a Facebook group barring Asperger diagnosis

Question-markFairness of Facebook groups? All know that this is never likely to be well enforced while Facebook’s system for responding to problems allows it to make one response then to unilaterally close the case as dealt with, without any further words. The set-up that you can’t email Facebook and can only submit problems through a page, is designed to enable it to do this. Then no matter how many times you reopen a case and insert as reason some unanswered aspect of it, they will just keep switching its status back to closed without a word.

That the admins on Wrong Planet also can do that, has featured on AGFW before. It is a built-in unaccountability, and vulnerability for a social site’s participants. It has a parallel in the police not even having to reply to crime reports. The corruption or uncorruption of any structure of rules or laws is measured in their subjects’ access to them being meaningfully automatic and not a discretionary favour. Discretion is a corruption.

Someone who has just suffered an intolerant banning from an autistic Facebook group does not feel able to submit the named case without evidence to show, and after blocking by the group concerned, is not in possession of that evidence. A neat circularity. But it needs telling what was done. It shows that funny attitudes over language choices are spoiling our scene.

It was a group whose title refers to diagnosis of autism. This person’s diagnosis is Asperger’s, coming from the period of that diagnosis’s use. If he had redefined it as autism that would have been okay. The group was for folks defined as autistic. It wanted folks to self-define anywhere under the overall term autism. It was against the term Asperger’s: diagnosis or identifier, they held the view against its continued use, which view is a camp of opinion in our scene.So it held that the group does not cover folks defining their condition as Asperger’s. It only covers folks defining it as autism. Never mind that they could be exactly the same folks! you must perceive yourself under the united term autistic.

This person insisted that as Asperger’s was his diagnosis he was entitled to stand by it as his self-description, that it represented him more accurately than would just saying autism. For this he got excluded from the group, on grounds of not being defined as autistic, and that is who the group is for.

But that is just a semantic and a coercion for folks to use the word and language choices you favour in their defining of themselves. That is intolerant militancy. A scene like that will be too controlling. This person reported this concern to another Facebook group, alerting that they must not all go this way.

Fairness of Facebook groups? All know that this is never likely to be well enforced while Facebook’s system for responding to problems allows it to make one response then to unilaterally close the case as dealt with, without any further words. The set-up that you can’t email Facebook and can only submit problems through a page, is designed to enable it to do this. Then no matter how many times you reopen a case and insert as reason some unanswered aspect of it, they will just keep switching its status back to closed without a word.

That the admins on Wrong Planet also can do that, has featured on AGFW before. It is a built-in unaccountability, and vulnerability for a social site’s participants. It has a parallel in the police not even having to reply to crime reports. The corruption or uncorruption of any structure of rules or laws is measured in their subjects’ access to them being meaningfully automatic and not a discretionary favour. Discretion is a corruption.

Someone who has just suffered an intolerant banning from an autistic Facebook group does not feel able to submit the named case without evidence to show, and after blocking by the group concerned, is not in possession of that evidence. A neat circularity. But it needs telling what was done. It shows that funny attitudes over language choices are spoiling our scene.

It was a group whose title refers to diagnosis of autism. This person’s diagnosis is Asperger’s, coming from the period of that diagnosis’s use. If he had redefined it as autism that would have been okay. The group was for folks defined as autistic. It wanted folks to self-define anywhere under the overall term autism. It was against the term Asperger’s: diagnosis or identifier, they held the view against its continued use, which view is a camp of opinion in our scene.So it held that the group does not cover folks defining their condition as Asperger’s. It only covers folks defining it as autism. Never mind that they could be exactly the same folks! you must perceive yourself under the united term autistic.

This person insisted that as Asperger’s was his diagnosis he was entitled to stand by it as his self-description, that it represented him more accurately than would just saying autism. For this he got excluded from the group, on grounds of not being defined as autistic, and that is who the group is for.
But that is just a semantic and a coercion for folks to use the word and language choices you favour in their defining of themselves. That is intolerant militancy. A scene like that will be too controlling. This person reported this concern to another Facebook group, alerting that they must not all go this way.

witch-trials
This is more of the absurd militant movement within our scene that wants to define the whole autistic spectrum as one undifferentiated same condition and suppress all recognising that any differences of functioning levels exist. They get personal against all other views and wants a controlled easily purged scene. This site has recorded that pattern a lot already.

17 Sep 2019

Advertisements

statistics don’t have agendas

Public Facebook group Speak out Against Psychiatry wishes its important awareness message to grow ever more public in its reach.

soop

This post from Denmark, Jun 25, gives info massively worth circulating worldwide:

Statistics Don’t Have Agendas

I’d like to share with everyone a horrifying fact from my country.

Here, they keep meticulous records of things, and in the last 18 years, a sobering result has come about:

2200 to 3000 people die in active psychiatric treatment every year. It’s listed as their official cause of death.

Yet, only 600 people die of suicide each year.

No matter what your stance on psychiatry is, those numbers alone tells us, we’re doing something so wrong, it can’t be overlooked anymore.

The ultimate argument for psychiatry is usually something surrounding suicide, and how psychiatry is believed to be responsible for people not killing themselves.

Well, I don’t know about other places, but here in Denmark, 6 people die in psychiatry for every one person that commits suicide.

Is that really considered an acceptable tradeoff?

giving enemies a consent power to hear an accusation overturned !!!

A basic need is that when a person overcomes a wrong accusation, clears their name, they can make that fact known. That is an absolutely basic ethic in supporting to a person in a dispute, and in handling of personal data. It is part of the human right to presumption of innocence.

That obviously means – if you clear your name, if you overcome an unjust or malicious accusation, you have a clear human right to that fact’s informing to anyone relevant. To anyone who had accepted the accusation or had acted like they did. That is a basic correction of your personal data. It has nothing to do with whether that other person wants to receive this news. It is a legal notice to the person, asserting that a tarring of your name is overturned and the right position is this.. It follows that you are entitled to have notice sent to them unilaterally.

I have encountered a weird and shocking interpretation of data rules, from an Autism Initiatives worker, that is a major concern requiring campaigning alerts and raising as a concern across the whole autism scene. It should equally concern folks involved in criminal justice. It is an interpretation directly attacking the human right to uphold innocence of an accusation.

washThis Autism Initiatives worker claimed, insistently and twice, that the info’s recipients have a power of consent over whether to receive the info, and have to be asked permission to give them it!!

Think about that. It means: if some folks fell out with you and turned malicious, unjustly because of an accusation and not accepting your response to it, they would have to consent before anyone could inform them of your cleared name and the acccusation being overcome. Folks who have wronged you already and are using a wrong personal data on you, would be free to refuse consent to receive the news that you have overcome the accusation, and they would be left not correcting their data on you and not told to stop believing you guilty.

This picture is so obviously on the side of injustice and against the equal personal data rights of its victims, that it could cause suicidality. Where are the victim’s data rights, in this picture? I am demanding from Autism Initiatives citations of which law this outrage is claimed to come from. Exactly which law on personal data:
* gives anyone any right of consent to decline to receive a name-clearing correction of data on another person,
* especially, a person who they have fallen out with as a direct result of the wrong data now being corrected,
* does not give the wronged party the automatic entitlement to have their data corrected to any impacted party, unilaterally and regardless of that party’s attitude,
* ever gives the person who the data is about, subordinate right to data consents below other parties who have wronged him based on false data. ?

Will report back if they come up with any: but whatever they come back with goes straight up against the human right to cleared name, and is not allowed to override it.

Maurice Frank
9 Apr 2019

Carbone Clinic and ABA

Scotland is an uncomfortable place to come to promote the coercive cruelty, personal oppression, called Applied Behaviour Analysis.

On Mar 5, Carbone Clinic, a promoter of ABA, held a day workshop on it for kids, for around 30 folks, at Dalmahoy Country Club Hotel west of Edinburgh. But responsibility to the wellbeing of spectrumite kids made an impact on the host venue, who had made the booking unaware of the issue, and it allowed the protest action called by Autistic Inclusive Meets to take place at the hotel doorway in the arrivals period and inside the building later. That was impressively unfought exercise of in fact its due responsibility to child safety.

Autistic adults, who know from their and the collective experience what is wrong with forcing treatments that conflict with the treated person’s nature, stayed throughout the day and showed the participants that our message of ethical opposition is there.

52917504_2003726026598787_8071766858119774208_n

Some of the facts shared in the protesters’ handout

Evidence for ABA programmes is overwhelmingly poor and considered low/very low (May 2018 Cochrane EIBI research review). No one has quality evidence to show that after thousands of hours and £100K’s those subjected to ABA have a better long term outcome (#ABAResearch on Twitter).

Issues with ABA have been blamed on bad therapusts, a “tricky” child, number of hours. But issues with ABA relate to coercion (lack of real choice), compliance, unnecessary overload, invalidation, rewarding masking (check out #TakeTheMaskOff campaign). Accounts of harm can no longer be ignored. Psychological wellbeing is out of the ABA equation. It breaches disability rights.

The Youtube video “Isabella 22 knock down drag out battle” was shared among UK ABAers as a good example, but looks like being abused.

Further info can be found: on the Madasbirds blog Apr 2017, Autistic UK website, Labour Party Neurodiversity Manifesto Appendix, Autistic Allies.

ABA teaches that children do right when rewarded, regardless of how meaningful, natural, or comfortzble to do so. They learn to ignore their own feelings, intuition, and to please people in positions of authority, so increasing vulnerability.

ABA is about changing observable measurable behaviour by trial and error until compliance is gained and the data shows the desired behaviour. ABA therapists use Functional Behavioural Analysis thinking this helps understand behaviour, but this just shows what the behaviour is seen to achieve (avoidance, access to something, attention, or internal reinforcement). This is very different to the “why” or root cause of the behaviour, usually due to anxiety, sensory, cognitive or other, e.g. due to EEG brain abnormalities.) In fact FBAs are pretty useless in practice.

The best way to understand autistic behaviour is to speak with autistic adults and read literature from autistic people all over the spectrum and autistic-led organisations. You will not spot ABAers doing this. Board Certified Behaviour Analysts (BCBAs) even think going to chicken training camps is useful to learn how to better train autistic children (search BCBA Mary Barbera chicken training). Other ABAers think it is fine to talk about training animals and autistic people in the same breath (just google Tag Teach ABA Clicker training).

ABA is nothing to do with understanding autism or the internal autistic experience, and these are not needed for ABA certification or practice. ABA success is very narrowly defined.

No ABA is not regulated or standardised. There is NO UK regulation, NO recognised UK supervisory hody, NO complaints procedure, NO recognised UK ABA profession. In the USA the ABA Certifucation Board Code of Ethics is a free-for-all. An example of low standards used by BCBAs can be seen in Gudberg and Parson’s Dec 2017 scientific review that disctedited a NI government funded 3 year, 5 volume report by BCBA Dillenburger that recommended intensive ABA.

Simply search the #ActuallyAutistic hashtag to feel the weight of feeling against ABA in the autistic community. Our 2017 abacontroversyautism.wordpress article provides evidence that tens of thousands in the wider autistic community do not support ABA, nor did 98% of over 5K autistic respondents in a 2018 survey by Chris Bonello (Autistic not Weird).

an overdose survivor’s message on group rejection needs saving permanently

This comes from mental health rather than autism, but the parts of mental health that most often have a bearing on autism: anxiety, self-worth, dealing with groups. Particularly, social anxiety.

The “Icarus Project” you find from a google, describes itself as: “a support network and education project by and for people who experience the world in ways that are often diagnosed as mental illness. We advance social justice by fostering mutual aid practices that reconnect healing and collective liberation. ” – Surely logically, that sounds like an ethic against rejection ! It even has a logo containing the words “You are not alone.”

But a review on its Facebook page, posted 30 Dec 2018 so is very recent, told of having strong social anxiety and actually getting rejected on a first visit, to an Icarus Project group in New York, and immediately as a result, attempting suicide by overdose.

The reviewer, the survivor of that story of exactly what this site is about preventing, writes an ethical call to all readers and a clearly wished wide audience. So it is clearly not a breach of her privacy, it is clearly in the spirit of what she writes, to pass it on and give it wider reach. All who are ever tempted to be cynical about social welcome and inclusion need to hear this. It needs saving onto permanent record.

It may not permanently be there on the fb page. Sympathetic critics of Icarus Project have posted arguing against the page’s existence and point. While that is supportive of her experience, it risks loss of her words from the record. So record them here.
treedamage-peotone

Always remember this, all be impressed by this:

” If I could get them advice I’d say to make a policy to never turn anyone away because you never know what people are going through even if they are smiling because they need you and want you to like them. Also if you are in a group setting and you seeing someone being turned away please say something, be someone’s hero, they need you more than you’ll ever know. “

19 Jan 2019

“a special immunity to making mistakes”

This blog on Applied Behaviour Analysis, by Lauren Smith-Donohoe a parent writing in the US,  laurensmithdonohoe.com/2018/08/11/regarding-applied-behavioral-analysis-aba-therapy/?fbclid=IwAR1XJwgyjVr38uyT6JxlWi0R8Onwr7YIPvSCFYBeAV3MJ1ZJNEg-zztOaw4
well sums up the sheer personal liberty case against it. She quotes anonymously from a former practiser of it, a thought that applies outstandingly to all traditional schoolteachers !!! and child psychiatrists too.

” I thought that because I cared about the kids’ well-being, because I had a strong desire to help them, everything I did must therefore be in their best interest. In my mind, it gave me a special immunity to making mistakes. Caring meant there was no way I could be hurting them. I now realize how dangerous this idea really is. I’ve hurt many people I care deeply about. Just because you care about someone or have good intentions does not guarantee you’re doing the best thing for them. ”

download (1) The school reformer John Holt, who lived before autism awareness, wrote on the attractiveness of being able to behave like tyrants but feel like saints. These invaluable words coming directly from autism practice need sharing around and framing in gold. They are part of why this site exists. They evidence and prove for ever, that in all work for us and all organising of us, it is utterly always a dangerous abuse for anyone ever to have an authority of final question-stopping decision. Over anything, ever.

This quote can be the foundation of a law responsibility against abuse and against exploitation traps, throughout the autism scene and other needs scenes: that nobody shall ever have, accept, give themself, or give others, any last-word final power over anything ever, and that a basic level of not being abused is never to have any cause to fear declaring when a practice is harming you. That includes fear just of rejection from a group, because harm includes that: a known culpable injury to both emotional and physical health and throughout history a source of control traps over lives. So this quote can also help to ban the abuse and horrific cultlike trap of ever deciding that a person must silently accept a rejection or else get more rejection.

These are all the great reforming standards of fairness that instantly leap out of this quote, that it gives a basis for already laying claim to under emotional abuse prevention laws in every country that has them.

Maurice Frank
16 Jan 2019

Autistic Inclusive Meets Community Group AIM

It’s a Facebook group, at present public. It has announced this, and some folks with a dangerous overconfidence against social maltreatment have posted welcoming it.

Autistic Inclusive Meets Community Group AIM

Yesterday at 12:00

If you are ableist, racist or LGBTQIA negative you will be banned from commenting.

You will be given NO platform and no right of answer.

Thank you.

*
WHAT? You will be accused and not allowed to defend, you will be treated dictatorially. Announced that openly ! witch-trials

THIS IS PURGE CULTURE! The page’s host is reported as Emma Dalmayne. Thanks to a concerned reader of it for passing this on.

AIM’s page announces it “a new organisation for the support of autistic adults and parents/carers of autistic children. Against autistic mistreatment.” BUT BANS AND REJECTIONS DECIDED ON UNILATERALLY AND IGNORING A DEFENCE, ARE A PARTICULARLY STRONG AUTISTIC MALREATMENT !!!

20 Dec 2018

More of it 23 Mar 2019:
” Please do not come onto this page promoting CBD oil use for autistic children, you will be banned immediately. ”

*
HOW did the banned person know that this would be AIM’s reaction? That person posted before this notice had been put up! That again us purge culture, and to expect instinctive knowing is a breach of autism.
As a non-pinned post on a busy Facebook page, quickly receding from new readers’ sight, how will new readers know the rule either?

AIM also does morally wrong Autistic Pride Day, ignoring the wellbeing reasons given on here not to do it.