There's a fight going on in the Comments section of Wampum re the bloody Times article on "curing" autism. Some idjit seems to have read Michelle Dawson and decided she represented an authentic voice for autism. I'm somewhat concerned that this will end up setting some b.s. terms of debate in whatever passes for the public mind. The thing I was thinking of when I was reading the "discussion" (impassioned attempts to argue followed by puzzled responses that the replies were so emotional: these fuckers have the crust to show up on a POA's blog and get surprised that the debate strikes a nerve?): Holocaust deniers. The very act of entering into debate and attacking Dawson's points one by one gives those points credibility they don't deserve.

One thing I didn't love from Kit Weintraub's letter was this general sense that people with Asperger's aren't "real" autistics: I don't want some sort of false divide being set up. OTOH, I can understand, if you have a kid who's nonverbal or otherwise not functioning well in the world, it's going to seem that much more outrageous that someone who can testify in court is claiming to speak for all autistic people.

Oh, and for anyone who wanders by and wonders if there is evidence on ABA? Check out this website, which also cites court cases and stuff (another incredibly dedicated parent--there are people out there working heroically to help their children and others): should keep you busy for awhile. Educate yourself.