dear mn hq why are so many disablist threads being left up

[Samcro]

one today for instance and mn hq post
"We don't think that this thread is disablist, it is a valid discussion that we don't think should be shut down. "

yet it has obviously been reported.
cause hurt and upset
how is that making life easier(or better) for the sn community`?

or this message from mn hq
That CBeebies is just far too PC
Thread deleted
Message from MNHQ: Thanks so much for all the reports about this.

Although there has been some interesting debate and discussion, we do agree that the OP and some of what ensues is disablist, so we have decided to delete.

how can these be interesting debates??
\not long ago mn hq said that they were going to be quicker dealing with this stuff
what happened??

We'd just like to reassure everyone that our stance on disablist posts hasn't changed at all

THAT IS THE PROBLEM!!!!

IT NEEDS TO CHANGE!
IT CURRENTLY ISN'T WORKING.

Dodgy I agree with what you say but am not sure it is the simple answer...

In a post above there was a comment that a borough was simplifying their definitions so that everyone on the spectrum is labelled as autistic, that is probably not helpful... While those with personal experience have a more detailed understanding of when / how / if it is a disability, the general public doesn't - while 'professionals' still have a lack of understanding how do you expect others with no involvement to be able to comprehend the language or definitions?

The reality is that society often sees autism as an umbrella statement covering a number of different scenarios, from those who are autistic and disabled, to those who have Aspergers and function apparently normally, to those with mild spectrum traits who clearly have no disability... The same word is used for the diagnosis and the traits which is not helpful...

There are also parents who might for example have a child with Aspergers or some spectrum elements whose child is diagnosed as autistic by HCP or who pushes for such a definition as it helps them to understand the difficulties or challenges they have, but such a child may present very differently to one who is autistic and can't lead a normal life... Such differing uses of the same word means it is difficult for those outside with no personal experience to really understand, and they absolutely can get confused when on the one hand they have a poster rightly saying that their autistic child is disabled and will never lead a normal life, and on the other they might come into contact with a child who is not autistic, but is labelled as such...

The professionals need to be more coherent first before we start criticising others for their lack of understanding...

Volley, if someone doesn't need or want to be defined as disabled, they don't have to be, but surely it's a good thing that there's a safety net should they need it?

The whole point of this thread isn't about individuals though, it's about the derogatory way ASD is spoken about, use of the word "label" which in 2016 isn't used for anything but invisible disabilities, and the use of label highlights that many people aren't quite understanding that autism is a recognised disability.
No-one in any position would question whether a child should be "labelled" as diabetic, because it might hold them back. So why is it acceptable for people to talk about ASD in these terms?

There are also parents who might for example have a child with Aspergers or some spectrum elements whose child is diagnosed as autistic by HCP or who pushes for such a definition as it helps them to understand the difficulties or challenges they have, but such a child may present very differently to one who is autistic and can't lead a normal life...

IF THE CHILD GETS DIAGNOSED WITH ASPERGERS THEN HE IS AUTISTIC!
His traits ARE dibilitiating in all three of the triads of impairments or he wouldn't have been diagnosed.

"The reality is that society often sees autism as an umbrella statement covering a number of different scenarios, from those who are autistic and disabled, to those who have Aspergers and function apparently normally, to those with mild spectrum traits who clearly have no disability... The same word is used for the diagnosis and the traits which is not helpful..."

I'd argue the exact opposite, using different terms is what's led to people thinking that Aperger's is different from autism, that it's some sort of mild version of it, it's not btw, Asperger's isn't actually a distinct diagnosis from high functioning autism, it tends to be diagnosed over HFA if there wasn't speech delay, but that's not an official medical difference. HFA and AS are full blown autism, the high functioning relates to IQ, not how well someone copes in day to day life.

So actually they're all completely meaningless terms as far as telling anybody how much the autism affects an individual's life.

To be "on the spectrum" you need dibiliting impairments in Communication, Social interaction and Imagienation.
You don't get a diagnoses by having a few traits of autism.

I was told that aspergers had been dropped from the manual and only autism used to simplify understanding, and to help make it clear that aspergers isn't simply mild autism.
There's also a problem that schools will often support a child by using limited ASD strategies, not understanding that each child is different and will probably respond to a more tailored and individual approach.
There's also a problem that ASD training (in schools and external courses) are very limited in the information they include, often very stereotypical, which leads to people who are not specialists assuming that they are in a position to recognise that a child is wrongly diagnosed we were told by several people that ds wasn't ASD, until he was involved with more experienced experts who saw it clearly).
We also have the problem that sometimes whole boroughs do not accept that autistic people mask.
There needs to be a massive shakeup to make sure children are not left unsupported, but I can't see this happening anytime soon.

However, MN's handling of this issue is IMO not a difficult one to change, their stance should be that autism is a disability (because it is) and language that is not acceptable in other disabilities should not be acceptable with ASD, it shouldn't be up for debate, and the fact that it is is shocking and offensive.

The fact the ASD is the most commonly used medical word on the site should highlight how often people are having to unresonably defend, explain and justify the disability.

This "discussion" right here is the issue. Why is autism and all its varying points on the spectrum being thrashed out as if being on one end of the spectrum is better than the other? The whole point of it being a spectrum is that it's not simply a case of a line where the lower end means you're "not that bad" and the higher end means severely impaired.

I question why someone who has no experience of autism, other than of course "they know someone whos DC has it" feels the need to question whether a diagnosis is a good thing. If they had asked "my friends DC has just been diagnosed with autism, can you help me understand more about it" then I think most people would like to help educate them. The label thread was cleverly written to push the right buttons and then the OP popped back up a few times to say they were wrong. By that time it was too late though, the "debate" had started and progressed far beyond what the original question was.

akkakk - you've been professionally involved in autism and yet you don't understand that asperger's is autism? Really?

akkakk do you accept my comparison that mnhq say it is okay to discuss autism as it isn't diagnosed at birth, therefore it is okay to discuss the validity of my permanent use of a wheelchair as I used to be able to walk?

(FYI my condition was present at birth but is only diagnosed later in life when it becomes obvious - I haven't been in an accident or anything)

i don't get how you can debate autism.
you can't debate CP or downs syndrome for instance.
I cant start a thread asking if too many people are labeled with cp or downs.
there is no debate to be had as they are disabilities.. as is autism
so there is not good discussion or debate to be had.

and I didn't start this thread just about the labeling one. its about all the threads and posts that are left up.

The professionals in education and medical circles can't fully agree, so how could we expect MNHQ to suddenly be experts with the wisdom of Solomon?

They agree that autism is a disability.

That's the issue.

From my recollection MN didn't say it wasn't a disability.

Well what exactly was the 'Downs syndrome isn't a good comparator because...' thing in aid of/ meaning?

No, you're right, they didn't explicitly that say it wasn't a disability.

But they DID seem to be making some distinction between Autism and other disabilities.

I took it to mean.

'You can't compare Down's syndrome and autism because Down syndrome is diagnosed at birth and is indisputable. Autism isn't diagnosed until later so we think you are all allowed to dispute/discuss whether people should be labelled as having a disability or not'

Which is fucking idiotic.

Though if I'm wrong if be very happy for some clarifications from mnhq.

So mnhq. Perhaps you'd like to explain exactly what you meant?

SilverChair do you think my wheelchair use is up for debate?

Yes, that would be helpful, MNHQ.

I took it to mean not diagnosed at birth and sometimes difficult to diagnose in childhood because it isn't always obvious due to where a person is on the spectrum.

SilverChair do you think my wheelchair use is up for debate?

Why on earth are you asking me that? I said above that autism is a disability, I couldn't be more clear than that.

I took it to mean that MNHQ share the commonly held view that sometimes ASD is a label that doesn't really mean anything, so is fair game to being discussed in terms of children just being horrible etc.
Then again, I'm feeling shit at the minute and am probably being ultra sensitive.

At 08:17:13 , to be precise.

Silver, when a child is diagnosed that diagnosis is not up for debate, which seems to be the case for ASD on MN and beyond.

It can be difficult to diagnose, particularly when expertise is a postcode lottery and individual areas have different understandings of presentation, but wrt MN and people who have no idea, it should not be up for debate.

Perhaps if MNHQ came on to actually clarify what was meant rather than deleting the thread and letting us all take our own meaning from it then it wouldn't be so bad. As it is, they've posted something that at best was an ill thought out reply that didn't have much to do with the discussion or at worst, confirmed they subscribe to the same mentality as other ignorant posters.