To just remind you that autism is genetic?

[robotgun]

Research tells us that 60 to 90% of the risk for autism comes from your genome. Maternal and paternal age are also a significant factor. Also genetic variants exist that cause autism-like behaviours and go undiagnosed because we don't routinely run genetic tests on our children. We also don't routinely institutionalise children that are different to their peers.

There's 'more' autism because people are having babies at older ages. And we are better at spotting autism.

It isn't heavy metals, microplastics, or the MMR.

Sorry, but it seems like every day I open this app and there's a new post saying 'What's going on with all this autism around, eh?' and a slew of replies blaming environmental factors that have no science behind them whatsoever. Or, worse, blaming mothers for reproducing too late in life or eating tuna in pregnancy or taking prescribed meds.

If you see enough of these threads every day you could well start to believe the nonsense that people write, much like people that read the Daily Mail every day start to believe that Meghan Markle is the devil.

Autism has always been here. It's not better or worse than it used to be.

Could we please talk about the chance of a child being autistic, rather than the risk of a child having autism? Language matters.

This is the case for us. Both diagnosed late in life, after having our babies.

Autism seems to be a given diagnosis for so many different conditions. The fact that Sarah who holds down a job, normal-ish life etc and likes to post on tiktok about her autism has the 'same' condition as Rebecca who requires 24/7 care, doesn't communicate verbally, smears etc is crazy. I know there can be varying degrees but it just seems as though they lump people together under one diagnosis if they don't have any other answers for what condition a person is presenting with.

So hello question.

They lump it together because the traits are the traits.

Sarah who is "highly functioning" has low support needs but may struggle in different areas and excel in others.

Sally who need additional help around the clock ,has high support needs. And requires help in many different areas of her life.

They are both ND.

It's a spectrum, not a barometer. You're not a tiny bit autistic, you are or you aren't.

ND people have variable needs like any other human.

Some of them have ADHD.

Op you moan that people say maternal age has an impact but then you admit it has an impact yourself?
Not really sure what your point is I barely see any posts blaming vaccines or heavy metals on Mumsnet. If we want to talk about Instagram however that would be a different story 😳

Yes, as you say, they are both ND. But ND doesn't only mean autism, it means neurodiverse. Which encompases a variety of conditions including but not limited to autism. Yet autism seems to be the catch all diagnosis for so many people.

Is that Jaguar Land Rover?

I saw maternal age is a factor, but that it isn't the predominant factor. And that women who have babies later in life aren't to be blamed for having autistic children, as paternal age is also a factor. And the idea of blame is weird to me too. My ND kiddo is brilliant.

I completely agree. There's a high degree of suppression of research data by medical companies, which have a stranglehold on regulatory bodies.

Not it isn’t.

1. Autism, or Autism Spectrum Conditions
2. ADHD: Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, or ADD: Attention Deficit Disorder
3. Dyscalculia
4. Dyslexia
5. Dyspraxia, or Developmental Coordination Disorder (DCD)

are all neurodiversities and you get a separate diagnosis for each. My daughter has 3 x diagnosis on that list.

Ridiculous. I have 2 x diagnosis as do my 3 dc. Their cousins have x2 diagnosis and their grandfather, great aunt and great grandfather would have been diagnosed I’m sure. None of us live in the same area and had very few meds growing up.

Let's not go there please. A large proportion of people commenting on this thread are autistic/have autism. People can describe themselves however they want, and there is by no means a unified position within the autistic community on whether is should be 'has autism' or 'is autistic'.

I'm autistic/have autism, and personally have far bigger concerns than language.

[Edited because I reread and had slightly misunderstood your post]

What annoys me is people consider this an 'illness' and like there is something wrong with these people. And there simply isn't.

Overall, humanity is total shit in dealing with different people than the norm, be it autism, allergies, sexuality ... whoever is different is being explored as a speciment that needs analysing and fixing.

We have 5 in our family so there's obviously a genetic link. I know a few people with more than one autistic child. I was lucky my DC were diagnosed when the NHS was properly funded. We didn't have to wait long for a diagnosis and support was put in place before they started school.

That's not really the question the other poster was asking...

@WorriedMama12 yes, it's a bucket diagnosis and people tend to lump learning disabilities in with 'autism' - possibly because autistics tend to have 'spiky' cognitive profiles and people traditionally don't bother to work out if someone who can't use 'mouth words' (i.e. speak) is otherwise cognitively able.

Also, there are a lot of people in the autism community who are trying to keep together a coalition of families containing members with severe learning disabilities and families with 'familial autism', by talking airily about varying levels of support, and - yes - there are people with such massive 'spikes' that they have wildly-varying support needs. But most people posting on Twitter/X have an above-average functional IQ in at least one area, even if they need a support worker to help them cope with the noise/lights in the supermarket.

That said, all of us can agree that people, whatever they're able to do, deserve respect, love, dignity, and a fulfilling life. It frustrates me that some autism activists try to pretend my DS are the same as a DS who needs 24/7 care - and it does come down to learning disabilities (or not). That doesn't mean I think autistic people needing 24/7 care deserve to be neglected or abused :(

yes, it's a bucket diagnosis and people tend to lump learning disabilities in with 'autism' - possibly because autistics tend to have 'spiky' cognitive profiles and people traditionally don't bother to work out if someone who can't use 'mouth words' (i.e. speak) is otherwise cognitively able.
isn’t it more likely that it’s because the majority of people with autism also have learning disabilities?

What is ridiculous is that you have no idea what I am referring to, but just jumped to your own conclusions. I wasn't talking about autism per se, I was confirming what RatHole said about pharma companies and suppression of research in general. For what it's worth we have clear genetic links to autism in our family, but I also think there's other factors, so do jog on with your outrage.

I once knew a very old man who had been a chemist at Rolls Royce (aeroplane engines not the cars) and he often talked of it being a hotbed for odd men, he included himself in this, who were monumentally clever but needed to be looked after outside of work.

He lived with his sister all his life. She married, had children, but looked after her brother all his life. Looking back he was undoubtedly autistic.

When the goady threads and posts about autism appear, it is worth remembering that mumsnet fairly recently said they had an autism troll.

They don't. If you look at the government's latest autism need report, 90% of children with an autism diagnosis under the age of 10 registered with a GP don't have learning disabilities.

This rises to 34% in adults above 30/35 (I forget which) because the vast majority of adults without learning disabilities never got diagnosed as kids.

All the historical research has been done on the children who are now adults - hence, all the stats claiming most autistic people have learning disabilities.

This is where all the debates about 'profound autism' come from. Parents of autistic kids with very severe learning disabilities are now vastly outnumbered by the parents of children who are 'just autistic', and they're trying to create a new 'type/category' of autism to avoid their needs being ignored.

I think people get muddled with disability and illness.
It bugs me when people say autism is a superpower, or that it’s not a disability. I think that really minimises what it can be like, particularly if you don’t have a structure that works for you.

What annoys me is people consider this an 'illness' and like there is something wrong with these people. And there simply isn't.

It's not an illness but it is, in some cases, a severe disability.

Who’s ’these people’ exactly? Do you know what autism is? Seriously, anyone who thinks like this really needs say what they think autism is and detail why is not ‘that big a deal’ in their minds. It’s not a differential in personality or comparable to sexuality or a fucking allergy.

The problem is that it's not 'a thing'. It's lots of things. And, in some cases, it can match the model of social disability.

I have no problems with my older DS at home. He had no problems at an (outdoor) nursery. The minute he got to school, his support needs were so high that he's now got an EHCP. It's like 'if he'd been born in the 12th century and we were living/working in a forest in a rural area, would he even be disabled?' It all feels weirdly contextual...