Autism Rights Movement - Criticisms and Counter-movements

Criticisms and Counter-movements

The movement has been criticized for its alleged failure to incorporate diversity and include certain subgroups within the autistic community. It has also been criticized because some of its members write material which is insulting to neurotypical individuals.

Parents with the perspective of autism as a disorder (which is called the "pro-cure perspective" in the autism rights movement) believe that therapy with the intent of extinguishing stereotypically autistic behavior is in their children's best interests; they see this as a "cure" that will reduce their children's suffering. These critics say ABA gives autistic children the best chance of success in adulthood, as they either do not believe it is possible that adult society could accommodate autistic people (who have not been trained by ABA to exhibit neurotypical behavior at all times) or they do not believe it is desirable to do so.

Some parents believe that intensive behavioral therapy is the only way to "rescue" autistic children. Some critics also fear that the movement will prevent other autistic children from receiving treatment. Neurotypical mother Kit Weintraub has responded to Michelle Dawson's claims that ABA is harmful by insisting that it is medically necessary and appropriate treatment, and that it is harmful to deny it to autistic children who need it.

There are also accusations about how well autistic people of different functioning levels are represented in the movement. Critics of the movement argue that anyone on the autism spectrum who is able to express their desire not to be cured must be high functioning autistic or have Asperger syndrome, despite the existence of low-functioning autism rights advocates such as Amanda Baggs. Lenny Schafer argues that if one would change every use of autism to read Asperger syndrome the movement might "make sense", although the upcoming incorporation of Asperger syndrome into the autism diagnosis in the DSM-V has been used as a counterargument by the autism rights movement.

Sue Rubin, the subject of the Oscar-nominated documentary Autism Is A World, is an example of an adult with autism who is aligned with the cure group. In her opinion, people with Asperger syndrome can communicate well and "pass for normal", while low-functioning people have a severe disability; "low functioning people are just trying to get through the day without hurting, tapping, flailing, biting, screaming, etc. The thought of a gold pot of a potion with a cure really would be wonderful.".

In defiance of the common complaint that anti-cure advocates' ability to articulate complex opinions in writing—which some critics see as being impossible for autistic people—autistic adults such as Amanda Baggs use their own writing and videos to demonstrate that it is possible for severely disabled autistics to be autism rights advocates. She says that when the critics assume that intelligent and articulate autistic people do not have difficulties like self-injurious behavior and difficulty with self-care, they affect the opinions of policy makers and make it more difficult for intelligent and articulate autistic people to get services. Baggs cites an example of an autistic person who was denied services when it was discovered that she could type.