everything except emergency life saving medical help should always require consent.
now if it were a vaccine instead of a cure, i think a lot of people would be ok with making it part of the default vaccine set. mild autism doesn't have to be a detriment and can even benefit you, but i think everybody would be okay with preventing severe forms if they could.
Autism doesn't "screw" with anything. It's a not condition in itself. It's complex of symptoms, that happen to form the basis of a diagnostic code in certain diagnostic systems. The cause of these symptoms are not well-understood, but there are strong indications that numerous different underlying conditions together result in the symptomology known as Autism. Which also, as many have noted, manifests in wildly varying degrees of disability - from very mild social issues to completely crippling symptoms such as inability to speak or extreme difficulty in dealing with other people.
You can't have a cure for something which is not a single thing - and which can be multiple different things, most of which we don't even know what are. And if you engage in a very thereotical thought experiment that was to be a cure for all these underlying conditions, there is no way to say what the side-effects of such a treatment would be. But it's completely irrational to think there could be a cure to a complex interplay of developmental, genetic, neurological and/or psychological factors.
What can make sense is to discuss treatment of *symptoms*. But which of the symptoms would that be? And how do you propose to treat them?
Your entire premise is based on an extremely primitive and lacking understanding of the relevant scientific and medical facts. An inability to revise a rigid view of the world in the face of a more nuanced and complex reality is actually one of the symptoms of Autism, so kettle, pot, black?
This reminds me of stories about how some deaf people shun those who choose to have cochlear implant surgery and about how some take issue with the surgery in general because it perpetuates the idea that deaf people need "fixing".
I think in that aspect autistic people, and for that matter everyone, should have the option to turn such a cure down, unless their condition proves to be a danger to themselves and/or others.
If there's a cure in terms of DNA editing though then I think it should be administered if possible.
Even if there was some fancy way of recalibrating the autistic brain, I think I'd be utterly terrified of it.
This brain has shaped me into who I am for over two and a half decades. The idea of someone re-writing how it works is horrifying! I could end up being someone else entirely and spend who knows how long trying to re-learn who I am, from the very basics to complex emotions.
I'll just deal with the hand I'm given and keep my brain untouched, thank you.
.
"This will be a fight against overwhelming odds from which survival cannot be expected. We will do what damage we can."
-- Capt. Copeland
Yes, well atleast in cases where the person can still function in society, regardless it raises the ethical question of whether rewiring a persons brain completely is morally wrong.
Is it morally wrong to "cure" a severely autistic person by rewiring the brain to the point where their former personality is completely erased? I would argue that it is.
I'd say it should be optional, but then if you choose not to cure it you shouldn't continue to receive disability benefits from the government if you are receiving any.
It’s not debatable at all. You’d be a complete and utter idiot to think Autistic people don’t have emotions no matter where on the spectrum they are.
- - - Updated - - -
Kinda ya, hubcap says there’s a “cure” you say that it makes them go bonkers because they can’t cope with emotions as if they had none before.
Last edited by Lorgar Aurelian; 2018-10-20 at 05:09 PM.
I am sick of letting parents decide on permanently handicapping their children. Either vaccinate or no public school.