The entire controversy
over Curtis Jackson's remarks seems to have brought an interesting
facet to my understanding of the autism community: When faced with a
common enemy and a common goal, they were able to set aside the
differences they had with each other and unite to accomplish their
intended goal. This posed the question to me: How, then, can we
retain this unity and move forward to have common goals accomplished?
Having talked to a close
friend of mine, we pondered the situation together and came up with a
rule of thumb for a common goal: The common goal should not benefit
one facet of the community, but the community as a whole. Extended,
an ideal goal, for universal support, should have a way of benefiting
all of humanity.
Therefore, this means that
anything there is a massive divide over, no matter how important
advocates of each party believe it is, should be shelved in favor of
the common goal that benefits all. Ideally, if said partisan goal is
a means to a universal end, there should be deliberation given
towards how to approach that end universally as far as can be done
before partisan debates are needed.
Clearly, the universal
goal everyone involved with autism seeks is for the children to lead
a better life. However, not all sides agree on how the better life
is to be achieved. The neurodiversity advocates argue for autism to
be seen as a differing mindset to be accommodated to by the
community, and the biomedical advocates argue for autism to be seen
as a disorder to be treated. However, I think, with a slight amount
of compromise, there can be a common goal to be found.
I believe that common goal
is to see autism as something to not be afraid of or feel hatred
towards. It is something to be looked at and handled on the
individual level. Some will choose to alter themselves or their
children with drugs and other means, some will choose to keep their
autism close to their heart and live with both its benefits and its
drawbacks.
The compromise, however,
is that the neurodiversity advocates must take a step back and allow
the biomeds to do what they feel is needed to help their kids live a
better life, and the biomeds must speak out when rhetoric of autism
is fearmongering and combative. We cannot be using “war on autism”
or call it a “emergency” or “national crisis” when the rates
go up. We cannot see these children as an enemy to be fought, or the
part of them that is autistic as something that needs
to go away. If we're to fight for a better future for these kids,
let's do it together, not as enemies. The world is tough enough on
them as it is without people claiming to speak on their behalf
fighting each other.