Are Autism and Asperger's Syndrome REALLY Disorders or Disabilities?

This is a question that I have been mulling over for a long, long time.  Well, if you're reading this blog, then you probably know that I have been diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome.  Because of this, you can probably guess that my answer will be, "No."  However, unlike a lot of my co-Aspies, I don't see this question as a cut and dried Yes/No, but I see it more in terms of a combination of the two, depending on the situation one finds oneself in.  Le me explain...

I have been diagnosed with mild to moderate Asperger's Syndrome.  As the psychologist was going through the testing procedure with me, he explained that the criteria for Asperger's hinged on whether or not it affected the individual's work, home or school life significantly.  "This," he said to me, "is one of the problems with personal diagnosis of mental disorders.  It is completely based on their behaviors, not on and physical or genetic markers that can be measured."  And, because of this, a person can see one clinician who can diagnose the patient with a mental disorder since he/she views the patient's behaviors as having a significant impact on their life, and another clinician can say that, even if the behaviors are impacting the patient's life, that the impact is not significant.  Additionally, it is also based on the outward manifestation of the condition through the patient's behaviors.  For example, when I was diagnosed, I was in a job that, although I loved teaching the population of students I was working with, I was questioning the direction that the school was going (where the policy was to try to fit students with Asperger's and NLD into a more traditional student mold, rather than helping them learn to use their unique perspectives of the world around them to make their own place in the world, kind of like trying to fit a really square peg into a round hole by shaving the corners off).

The continual stress of ending my work with this unique student population that I really felt comfortable working with (and, I later found out with my diagnosis, for good reason!),  was causing my lack of social skills and poor personal relationship skills to become very apparent.  I even got into a couple of arguments with the headmaster about policies, which eventually caused him to try and make the environment a caustic one to work in and force me to leave.  So, at the time of my diagnosis, my Aspie traits were very apparent, and they caused enormous difficulties in my employment, as well as at home (since I was always stressed from work, and the 60-80 hours a week working for a boarding school, it wreaked havoc with my family life as well).

Now, I am in a job where I feel appreciated.  I am at a school in which my Aspie traits help students to be comfortable working with me one-on-one in the Learning Skills Program.  The school, unlike my other school, also doesn't try to force students into a single student mold, but instead allows each student to learn to use his or her strengths to learn about the world around them, and eventually give them the power to shape it for the better.  The school's philosophy is more like mine, and I feel comfortable in the environment.  My Aspie traits, although they are still a part of who I am and show up on a regular basis, do not have a negative effect on my life at work.  If I was to undergo my diagnosis today, I might not be diagnosable...

And THAT is why any of these disorders aren't really disorders or disabilities in the truest sense of the words.  Humans have a wide diversity in their genetic code, and millions of years of natural selection which have brought us to where we are today.  If Asperger's or Autism were detrimental to us as a species, natural selection would have weeded it out long ago.  But, the fact is, IT DID NOT.  Aspies are still in our population.  In fact, it has been proposed that many of the most unique thinkers of our recent centuries were undiagnosed Aspies.  Names like Einstein, Mark Twain, Isaac Newton and HP Lovecraft, to name a few (check this link to see people who have been diagnosed or others speculate may have had Asperger's) have been tossed about, and, since Asperger's and Autism were not identified until the 1940s, it is probable that at least a few of them did have something like it...

You see, disorders are only identified by those who do not identify as having the disorder.  A disability is something which prevents someone from being able to survive in the regular world due to the disability.  My Asperger's is not a disorder for me, it is a difference, since it just means I think differently than most other people.  The order in my thinking is not missing, it is jut not the same as in others.  It is not a disability, it is a difference in my abilities.  I perceive the world in a different way than others do, and it makes me unique. 

We need to take a look at society's view of mental health, and reassess how we view it.  There is a negative stigma to the words we use to describe mental health (disorder, disability, mental illness, etc.), and this creates the perception that if I have one of these disorders, then I am not normal, and it is something to avoid.  However, we need to stay mentally healthy just like we need to stay physically healthy, but we avoid checking our mental health because we're afraid of finding out that we're not normal, that we're disordered or disabled.  Insurance companies pay for our physicals, but not our mental health checkups.  THIS is the view we need to change, the idea that mental health is not as important as physical health.  We need to see it as MORE important, since it is usually hidden from view, and, therefore, more important to get help for when it begins to deteriorate.

So, we need to STOP labeling things like Asperger's and Autism as disorders and disabilities.  We need to take a different view of mental health, one which is beneficial to the human race as a whole, one which will help people become mentally fit as well as physically fit.

GMO Labeling - is it a good idea?

The CT legislature recently passed a bill requiring labeling of foods with ingredients coming from genetically modified organisms, or GMOs.  Being the first state in the nation to do so, some of our political leaders had reservations about such labeling, concerned that the additional costs associated with it would be either passed on to consumers or have the major companies not even offer these products for sale in the state.  So, the bill that was passed by the CT House included a "trigger" which requires a number of states around CT to also require labeling of GMOs.  This has created an uproar in both anti-GMO groups as well as the CT Senate, saying that the trigger makes it impossible for this labeling to occur.

As a science teacher, I have taught a number of politically and publicly charged topics, such as Global Warming, Diversity Loss, the Ozone Hole, and, now, GMOs.  When I ask my students about GMOs, they often start off very against them.  However, as I ask them questions about the research done in the past decade on GMOs, and their effect on human health in the long and short term, they begin to see how science works.  So far, there has been only one study done which has shown that GMOs could cause health problems.  This study was done on experimental rats where they were fed exclusively GMO corn for 2 years.  This corn was modified to be resistant to Roundup, a weed-killing chemical made by Monsanto.  Pretty damning, huh?

Well, when the experiment is broken down, a number of problems appear.  First, most experiments with this type of rat only goes 90-180 days.  This is because their lifespan is about 2 years, and towards the end of their lives, they have a high incidence of tumors.  A number of scientists have pointed out these, and other flaws in the experiment, and when they are taken into account, the rate of tumor development in the GMO and non-GMO rats was not significantly different.  Also, the researcher who carried out the experiment has been a vocal opponent of GMOs for years,putting further doubt into his results due to potential bias.

So far, there has been no scientific proof of GMOs being detrimental to the health of humans.  Yet many people keep yelling that they do not wish to have these ingredients in their foods, and that we have a right to know what we're eating.  Unfortunately, they are acting on emotional, but not scientific, arguments.  If these groups get their way, the only thing that the residents of CT have to look up to are higher food prices and less choice at the market.  Add this to the high cost of living and poor economy in CT already, and you have a recipe for disaster.  I applaud Speaker Sharkey and Gov. Malloy for thinking of the people of the state (although our governor might not have our best interests at heart), for fixing a bad bill and making it more palatable and less likely to raise food prices.  I would have preferred if they had looked deeper into the science before passing any bill, but if they are to pass one, hopefully it will be the House version.