[Perenti]

I'm on the spectrum (diagnosed), and also like being me (most of the time).

But what about the poor sods who have so much happening all the time that they don't get the chance to learn to speak, or read, and scream in terror continually at the unending sensory deluge they try to live through? If there was a way to prevent that kind of presentation of ASD I think everyone would be better off. I took "prevention" to be about prevention of the life restricting developments of the condition.

On the other hand, if "prevention" is about culling the gene pool, I'm dead set against that.

[gizmondo]

> On the other hand, if "prevention" is about culling the gene pool, I'm dead set against that.

Well, you can be against it by raising autistic children yourself, it seems you're in a perfect position for that. Why people feel they have the right to demand that from others is beyond me.

[ModernMech]

The problem is that when you teach society that a certain “kind” of person needs to be culled, that is a stigma about people in that group.

IME such strong feelings don’t don’t stay relegated to your personal choices, they get reflected at a broader policy level.

People say “well it was your choice to have such broken people, we gave you a pill that would make that not possible. Therefore we las a society will not support them (you’ll hear rhetoric along the lines of “why should we spend my hard-earned tax dollars on social programs for autistic people, that’s a you problem, why people demand I pay for their choices is beyond me”)

Of course that’s when the government offers a “compassionate” final solution to the autist problem. Since autistic people can’t seem to stop reproducing despite the “cure”, we should sterilize them. Or we should make it mandatory because otherwise they are a drain. Then of course for the ones who are “too autistic” (I.e. who are nonverbal or who otherwise cannot be productive), we can euthanize them.

No thanks we have been down that road before as a society. It doesn’t end well.

[gizmondo]

The slippery slope scenario you described didn't happen with the Down syndrome for which there is a reliable screening. There are a few people want to ban that screening and they use exactly the same arguments (also it's eugenics!). We're lucky that at least these people are rightfully viewed as insane.

[immibis]

How hasn't it happened? Is there government support for parents of Down syndrome children?

[didibus]

There is Supplemental Security Income in the US. And I think in Canada and Europe there are even more government subsidies available.

[MagicMoonlight]

We get that same argument from deaf people… so they stop deaf babies from getting their hearing corrected at birth and they firebomb the clinics.

They say it’s basically the holocaust because you’re exterminating deaf people by curing them. Do you support their views?

[ModernMech]

I am not familiar with the deaf community nor the controversy surrounding curing deafness. If you're asking me if I support firebombing clinics, no. I don't know what incident you're referring to.

I looked up some info and I find the issue to be far more complicated than you've summarized. One thing I note is that 90% of deaf children are born to hearing parents. They are making a decision about implants for an infant based on a reality they want the infant to experience, but they wouldn't even know any alternative way of living. Why do they get to make the decision for the child? Deaf people live like the rest of us. They face struggles, yet they live full happy rich lives.

Devices like implants don't come without risks and drawbacks. For people used to deaf culture, they have to learn how to integrate into hearing society, which can be frustrating and also lead to ridicule, shame, and embarrassment. The devices can be broken and can be distracting and annoying. I can understand why many would not opt for them, and would advocate against them when there is a ready and willing culture to receive deaf people as they are.

Maybe some people choose these implants and that's what they want. That's fine. No one is stopping them from doing that.

But I don't exactly see why hearing people are deciding that they must "cure" their child's deafness. I read that people are calling it child abuse. See, that's something I can't get behind, and it's an admission that our society is abusive toward people with differences.

That's not a reason to genetically alter people so that they conform to the abusive society, it's a reason to change society so that it doesn't abuse people with differences.

So again, I'm not familiar with this debate, here is some info I looked up:

https://www.businessinsider.com/why-deaf-people-turn-down-co...

[viraptor]

> But I don't exactly see why hearing people are deciding that they must "cure" their child's deafness.

Because past some age, you can't meaningfully learn to use hearing for communication anymore. You can choose to lose hearing as an adult if you really want to. But only if you were given the opportunity to have it in the first place as a child.