Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion National Dialogue Hurting Or Helping?

This is perhaps too off giftedness and I have no issue with it being deleted if need be as I am conscious that it may be perceived as political, though I mean only to comment on the cultural differences in the discourse about the cause of this tragedy.

From my perspective - as a non American - this discussion is fascinating. In my country the focus has been on guns (we have gun control and all the same problems with access to treatment for ASDs and mental health issues, we have no mandated gifted programs etc - and yet no mass killings in nearly 20 years). I follow various news sources from around the world and there has been almost no mention of giftedness, ASD or anything beyond guns as a cause of the deaths in this situation from any country other than the USA (I say cause of the deaths as there has of course been recognition that he was mentally ill and that this was likely a factor in him taking up weapons). Rather, internationally the response has followed the argument that all the other issues cease to be an issue *from a mass killing perspective* (obviously, as mentioned, the psychological issues exist regardless) if the person doesn't have easy access to guns.

I note it because I found it fascinating that this becomes about giftedness/ASD only in the States and I mention it not as a criticism, just as noting the difference in cultural spin. It must make it extremely hard for parents of kids who do not fit 'easily' socially.

The New York Times and Wall Street Journal are writing about guns, both in the news and editorial pages, as you can see online, for example http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/us/politics/pro-gun-democrats-signal-openness-to-limits.html .

To be fair, you're interested in speculations and assumptions on how this will affect the gifted community at large, rather than how it happened in the first place, and what role his giftedness or lack thereof may have played in it.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/opinion/dont-blame-autism-for-newtown.html
Don’t Blame Autism for Newtown
By PRISCILLA GILMAN
New York Times
December 17, 2012

...

Let me clear up a few misconceptions. For one thing, Asperger’s and autism are not forms of mental illness; they are neurodevelopmental disorders or disabilities. Autism is a lifelong condition that manifests before the age of 3; most mental illnesses do not appear until the teen or young adult years. Medications rarely work to curb the symptoms of autism, but they can be indispensable in treating mental illness like obsessive-compulsive disorder, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder.

Underlying much of this misreporting is the pernicious and outdated stereotype that people with autism lack empathy. Children with autism may have trouble understanding the motivations and nonverbal cues of others, be socially naïve and have difficulty expressing their emotions in words, but they are typically more truthful and less manipulative than neurotypical children and are often people of great integrity. They can also have a strong desire to connect with others and they can be intensely empathetic — they just attempt those connections and express that empathy in unconventional ways. My child with autism, in fact, is the most empathetic and honorable of my three wonderful children.

Additionally, a psychopathic, sociopathic or homicidal tendency must be separated out from both autism and from mental illness more generally. While autistic children can sometimes be aggressive, this is usually because of their frustration at being unable to express themselves verbally, or their extreme sensory sensitivities. Moreover, the form their aggression takes is typically harmful only to themselves. In the very rare cases where their aggression is externally directed, it does not take the form of systematic, meticulously planned, intentional acts of violence against a community.

And if study after study has definitively established that a person with autism is no more likely to be violent or engage in criminal behavior than a neurotypical person, it is just as clear that autistic people are far more likely to be the victims of bullying and emotional and physical abuse by parents and caregivers than other children. So there is a sad irony in making autism the agent or the cause rather than regarding it as the target of violence.

...

Well, the author loses me the instant that she throws mental illness under the bus. She argues for a position that spectrum disorders are "disabling" which would be fine-- but then she makes the statement "not mental illness," which would also be fine (as a means of distinguishing what autism IS, and what is it NOT) but to tie the two things together the way she does it just plain MEAN.


Those two categories are very definitely not mutually exclusive, which is an important point missing in the essay. I find it mean-spirited and selfish of her that she throws THOSE kids under her ideological bus. Life is plenty hard enough for people with mental illness, and no, not all of THEM can just "take a pill" either, as the author implies. They have families that love them and struggle to meet their needs, too. She just made it harder by making the comparison in an ignorant manner.

I know what she's getting at, and I don't disagree with her on that score. But I do object to her fairly nasty/sly implication that "mental illness" might well be both LINKED to violence/aggression and is certainly "not a disability like autism." I consider THAT a sad irony.

Just as ridiculous is the assertion that spectrum disorders are not "real" disabilities because people with mental illness are significantly more likely to die from a cause related to that illness. This is true, of course; it's just irrelevant and unhelpful, and it uselessly implies that the one thing is "more of a disability" than the other. Yuck. I hate the "more disabled than" rhetoric with a purple PASSION.

I feel sad and discouraged by the media coverage. I'm with Val (and Jon, and others); it's just too simplistic to see this through a single lens and with blinders on.

Those who are (predictably) using this as a personal soapbox are marginalizing other important elements here, and they aren't doing it for altruistic reasons, but for selfish ones. Even people who seem to have the best of intentions are making this about THEMSELVES-- and mostly, about separating themselves from any "taint" of similarity as a means of reassuring themselves that it couldn't happen to them. That, too, saddens me.

"It wasn't because of _______" (guns/autism/giftedness/radical acceleration/broken home/bad parenting/mental illness) misses the larger issues here.

Or maybe it IS the larger issue that all of those statements are dancing around-- why is it so unacceptable to be different in this country?? I think this is the underlying reason why such things keep happening in my country. We marginalize. It's what we do. We look for DIFFERENCES, not commonality. How sad.

I like what Howler wrote, and I think that's really how I let myself get side-tracked... the fact that the mom was described as a "prepper" makes me want to pretend I don't even take _reasonable_ precautions. The fact that the kid is described as "smart" makes me nervous about describing my kids or friends or self as smart. The fact that he's been described as having ASD makes me shy of the assessment we're on a waitlist for. People had covered most of the other bases, so I went for that one. but...

I hadn't put it together before Howler, but this is ALL about creating a strong us/them that insulates ME from feeling unsafe.

Except creating a strong us/them that insulates a person is probably part of how some guy comes to kill as if the lives of others aren't important.

So. Um. Maybe what the "I am..." woman did has some redeeming features in that way.

So maybe a smart person would make an effort not to draw strong lines of separation, in some way that does not involve posting photos of one's children publicly...

Or is that "wise?"

Sorry Bostonian - I can see how my post might have read as implying there was no discussion about guns in the states. What I had meant was that it seemed that it was only in the States that ASDs/mental illness/giftedness were being talked about much as significant contributing factors. Which in itself perhaps means outside the States we're failing to consider the bigger picture too (not meaning his ASD and/or giftedness were causes, just that such an act can't really be attributed to a single factor).

This article makes a similar point.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/12/18/health/fearing-a-stigma-for-people-with-autism.html
Fearing a Stigma for People With Autism
By AMY HARMON
New York Times
December 18, 2012
Amid reports from neighbors and classmates that the gunman in the shooting rampage in, Newtown, Conn., had an autism variant known as Asperger syndrome, adults with the condition and parents of children with the diagnosis are fighting what they fear may be a growing impression that it is associated with premeditated violence.

Individuals with autism spectrum disorders, who are often bullied in school and in the workplace, frequently do suffer from depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts. A divorce mediator who met with the parents of Adam Lanza, the gunman, during their divorce told The Associated Press that the couple had said that their son’s condition had been diagnosed as Asperger syndrome.

But experts say there is no evidence that they are more likely than any other group to commit violent crimes.

“Aggression in autism spectrum disorders is almost never directed to people outside the family or immediate caregivers, is almost never planned, and almost never involves weapons,” said Dr. Catherine Lord, director of the Center for Autism and the Developing Brain at NewYork-Presbyterian hospital. “Each of these aspects of the current case is more common in other populations than autism.”

thanks, this last post is great.