I guess like everybody else I'm reading up on election and all that happens in this conversation is people snatching individual words/phrases and twisting them to find reasons to get offended or show their self-righteousness and how wrong I was or how I dared to word something this or that way.
That makes discussion quite futile, so I'll answer a couple more remarks because I really don't want anyone to feel offended and will hide this thread, life is too short for trying to placate the posters who will always find something wrong with others.
he looked like an ordinary boy what prey tell does a child with asd look like ? What I meant I didn't have a chance to observe any unusual behaviour, of course people with ASD look like humans and nothing else, I think you know I didn't mean to say he should have looked abnormal. I talked to DD yesterday trying to understand how the other children feel about him being allowed to do things which no one else in the class are allowed and having his special seat/place. What she described alone was enough to know he wasn't NT and it was managed really well with the kids not minding at all and taking it for granted that he could have his special routine and allowed toys which no-one else could have- DD said it was to help him learn.
But the worst thing you've posted is that asd is caused by relatives marrying each other.
I didn't post that, all I said that genetic disorders including autism are more likely to be passed on if relatives with these disorders marry each other, which is common sense. It was in response to the poster with a child with ASD saying she wondered if it was a result of her grandparents/greatgrandparents? being cousins, would you like to go back to her post and ask her if she even thinks before she posts??
seems, whether she is conscious of it or not, to have a conception of a primary ASD diagnosis as being 'bad' and ASD traits/symptoms allegedly secondary to something else as being an unfortunate state of affairs that doesn't 'count' as the bad, real ASD.
I/she don't separate it as bad or good ASD. Certainly her and his life would be a million times easier if he didn't have ASD, it is not a pre-requisite with his condition, as far as I understand. On the other hand, I think she'd gladly have a child with "just" ASD over a child with tuberosis sclerosis.
You might want to make sure the researchers get the memo you got on what causes autism. I didn't know you could trace it through a lineage so you should definitely publish that.
How is it even possible to interpret my words like that??
Isn't it obvious I was talking about his particular case? HIS Asd is caused by his tuberosis sclerosis, as part of this condition. His tuberosis sclerosis is a result of his mother being a carrier, which she wasn't aware of until she had him. We later became aware that her cousin on her father's line had a child of TS too(the cousin lived in a different country and the diagnosis took a while, so the link wasn't immediately obvious). In the end they all had genetic testing and traced it to that line in the family. I never said they traced autism to that line in the family, it is lazy to read my words like that.
Cheerio - will stick to reading up on election, I'm sure all the indignant posters here will be very glad to see me go! I hope it won't get boring with no one to hound.