't using dodgy testing systems. The Child Development Centre provides some proper therapies like speech and language therapy and occupational therapy as well as rubbish like biomedical and craniosacral therapy and its shiny website contains a page full of jolly testimonials. There's no price list but I bet it all comes with a high price tag. 

The TV show, as always with these things, showed a mum telling the miraculous story of her son's escape from the clutches of autism (tendencies) via music, biomedical therapy and craniosacral therapy. "Two years later," claims the reporter, "he's really reaching his true potential." Two years is a long time, and autism is developmental delay not developmental stasis. The Child Development Centre is being credited with all that slow, natural progress the child made in this lovely infomercial courtesy of RTE. 

Today FM also promoted the Child Development Centre and their conference in an interview as bland as that on RTE. A mother describes how her perfect son was all of a sudden diagnosed with autism and "turned to a stone" but then they went to a herbalist and the Child Development Centre and were able to "bring him back" and now "he's not lost any more." He never was lost.

Hey Irish media, how about when you have a story on autism or some other condition, you seek out a person who has that condition. If you want an expert on autism, talk to an autistic.

Neither was I expecting to read a circa 2007 article on quack autism cures in the Irish Times a few days ago. Dear Maud this one is truly terrible. It (again) features the mother of an autistic kid who claims that following a particular regime rid her child of teh autisms. This time it's the services of Natasha Campbell McBride's and her GAPS diet that are being promoted and Geoff has written a wonderful post detailing just a few of her outrageous claims and dubious and potentially dangerous practices.

This article follows the tried and tested Autism Article^TM template as described below.

Don't stray from the template- sure who wants to know about the reality of life with autism!

It really astonishes me just how closely Adrienne Murphy sticks to the template I wrote in 2008!

But it's 2014 and we should not have to keep having these discussions. I'm tired of dismantling specious claims by unscrupulous hacks. Autism is nothing like that described by Murphy in the Irish Times. Autism is a genetically-based human neurological variant and NOT "the result of a complex intermeshing of degenerative diseases and comorbidities, largely created and exacerbated by environmental factors."

Autistic children are NOT "fully recovering" after biomedical treatment. Autism is not a disease though some people may have medical conditions as well as autism for which they must obviously receive proper medical treatment.

Murphy describes herself as "a lay expert" in autism yet fails to understand the most basic explanation for rising diagnoses.

Yet there's a final insult in the closing lines of the article: "Adrienne Murphy will be joking about autism as one of the performers in Stand Up For Humanity! Activists do Stand -Up Comedy for Charity."
After the disablism and inaccuracies of her article, I think it's for the best that I'm too far away from Dublin tonight to attend.

Double Helix Water Autism Quackery

There's a new quackery promoter in town and he sent me the following email a few days ago. My thoughts are in red:

"Dear Sharon, 

I have just been reading your blog I don't think so and wanted to introduce you to a new approach to working with Autism. Rather than send you a long email.
Don't leave me hanging, rather than send a long email you'll...?

I just wanted to say that I am new to the Autism community here in the UK allow me to represent the autism community in the UK and Ireland and say hello and welcome as I am working to try and connect with parents of Autistic children but not autistic adults? with a view to subsidising a trail oh here it comes of a water product that is having very positive outcomes with Autistic children. Wowee positive outcomes! That sounds like a good if rather vague achievement. And you're subsidising a trial? Does that mean people are actually being asked to pay to take part in a research project? Ethics fail.

I have attached a couple of pdf's for you to look at and look forward to hearing back from you when you have a moment.

 

Best Regards,
Jeremy Jones

Double Helix Water (UK) Limited

Company Number 8482978

Distributors of Double Helix Water for United Kingdom and Ireland"

(Double Helix Water-it's like DNA and water combined and doesn't that sound just awesome!)
Jeremy's email included a link to a science-y video all about the mysteries of water. Also attached was a slick marketing PDF which is what really piqued my ire. I can't find a link (will forward PDF to anyone interested) I uploaded it to Google Drive and here's the opening page:

 

Autism- ripping jeans and upsetting little kids since 1943

 

 

They're selling hope, the most marketable of all products. But they need first of all to frighten potential customers who, if they knew that autism is part of the naturally occurring diversity of human experience, wouldn't be hoodwinked by their pitch.

 

This document which I'm calling A New Hope goes on to proclaim that we're in the midst of a Global Epidemic, autism is a "medical and social issue that we can no longer afford to ignore. It has to be dealt with, and real solutions need to be
found." 

 

This is followed up with an unreferenced "study" concluding that biomedical treatments are 81% safer and 60% more effective at "producing improvement" than drug treatments for autism, all based on parent consultations and the Autism Research Institute. 

 

So much fail. To start:

1. who was "improved" and how?
2. drugs don't count as "biomedical treatments"?!
3. how was relative safety defined and measured
4. parental opinion is hardly objective.
5. the Autism Research Institute is a key player in the axis of autism-vaccine nonsense, it is a disreputable organisation promoting pseudo-scientific and potentially dangerous treatments for autism.
6. what exactly are the drug treatments referred to?

On to page 11 and more misinformation:

"Genetics Does Not Explain Autism
A Stanford University study of twins published last year found that genetics accounts for just 38 percent of the risk."

That's not what the study found- its authors say that the role of environmental factors has been underestimated. However an alternative analysis of their data concludes that it supports the findings of all previous twin studies and provides further evidence of the heritability of autism.

There is certainly no evidence for A New Hope's next claim, "The Majority Of Autism Is Caused By Environmental Factors."
After the usual autism-snake-oil pitch about gastrointestinal disorders and chemicals and toxins (oh my!) we're shown the solution- our saviour is so highly qualified the page is crammed with accolades:

Our hero

And this genius discovered something remarkable- stable water clusters. I think he means ice crystals. But anyway these, A New Hope claims, "have a remarkable effect on the Human Immune system."

What is it with quacks and non-standard word capitalisation?

On page 21 we learn that they use "Completely Safe thermal imaging" not harmful x-rays to examine the patient. But why would anyone even suggest using x-rays to discover anything about autism?!

Pink bad green good

So the magic water is administered and as the "startling" thermal image above of an autistic 7 year old shows, after only 20 minutes the child's temperature has dropped. Perhaps the heating was broken.

A New Hope ends with a pair of testimonials about how the magic water made a little boy and autistic teens smarter and healthier.

OK I'm convinced- where can I sign up to get the boy known as Duncan a supply of water clusters to make him more green and less autistic? Thankfully there's a FAQ on the website telling all. There's also the small detail of cost, they ask "participants to contribute $800 for this research project for three months". And they have the cheek to ask people to fork out that kind of money for water with a disclaimer that comprehensively states that participants can and should expect nothing for their money: "Nothing in this material is presented here as an effort to offer or render medical advice or opinions or otherwise engage in any type of medical practice."

This is a ridiculous con but some parents of autistic children will fall for it. It disgusts me that the people behind these companies are so lacking in standards, morals and ethics that they prey on people at a vulnerable point in their lives.

Mike directed me to a site dedicated to water quackery which other than homoeopathy, was to me, an undiscovered ocean of woo. Dr Lo and his Double Helix water gets a special mention.

And Allan sent me a link to an inadvertently funny video about emotional water- with ice crystal formation supposedly dependant on exposure to words.

What would happen if the water was exposed to these words?

 

Ryan has autism but he's adorable and makes me laugh every day

There was an article about Ryan (aka Duncan) and me in yesterday's Belfast Telegraph. It's based on a piece I sent in to promote the NAS. I managed to get lots of my personal philosophy on autism in there and I'm well pleased with how it reads. It's not online yet so I scanned the article to share here.

From Belfast Telegraph autism article, May 8, 2012

From Belfast Telegraph autism article, May 8, 2012 Click on the picture to enlarge.

And my life is now complete, I have shared a page in a newspaper with Rocky.

Vatican's Autism Message

They've never heard of the social mode of disability down at the Vatican. This is a breathtakingly backwards view of autism. Archbishop Zygmunt Zimowski, get in touch and I'll set you straight on a few things.
Here's his take on autism:

"On the occasion of the Fifth World Autism Day, the Church intends to express her nearness to those who are burdened by the weight of this profound suffering. In large measure still to be explored, autistic spectrum disorders constitute, indeed, for those who are affected by them, a grave alteration of behaviour, of verbal and non-verbal communication, and of social integration, with a wide-ranging effect on the normal development and evolution of the personality."
(Emphasis mine)

WHAT!? Such disdainful, othering language. The problem, Zimowski thinks, are the disordered, abnormal "gravely altered" autistic people.

I wonder if he ever knowingly met an autistic person or did he just ask Tony Humphreys what they're like? If he spent any time connecting with a few autistic people himself, he might realise how wrong he is when he says:

"In this pathological movement of self-envelopment and closure to the other and the external world, the Church sees as impelling the task of placing herself at the side of these people – children and young people in particular – and their families, if not to breakdown these barriers of silence then at least to share in solidarity and prayer in their journey of suffering. Indeed, this suffering, at times, also acquires features of frustration and resignation, not least because of the still scarce therapeutic results. These frustrations are to be seen, in particular, in families which, although they look after these children with loving care, experience repercussions as regards the quality of their own lives, and are often, in their turn, led to be closed up in an isolation that marginalises and wounds."

Such florid nonsense.
This is a 45 year old Bettelheim-era and utterly discredited vision of autism. Autism doesn't mean closure to the outside world. And what barriers of silence is he talking about? I know some autistic people who don't speak but none who are silent. Not all autistic people are children. Not all families with autistic members are closed up, marginalised and wounded.
Zimowski continues:

"The Church and all people of good will thus feel committed to being ‘travelling companions’ with those who live this eloquent silence, which calls upon our sensitivity towards the suffering of others, following the emblematic example portrayed in the gospel parable of the Good Samaritan."

"Eloquent silence". Oh wow.

It's too awful to go through this line by line but here's a selection of words this pillar of the Catholic Church uses to talk about autistic people like my wonderful son. To the archbishop they have:

• "a pathology which affects more people in numerical terms than could have been imagined only a few years ago"
• "the gravest and most devastating disability"
• "a grave psychological disturbance"

And they are:

• "people with autistic disturbances"
• "enveloped in the mystery of silence"
• "a living and transparent sign of the presence of the Resurrected Christ in the world." 

No Archbishop, they are people living with a disability in the same real and right-now world as everyone else. They deserve, like all people to be treated with kindness, respect and decency. They do not require your pity or your depction of them as disturbed and mysterious ciphers. They need to be listened to, understood and accepted. It's not difficult.

The Good News According to Tony

I my previous post I wrote about the Tony Humphreys radio interview. I messed up the html somewhere and am unable to edit that post- even to add a title and there was another part of the interview I wanted to write about so I shall do so here.

Tony Humphreys said something that can't be left unopposed. This is what he claimed was his good news message. He told the interviewer, Claire Byrne:

"when I wrote that article, Claire, I thought this was good news. I thought that I was going to ... that parents would be relieved ... "I haven't passed any neurobiological defect on to my children, or any genetic defect." The news now is that there are creative possibilities if we examine everything in our own lives and our children's lives, we may now discover, "Oh My God, this is what may help my child and myself to have a deeper relationship."" (Emphasis mine.)

This is not good news. This is an outrageously disablist, callous and immoral position to hold. Tony Humphreys thinks we will be relieved at not having passed on our children's conditions genetically. The corollary is that he thinks we out to feel shame if our children are born with a genetic condition (or defect, to use his term) like Fragile X, or Huntingdon's Disease, or Sickle Cell, or Down Syndrome -or autism. He has this bizarre idea that we will be pleased to know that our genes lack any of those icky, troublesome defects and it was just the way we failed to raise our children properly that caused all the trouble. But hey, here comes Tony with a solution- creative examinations to build deeper relationships- or something.

What Tony doesn't understand is that I am proud of my children, pleased that my genes go towards making each of them who they are. I delight in my one perfectly autistic son. He is not defective. Many people who have autistic children are themselves autistic to some degree. More of us share some Broader Autism Phenotypes. Why would this man expect me to feel shame of something I am only proud of?

Some of the genetic conditions I listed result in illness or shortened life-span. In those cases also, guilt or shame have no place in effective parenting. Parents can be proud of their children and do their best for them while supporting proper research efforts to improve the lives of their children.

For that reason we do well to avoid the quacks and snake-oil salespeople who promise creative possibilities for problems we don't actually agree that we have.

Claire Byrne Interviews Tony Humphreys

On Saturday I listened to Claire Byrne interview Tony Humphreys on the Marian Finucane show. It was the first media appearance the disgraced psychologist has made since publishing his vile column in the Irish Examiner, apart from some quotes in that paper in which he reiterated his notions while claiming he never intended to hurt anyone.

(A transcript of the show has been made available on the Irish Autism Action Facebook page. I have used this but altered a few words to fit what I heard TH saying.)


He was introduced as "consultant clinical psychologist Dr Tony Humphreys" though I have yet to see evidence that this title accurately describes his experience and training. When asked what he though of the reaction to his piece he replied:

"I was absolutely overwhelmed, because my intention was to bring good news to people but that somehow what I said was very much misinterpreted as my blaming parents and if anybody knows my work over the last 20 years I have always said parents always do their best. Parents never deliberately neglect their children. But we all come into our roles whether as parents or teachers or childminders, other adults [unclear] with our own hurts and our own unresolved issues and these operate at an unconscious level and what's been hugely missing from the whole controversy is that we operate unconsciously we never consciously want to hurt anybody, right, or neglect our children and not love our children."

This cracks me up. Like a missionary, he sought to bring "good news" to the unenlightened. I can't wait to find out quite what this is. He then claims that all his many critics are at fault as we have "very much misinterpreted" his words. Nope, the problem isn't that we have poor reading comprehension, but that he wrote a terrible, parent-blaming, diagnoses-denying, inaccurate and illogical article. He says what is "hugely missing" is that we, the parents whom he reckons have the magical ability to train our children to be autistic, are doing this without being aware of our actions. Poor Tony, he seems to think we object to his twisted thesis because it hurts our feelings. Well it does, but that's not the point. We object because it is bollocks.

When asked if he thinks parents can cause autism by being heartless he said:

"No because I don't ... I mean, I've ... see I don't believe in autism and I concur with Dr Timimi that autism has not been established as a neurobiological fact, right. What I do believe, right, what, if anybody responds to you or me in a heartless way then we do react, right, and we find a way to protect ourselves and defend ourselves against that heartless reaction. But we do that unconsciously as well. It is not that we want to hurt the person that treats us unkindly, it is that we have a need within ourselves to be kindly met that now becomes unmet, so we retreat into a defence and what happens then is that defence meets defence and the whole thing escalates."

"I DON'T BELIEVE IN AUTISM"!!!!!! This is a position of faith, for this man evidence is irrelevant and facts don't count.

"I think one of the other things I want to say Claire, is that you know, eh, in my work over the last thirty years, ehm, my work has always been about compassion and understanding and empowerment of people and I was shocked, right, absolutely shocked at the level of hurt out there and, um, in my experience a huge sadness around that because I would never, never wanted to create that in any human being, right and so ... and also I have suffered my own hurt in, you know, in being seen as somebody who would want to cause hurt because actually it's light years away from what I would want to do."

Again with the self pity and the refusal to accept responsibility and the consequences for the harm and hurt he has caused. Instead he is sad at how he has been portrayed- such a consciously selfish and immature reaction. He continued to try to justify his self-serving behaviour as "opening a debate". No he isn't, he is disagreeing with well established explanations of autism, that are backed up with proper research and evidence.

The interviewer played a tape of Dr Timimi saying that he absolutely does not take the position Tony Humphreys does on autism. Humphreys was unrepentant, and when asked about how, unlike Timimi, he is "pointing the finger at parents" he said:

"Um no, well not only at the parents right, but it's not pointing the finger, in other words ... I've worked with many parents over the years, children ... parents with children. Labelling them with ASD, ADHD and the other labels that children get, right, and when parents come to me, I hold ... that I ... if they are in troubled places, my first response is to where they are at, right, and to look at what they are carrying and the hurts they're carrying and to resolve those hurts. As those hurts are resolved, they automatically change in their relationship with their children. Now it's not just parents who are in relationships with children. Every one of us is in a relationship with children and that old village, that old African saying, "it takes a village to raise a child" is so accurate because it takes a whole society to raise a child and child minders and teachers and peer groups all affect children's' concepts of themselves."

So he accepts that he blames parents and all adults involved in raising children but somehow thinks this is not pointing the finger because, presumably, all these errant adults are failing their children unconsciously. The thing that Tony doesn't seem to get, is that neglecting children will harm them, but it won't make them autistic! People who are autistic were not made that way by how their parents raised them. He reiterated his notion that we, the parents of autistic people, need to get over ourselves and sort our own issues:

"But we all carry baggage, we all have major defences and unless we get the holding in relationships, we don't examine our defences, and to examine our defences is very challenging in a judgemental culture."

After more waffle he passed judgement on how we fail to respond to our children's communication.

Understanding and enabling our children's ability to communicate more effectively is one of the most important thing parents and teachers of autistic children can do. But we learn how to do that by talking to people who understand autism- autistic people being the most important teachers of all. We can also learn from experienced speech and language therapists, teachers and other professionals.

Tony Humphreys pontificated at some length on his own quaint notions about autism and developmental disability. He shared an anecdote about a woman who "realised that she hadn't been making eye contact with her child." He claimed that babies "make the most amazing eye contact with us, right, because they need us first to see them and to respond to them."

My autistic son never made eye contact with me as a baby. His non-autistic siblings both did. All three were breast fed for over a year and I gazed adoringly at each one as I held them. Duncan was uninterested in looking back. It was innate in him even as an infant. Tony Humphreys denies that is possible.

Tony Humphreys named a few people whom he claims agree with him but ignores the proper peer-reviewed scientific research, then he said:

"there's a whole huge body of research out there. But I can understand, right, that people who have believed a certain thing for many years, it's very difficult now to have that suddenly challenged, right, and I have no trouble with sitting with these people and hearing where they are coming from once they also give me the freedom to also to say where I am coming from"

I doubt that Tony Humphreys would really want to sit with me and hear where I'm coming from. He pulls a freedom of speech defence too, asking us to allow him to say his piece. Sure, he can hold whatever bizarre notions he wants, he can think that autism is caused by extraterrestrials if he wants, he just shouldn't teach that at a reputable university, to influence people who may well work with these disabled children, or to be held up as an expert and given a column in a national newspaper. My dog knows more about autism than Tony Humphreys.

The best bit of the interview occurred when he had a quote from his article read back to him and he said it was "a total misinterpretation of what [he] said" and that he wasn't "playing word games with anybody!" Classic!

He ended with his line about opening debate and the interview ended so the good people of Ireland could worship some bells.

Today the Irish Minister for Health, James Reilly, who has an autistic son, publicly condemned Tony Humphreys (link opens video). So now the Health Minister, all the Irish autism charities, huge numbers of parents and autistic people, the Psychological Society of Ireland, a raft of experienced and respected autism professionals and researchers, the two men named in the original article- all stand united in their criticism of Tony Humphreys.

Hilariously, in the video linked to above, we learn that Tony Humphreys encourages the Minister and all parents of autistic children to read the up-to-date literature on autism. The bare-faced cheek of the scoundrel! He doesn't regret speaking out on what he BELIEVES is the truth. Again with the faith Tony!

I'd ask Tony Humphreys to do the same. I'm much better informed than he is and very much wish he would heed his own words. Then he needs to apologise and retire from making public pronouncements on autism and all medical conditions.

Half Hearted Apology from Irish Examiner

The Irish Examiner today repeated the half-apology they made on Tuesday but have still failed to retract the article. An article is published in which they share the Psychological Society of Ireland's condemnation of the article and their disagreement with Humhrey's views.

The Psychological Society of Ireland (PSI) has described as "unhelpful and likely to cause upset" comments by clinical psychologist Tony Humphreys that inferred parents of children with autism were to blame for their child’s condition.

Mr Humphreys made the comments in an article published in this newspaper a week ago. They have been criticised both by fellow experts and parents of children who have the condition.

"It is grossly inaccurate and demonstrated a clear ignorance of the most basic understanding of autism and autism spectrum disorders (ASD)," said Brigid Sinnott, manager of ABA and Autism Services in St Catherine’s Association.

Dr Humphreys has since said parents were "never to blame" for autism and his intention was simply "to inform and enlighten".

PSI president Michael Drumm said: "Tony Humphreys’ assertions are not supported by the vast body of published research in the field of ASDs and are unhelpful and likely to cause upset."

ENOUGH of the guff about what Tony Humphreys intentions were- lots of people do harm unintentionally but they should still be held to account.

Here comes the apology bit:

Irish Examiner editor Tim Vaughan, in an editorial earlier this week, apologised for the hurt caused by Dr Humphreys’ comments.

"His comments have caused enormous upset for many parents and relatives of children with autism and I very much regret and am sorry for this," said Mr Vaughan last night.

This is a classic non-apology. Tim Vaughan is sorry, not for the actions of his paper, but for the reactions we have had to it and I do not need Tim Vaughan to apologise for me.

I think it is the best we can hope to get from this newspaper. I think they have a very skewed sense of decency and ethics. Tony Humphreys is back writing his pcychobabble column in today's Irish Examiner Feelgood section. And again his topic of choice is "love." I have not had a chance to read it yet but have it good authority that it adheres to the man's usual standards of expression, logic and accuracy.

Let us not forget that this is not all about autism. A bit of searching has shown that this man has pontificated on all sorts of serious conditions: asthma, IBS, cancer, schizophrenia, tonsillitis. The Irish Examiner have taken his columns on IBS and asthma down from their site. Yet they still employ him to write as an expert in their health supplement. I find this astonishing.

The Irish Examiner have a very skewed sense of journalistic integrity and ethics. However I read that Alan Crosbie, chair of the group which publishes the paper, at a recent conference on media diversity in Dublin, called on the governmant to:

"address the threat to humanity posed by the tsunami of unverifiable data, opinion, libel and vulgar abuse in new media.”

Isn't it ironic.

Excuses Not Apology from Irish Examiner and Tony Humpreys

The saga continues. The Irish Examiner today have Tony Humphreys' words in their paper, as both the paper and the disgraced "psychologist" attempt once again to excuse the damaging and error-laden autism article. Unfortunately they do not offer an apology or a retraction. In direct opposition to the what they published on Friday, today's piece has the title, "Parents ‘never to blame’ for autism." and is by Conall Ó Fátharta. Well Conall, that's been known for about 50 years, but nice of the Examiner to finally catch up.

Dr Tony Humphreys said parents were "never to blame" for autism and his intention was simply "to inform and enlighten" the public of research in the area.

Tony Humphreys needs to be clearer- he needs to say, "On Friday I had an article published in which I directly and unequivocally claimed that bad parenting causes autism.I was wrong and I apologise."
Because that is what happened. This is just more bullshit spin. He was not attempting to "inform and enlighten" he was making a claim he had zero evidence for.

He has been severely criticised for his article in last Friday’s Irish Examiner which gave the impression parents were to blame for their child’s condition. Yesterday, he said he never intended "to hurt anybody".

The article did more than "[give] the impression parents were to blame for their child’s condition" in the article he made his opinion perfectly clear- parents are to blame for their child's condition.

Tony Humphreys is quoted:

"My intentions were honourable. I wanted to inform the public of up-to-date research that is there. It was never my intention to hurt anybody.
"I have the greatest compassion for parenting. It is the most important profession we have in society and one which we get the least preparation for. We don’t prepare parents for the complexity of what is involved."

I care not what his intentions were, I'm interested in the facts and the very real effects. If he hadn't intended to hurt anyone he should not have written his toxic, damaging article. He did not inform the public of up-to-date research, he was rehashing a theory comprehensibly discredited 50 years ago.

Dr Humphreys said he simply wished to show research that had proposed a broader examination of autism rather than focusing on it as simply a genetic neurobiological disorder.

"There are complexities and intricacies of family life that didn’t come through in what has been said.
"What I wanted to inform people of is that we need to look at children in a broader sense and look at every aspect of their lives, every relationship they have, at their social and economic experiences, rather than just focusing on a hypothetical, neurobiological defect.
"I wanted to point out that we should look at every aspect of a child’s life in order to truly understand why children behave a certain way," he said.

Tony Humphreys informed people of nothing but his own prejudice and ignorance. He may have seen this going differently in his imagination but thankfully, I don't live in Tony Humphreys' head and the reality is, he hasn't a clue what current research says. His buff about looking into the families of children with autism counts for nothing. Is he going to have someone poke into the "complexities and intricacies" of everyone's family life? We know from his other writings that he thinks parents cause all sorts of conditions from IBS to asthma, so Tony Humphreys would probably say yes, lets examine the dynamics of every family in the country and check they adhere to some state mandated level of love and support. That's bound to work.

At a public meeting in Cork last night, a mother of a five-year-old boy with autism confronted him but he refused to elaborate on what he had written in the Irish Examiner, and said he had already given his response to criticism.

Well done that mum. He has given a response, but it is totally inadequate.

Dr Tony Humphreys responded to comments on blogs and social media websites which questioned his professional background. He pointed out he had a BA (hons) and MA (hons) in applied psychology from UCC and a PhD in clinical psychology from the University of Birmingham.

Dr Humphreys worked for eight years with Mid-Western Health Board psychiatric services and for two years in Staffordshire Health Authority in Britain. He also has 20 years’ experience as a courses director and lecturer in UCC.

His qualifications do not protect him from justifiable criticism. Parents of autistic children, autistic people themselves and professionals with a real knowledge and understanding of the condition are united in their criticism of his piece. Knowledgeable, experienced and skilled psychologists, both educational and clinical, have expertise on autism and can be incredibly helpful to families. I have had valuable input from these professionals at various stages. Tony Humphreys is bringing the profession into disrepute. Parents may be put off using their services in fear of finding others with stone age views like Humphreys.

I also am very concerned that a man with his views is allowed to teach anyone and the reputation of UCC is damaged by its connection with this man.

Irish Examiner Responds to "Autism Controvery"

After all our letter writing, tweeting and blogging, the Irish Examiner today published their response. It is wholly inadequate. They have published an editorial basically saying that they were correct to publish the article because, they say, in a democratic society, everyone has the right to their opinion. It's nice of them to offer us all a civics lesson. I shall however, examine their editorial in detail.

They published wonderful letters from parents and people critical of the article. There was also a letter from Waterford music therapist, Jim Cosgrove in agreement with Humphreys. I wonder is he has any autistic children as clients. I wonder if he still will after today.

There is an excellent article by Kevin Whelan, the chief executive of Irish Autism Action, refuting the article and describing the reality of parents and families struggling and coping as best they can with unbounded love and determination. Lastly, Tony Humphreys is once again given a platform for his opinion in a piece entitled, "Research is crucial to care debate." Research is, conjecture ain't.

IN ALL my work over the years in supporting families with their very real difficulties it has been clear to me that parents always do their best; it would be an act of neglect on my part to withhold information, because information is a very important source of support.

It is now clear to him that parents always do their best, a far cry from the defamatory statements he made on Friday about how parents seek help for their children only to avoid looking into their "own emotional and social struggles" and that we "often need more help than [our autistic children] do."

But what is this information he has such a duty to impart?

My intention in last Friday’s article was to give people information that has emerged in recent times in relation to troubling behaviours in children that are commonly called autistic spectrum disorders (ASD). This ASD perspective has dominated and has been presented as fact. My goal was to show there is another perspective on this and that what has been presented as fact is not fact; it is simply a perspective. It is very important we hold an open mind and keep ourselves informed.

Aw here, why are all of us who have autistic family members getting so stressed, he's only wanting to offer a new perspective. We may have struggled for years to have our concerns about our children taken seriously, and may have navigated the complex diagnostic system and sat with our children through many difficult multidisciplinary assessments before they received the diagnosis. But we shouldn't be so damned closed minded, we ought to listen to Dr Tony- there are no facts, there are only perspectives! Duh, it must be those broader autistic phenotyoes some of us have that limit us to black and white thinking. We probably believe in gravity and the germ theory of disease, dismissing all alternative perspectives!
This is preposterous, Tony Humphreys is rejecting reality.

The seminal work in 2011 The Myth of Autism by Dr Sami Timimi, consultant child and adolescent psychiatrist, and his two colleagues provides very important findings from rigorous research and scientific enquiry. Incidentally, Dr Timimi and one of his co-authors had been diagnosed with ASD when they were children. In the interest of responding effectively and caringly to both children and their parents and teachers, it is crucial this research-based information be taken into account.

Oh it's a seminal work! Can I argue with that. Well, yes. 
The authors he places so much faith in disagree with his assertions, saying "We are NOT saying any of the following: 1. Autism is a condition caused by poor parenting." Moreover, real scientists refer to peer reviewed scientific publications from respected journals when citing research, not popular science books. Mike Stanton has explained, the book was only "a mixture of reviews of certain areas and detailed analysis of particular papers."

Humphreys concludes;

There are very important policy and care decisions involved here. If we can stay open to different perspectives and engage in mature debate, our chances of coming up with the best solutions for what are very real difficulties in family and school holding worlds increase enormously.

Basically, he has taken lots of words to say very little. Why should policy and care decisions be influenced in any way by the discredited model of autism Humphreys promotes? You may as well have astrologers running the judiciary. Nonsensical.

Worse yet is the editorial from the Irish Examiner: "The right to an opinion."

They acknowledge that people were hurt and angered by the article, and mention the criticism they faced then go on to make much of Tony Humphreys credentials as an expert:

Dr Humphreys is a highly experienced and well-regarded clinical psychologist, successful author, and broadcaster.

They mention their "record of campaigning for the rights and services for people with an intellectual disability" and finish:

While we regret and are sorry for the obvious hurt caused by Dr Humphreys’ comments, we stand by his right to freedom of expression in a democratic society, just as we would support the rights of others to disagree with and criticise his views and criticise us for having published them.

So basically, we're sorry you lot took offence and complained because we were only doing our democratic duty to give this dude a platform to express his views.

What I'd like to know is, given that they have mentioned his expert status, and that his article was published in a health supplement, why are they now portraying it as just one man's opinion?
So which was it, expert reportage or opinion?
The piece was ridden with errors, not one bit of it stands up to any kind of scrutiny. Even the Cambridge researcher mentioned by name has called the piece "offensive" and said it "turns the clock back 50 years". Tony Humphreys does not have the right to create a loads of "facts" that are harmful to so many people. Clearly despite the credentials the Irish Examiner is so in awe of, Humphreys is no expert on autism. In fact if that is the level of journalistic standards they adhere to, why don't they get me to write farming reports, or as my friend Lisa suggested, David Irving on foreign policy.

If it is just opinion, and the Examiner feels it is their democratic duty to publish any opinion no matter how factually incorrect, toxic, damaging and hurtful, can I expect to see a parade of bigots getting their chance to have their views aired in a major newspaper? Because after all, we have the right to disagree and criticise them for publishing.

This editorial has made a bad situation worse. This is not over.

Tony Humphreys Toxic Autism Article

Tony Humphreys' awful article has been criticised in several places. Lisa wrote how reading it made her feel she had:

stepped into a time warp that has taken us back to the 1950's when Autism was blamed on so-called "refrigerator mothers" whose coldness towards their children caused them to be developmentally delayed and socially withdrawn.

She also makes an important point about Humphreys' academic pursuits:

Disturbingly I found out today that he lectures on "interpersonal communications" and "parent mentoring" at University College Cork. So potentially there is a student being indoctrinated with these ideas right now.

I have emailed the Vice President for Teaching and Learning at University College Cork and The Centre for Adult Continuing Education, asking them to investigate this matter, writing:

Dr Humphreys even goes so far as to assert in his article that the very existence of autism is not a scientific fact, an utterly ridiculous assertion. These are toxic, false and damaging ideas. It is very worrying that a university of such repute would allow someone holding these views to teach particularly on courses taken by parents and those training to work as Special Needs Assistants.

I look forward to hearing their response.


I had emailed Professor Simon Baron-Cohen yesterday to alert him to the misrepresentation of his research in Tony Humphreys' article. He was kind enough to reply that he was going to tweet a public response;

He wrote, "Offensive Irish article blames autism on unemotional parenting and turns the clock back 50 years http://tiny.cc/ffxg8"

It doesn't look good for Tony Humphreys when the researcher he quoted in support of his theory is willing to condemn his article publicly.

Where I focussed on the inaccuracies of his article and the harm they will do to parents, especially of newly diagnosed children, Siobhan O’Neill wrote about growing up with her autistic twin brother, demonstrating clearly how nonsensical Humphreys' notion that a parent can make their child autistic really is.

Another post at Three Mile Limit took issue with factual errors in Humphreys article and offered to give him a name for his  hypothesis, "Refrigerator Cousin."

Mike Stanton examined more closely Humphreys' claim that the "Myth of Autism" book he referenced backs up his notions and found that not even this was true: 

Skip to page page 293 when the authors clearly state

We are NOT saying any of the following: 1. Autism is a condition caused by poor parenting.

That is concurring with Humphreys attack on parents who possess few or no heart qualities? It seems only right that ill-written books should be ill-read. But, bad as it is, The Myth of Autism does not deserve to be as badly read as it was by Tony Humphreys, if he read it at all.

Bock the Robber writes about Humphreys former role as a cleric:

the denunciation of parents in the article of Tony Humphreys has a smell of clericalism about it.  This article sounds a lot like the sort of judgemental nonsense we heard from priests and bishops over many years.

After listing the errors in the Examiner article he makes a valid point:

If you're a scientist, present your research.  Publish your research papers.  List the peer-reviewed publications you've produced.
If you're not a scientist, don't presume to talk about things you don't understand.

If only we lived in a world where it worked like this.


The last post I have noticed is by Magnumlady who writes:

We are living in a world where it’s hard to get by if you have a disability (especially an unseen one) and are trying to get people to understand about autism. It’s not helped by articles like this.

I quite agree.

Many people have expressed their hurt and shock at the Irish Autism Action Facebook page where the article was transcribed. 

Eventually The Irish Examiner made a response, of sorts. This afternoon they released the following on twitter:

"We will be publishing a full range of reaction in tomorrow's edition relating to Tony Humphrey's column in Friday's Feelgood." link

"While giving a platform to diverse opinions is central to our journalism the views of TH on autism should not be mistaken as our own." link

(The irony that a piece which made so many feel so rotten was published in a section entitled "Feelgood" is not lost on me.)

I find it astonishing that the Irish Examiner feels this is an appropriate response. No one who has complained that the article is damaging and toxic believed that it was an editorial. It was not clearly marked as an opinion piece.  Even if it was, it was irresponible and unethical to give a platform to such a piece, lacking as it did all veracity and which has caused real harm.

Already I have witnessed the people who argue that there must be something to Humphreys' arguments- that there are too many children labelled, that diagnoses are made too quickly, that perhaps parents need to look at themselves- as if we don't! None of this is based on fact- but newspaper articles like this one make it harder for families to convince people that their children's disabilities are real and that they require adaptations and support.
 
The Examiner have contacted some people who emailed them (not me) and asked permission to publish their letters. It appears they will be hosting a vox-pop, as though there is any doubt that Humphreys wrote an article entirely lacking merit. He was mistaken, the paper should apologise and retract the piece.

 Please let me know in the comments if there are any other posts I may not have noticed yet so I can add them to the list. Thanks.