Consider how the health advice on Covid infectivity conflicts with the physical impacts of trauma stress!! Don’t touch our faces! If wearing face masks don’t keep touching + adjusting them! we are told, that these actions physically move the virus around when it’s present. Yet exactly these actions are driven by physical disturbance and impossible to suppress, when you are in trauma stress. This means that being traumatised increases your Covid infectivity and risk, unjustly hence itself further traumatically.
That means, COVID INFECTIVITY + PUBLIC DANGER IS INCREASED BY GIVING ANYONE ANY SOCIALLY UNFAIR EXPERIENCE EVER!! In autistics’ case, this means that wrongs already illegal as violations of safe support and of vulnerability, are now AS WELL time-critical violations of Covid safety for all the public around us!! MAKE THE OBVIOUS USE OF THAT FACT TO STOP THEM.
In Scotland, following the government letter this week to every home, I have put to the health service that the test + trace system announced in the letter, called NHS Inform, faces a position on infectivity of the folks it works with. That it involves a crime, and will arise with any NHS Inform staff who working with me if I ever have a Covid test or get told by a tracker to self-isolate.
Face touching, and mask touching from irritation to face, both affect our Covid infectivity. That has been a message throughout. Frustration is a physical stressor and disturber, it makes these touchings happen more, either unsuppressably from physical discomfort, or wholly involuntarily. This follows for everyone, but more strongly so for autistics, with our physical sensory issues. Injustices, and exploitative violations of social wellbeing, cause frustration. Hence, they cause or increase the infectivity of any of us who have Covid.
So anyone who does any social violation, or unjust practice around redressing a social violation, to any autistic spectrumite, illegally risks increasing Covid infections through its effect on us. For those of us who care for another type of vulnerable dependent, such as elderly, it follows that what is done to us risks them too. I am a regularly visiting carer to an elderly person, socially distanced errand care not bodily, but by that person’s a practical need for my familiarity with her wants, over what she would expect from any unfamiliar care worker, I have a responsibility to do it: so it is of absolute ethical importance that nothing is done to me making me more infective.
When the autism strategy held a consultation on its latest stage: within my submission of 21 Nov 17 I included a crime report under ethics of safe support and the Adult Protection law, where I was one of the crime’s significant number of victims. The crime and its pursuit affect the autism strategy’s outcomes on having uncorruptly safe autism support systems in place. It directly informs the strategy’s objectives and affects their attainment or not. This made pursuit of the crime owed by the authorities, to the autism strategy process, to enable its carrying out. That gives them an automatic duty to pursue the crime, instead of having any power to decide not to.
On behalf of all the crime’s victims, I brought about this position by making the crime report within the submission, instead of to the authorities directly. It gave the strategy workers a duty to pass it on along with to cite the authorities for the automatic pursuing. The Autism Network Scotland that oversees the strategy, fortuitously I was already a long standing autistic participant in its activities, it has been a body promoting participation in policymaking. I was a co-writer on its book An Ordinary Life Too, and the reported crime is s continuation of a long trail of malpractice exposed in its chapter 12. But with no means of time-critical leverage until now, ANS had never yet obtained the authorities’ acknowledged obliged action on the crime report situation.
At the start of Covid, I raised to ANS that the question of frustrated touching and infectivity created a time criticality to the present situation, that ANS should use to force the issue on the crime’s pursuit and end to any indefinite stalling. Now, the position for NHS Inform is that at any unpredictable time I might need a Covid test and NHS Inform working with self-isolating me with minimising of infectivity. Or it could be the same with another victim of the crime. The duty to public health and a care dependant’s health will then time-critically include citing the authorities for the crime’s automatic pursuit. Instead of waiting, for a sharply time-critical crisis point to arise over obtaining the crime pursuit, that situation’s possibility entitles NHS Inform to obtain the crime pursuit now, and makes it necessary.
Every autism organisation has an ethical interest, for the medical safety of everyone supported by your work, in NHS I form doing this, and in supporting its action as needed by all autistic people.
Here I reminded NHS Inform that this can not be answered by referring me to the police or social care dept. It would actively be a worsening of the route of frustration touching and infectivity, to do that, because it would leave in place the entirely preventable possibility that they could decide not to pursue the crime. That position is preventable, so to direct the crime’s victims back into that position would increase our victim toll and vulnerability from suffering the crime, and that is clearly illegal to do. The duty against infectivity is specifically, committally not noncommittally, about holding the authorities to the autism strategy position that the crime has to be pursued automatically. I am responsible to others for this, the same as the NHS is, and all autism workers are.
For any of us who have had support actions breached or betrayed unfinished, or had disproofs of a false accusation ignored, or had support networks broken up by foul play situations, or been set up or exploited then rejected – what my action establishes, every autism worker has an obligation to our vulnerability to want established, and would illegally violate our emotional safety by not wanting it. Namely, that we need and are entitled to automatic criminalising of the perpetrator of any of the violations just listed, including when it is another autistic person, and that right now in the Covid period we need it on grounds that not having it makes us preventably more infective by touching, including at any time when we pass through the test + trace system.
So this is to the gain of every innocent autistic person’s safety, both from preventable Covid infectivity and from social exploiting and violations of support. Then it sets a future needed standard of practice to those effects: a standard that you and all your work’s beneficiaries ethically need.
27 Jun 2020