Another Spectrum

Personal ramblings and rants of a somewhat twisted mind


Leave a comment

Problematic and Traumatic: Why Nobody Needs ABA

The founder of ABA, Dr Lovaas’ own view of autistic children stated:

You see, you pretty much start from scratch when working with an autistic child. You have a person in the physical sense — they have hair, a nose and a mouth — but they are not people in the psychological sense. One way to look at the job of helping autistic kids is to see it as a matter of constructing a person. You have the raw materials, but you have to build the person.

(The Art of Autism, 2015)

Autistic Self-Advocates Against ABA

Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) therapy should not be considered a therapy or treatment for autism. Even when it may not appear to be harmful, ABA is an inherently abusive and traumatizing practice. This trauma and abuse stems from a troubling history behind the practice, a lack of understanding among professionals about autism and autistic behaviors, and from ableism within healthcare. Autistic children face abuse in the name of therapy through punishments and aversives. They face abuse by being trained to be compliant and to not express their discomfort. They are taught that their natural instincts and behaviors are wrong — that for being autistic, they are wrong.

Endorsing Aversives and Torture

At its roots, ABA was a physically abusive practice designed by Dr. Ole Ivar Lovaas in the 1960s. Lovaas’ methods focused heavily on aversives to change autistic children’s behaviors, and particularly focused on eliminating stimming; he referred to stimming…

View original post 4,071 more words


5 Comments

Special people

On Saturday I and two of my siblings travelled the three hours to Opunake to a commemoration service for an aunt. I’m in my 70s and the two siblings are knocking on the door of 70, and attending funerals, commemorations and celebrations of lives of recently departed is becoming more frequent by the year.

This particular service was called a commemoration as the aunt died in January, but due to the restrictions on international travel imposed by Covid, it was felt more appropriate to delay the funeral until as many as possible would be able to attend. Instead of there being a presence of a body in a casket, there were her ashes in an urn on a table amidst flowers, photographs and a candle. Somewhere between 200 and 300 attended

Looking back on the services I have attended over recent years, it struck me that the only “real” Christian funeral was that of my mother. All the rest either ignored Christian theology altogether or at best may have included a token hymn that reflected an aspect of the deceased’s life more than anything specifically Christian.

Like all the others I have attended (apart from my mother’s) there has been no mention of God or gods, Jesus or an the expectation of an afterlife in heaven or hell. The only token towards a cultural Christianity was a quip by one speaker who mentioned that if her late husband was the one designated to drive her to the pearly gates in his much loved orange Vauxhall Viva, she’d probably wish to be somewhere else – anywhere else. He had a reputation for loudly expressing his view that he was the only competent driver in the world (and probably in heaven), although it was evident to everyone else that he wasn’t.

Aunty Joan was my father’s oldest sister and was just a few weeks short of her 105th birthday. She was one of twelve siblings, of whom only two remain. I was going to title this piece “Another one bites the dust” in light of that comment being made in jest by one of her remaining brothers, but I suspect some of my readers might not think too kindly about such an irreverent phrase, particularly if they have experienced a recent loss of their own.

On the drive back, my brother, who is neither a Christian nor religious made the comment that Aunty Joan was a true Christian, and the world could do with more people like her. My sister and I agreed, but I quipped that a great many fundamentalist Christians would disagree. It all comes down to what one considers “being Christian” is all about.

I live in a society that is secular but nominally “Christian”, and as best as I can recognise, the religious beliefs of Kiwis has changed little over my lifetime. What has changed is what Kiwis consider “being Christian” is. Until the 1960s, most Kiwis regardless of their religiosity would have been offended if they were described as not being Christian. Being Christian did not centre around belief but around action. One was judged by their deeds – generosity of heart and spirit, helping those in need regardless of one’s own circumstances, listening, caring, being supportive and being a warrior of whatever one perceived as social justice.

What has changed over recent decades has been that the concept of “being a Christian” no longer has that meaning. Lead by the importation of fundamentalism it’s become all about belief – having a specific sort of faith, and that “good works” count for nothing. Perhaps if one does “good works” for the purpose of salvation (whatever that is) then just maybe they do count for little. But people such as Aunty Joan never gave salvation a second thought. They give of themselves because, in good conscience, they could not ignore the needs of others.

For old schoolers such as myself, Christianity was (and I’m using the past tense deliberately) about one’s relationship to humanity (Love your neighbour as yourself). Today it seems that for some Christians, all that matters is one’s relationship with a deity and the worshipping of “His” Bible.

Sixty years ago I too would have been offended if someone had declared I wasn’t a Christian. Today, I’d be offended if they said I was. It’s not that my beliefs or values have changed significantly, it’s because the common understanding of what being a Christian has undergone a radical change under the influence of the fundamentalist evangelical movement. That’s why today, if someone asks if I’m a Christian, I always ask what they mean by being Christian. I’m unlikely to be in agreement with many who are younger than fifty.

The following is a poem by David Harkins that was presented at the service. I felt it was most appropriate.

You can shed tears that she is gone
Or you can smile because she has lived.
You can close your eyes and pray that she will come back
Or you can open your eyes and see all that she has left.
Your heart can be empty because you can’t see her
Or you can be full of the love that you shared.
You can turn your back on tomorrow and live yesterday
Or you can be happy for tomorrow because of yesterday.
You can remember her and only that she is gone
Or you can cherish her memory and let it live on.
You can cry and close your mind, be empty and turn your back
Or you can do what she would want: smile, open your eyes, love and go on.


6 Comments

If only…

I’m a millionaire!

Of course it’s too good to be true.

This piece of junk got past the Spam filter this morning as it was sent from a compromised Finland hotmail account, and consisted of no more than the above image.


Leave a comment

Justice for Linden Cameron — NeuroClastic

There are many reasons why I’m grateful that police in Aotearoa New Zealand are not routinely armed and are trained in de-escalation techniques. The situation described in the linked article below is one. Linden was no danger to anyone other than possibly himself.

What I find unfathomable is how a description of a crying and yelling unarmed autistic became a “violent psych issue” involving the juvenile “having a mental episode” and “making threats to some folks with a weapon.” Is this another example of someone (or several people) in the communication chain confusing autism and a violent personality and expanding the situation to fit their narrative?

This very much looks like an example of “if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail“. And it seems to be borne out by the police shooting Linden in the back as he attempted to flee in panic.

I can understand why the author advises against calling the police in a mental health crisis, and while that might be reasonable advice where police are armed, it’s not a situation we are confronted with in Aotearoa.

On September 4th, Linden Cameron was shot by police several times in Utah after a Crisis Intervention team was called, which was supposed to help him in a mental health crisis. The post Justice for Linden Cameron appeared first on NeuroClastic.

Justice for Linden Cameron — NeuroClastic


Leave a comment

Protesters gather outside The Home Office in London to demand they #FreeOsimeBrown — NeuroClastic

I have posted about Osime’s case previously : Osime Brown: A Life Sentence for Not Stealing a Mobile Phone — NeuroClastic. His crime was being both coloured and autistic.

On Friday, September 4, organizers gathered to demand justice for Osime Brown. Hear the impassioned speeches of Osime’s family and activists there in support. The post Protesters gather outside The Home Office in London to demand they #FreeOsimeBrown appeared first on NeuroClastic.

Protesters gather outside The Home Office in London to demand they #FreeOsimeBrown — NeuroClastic


3 Comments

Osime Brown: A Life Sentence for Not Stealing a Mobile Phone — NeuroClastic

Minority groups are typically disadvantaged and treated more harshly, especially by the law, than the rest of the population. And for every minority group one belongs to, the problems multiply many fold. Being autistic and of colour can be a deadly combination. For example Matthew Rushin’s Fifty year sentence for a car crash or in the example linked to below, being tried and found guilty as an adult for a crime he didn’t commit as a juvenile, and now facing deportation.

Osime was sentenced to 5 years in jail for a crime he didn’t commit. Now, Osime has been scheduled for deportation to Jamaica where he knows no one and would have nothing. The post Osime Brown: A Life Sentence for Not Stealing a Mobile Phone appeared first on NeuroClastic.

Osime Brown: A Life Sentence for Not Stealing a Mobile Phone — NeuroClastic


Leave a comment

Second wave? What second wave?

Yesterday as I was passing through the supermarket checkout I overheard two women in an adjacent isle complaining that New Zealand is doing no better than other countries and is now seeing a rise in new infections after being COVID-19 free for weeks They were convinced that the 14 cases now active in NZ are the beginning of a second wave. They are wrong.

Their concern appears to be widespread as the public demand for testing has soared over the past week to the point that demand exceeds the ability of the health system to process tests in a timely manner. The health authorities have had to apply limitations on eligibility for free testing.

We are now testing at a rate of 10,000 per day, which by way of comparison is equivalent to the US population being tested at the rate of 700,000 per day. The difference is that not one test over the last month has returned positive, whereas in the US, approximately one in nineteen tests is a positive result. NZ: 0%, US: 5%.

So why am I confident that the two women are wrong? True, there are now 14 active cases after being COVID-19 free for weeks, But those 14 cases are actually evidence that our system of managing the pandemic is working as planned.

For those who are unaware, NZ closed its borders completely way back in March and they will remain tightly closed for the foreseeable future. The only people permitted to enter the country are NZ citizens and permanent residents. Everyone else is excluded (although exemptions may be granted in exceptional circumstances). In effect we are closed off from the rest of the world

Expat Kiwis are returning home in ever increasing droves, and it does not seem that it will ease for some time. Everyone arriving in New Zealand is placed into “managed isolation” – quarantine facilities that are now overseen by the military. The number of daily returnees has stretched the capacity of the quarantine facilities in Auckland beyond breaking point, and new facilities are being set up in other parts of the country.

All those put into managed isolation are tested at day 3 and day 12 of isolation, before being permitted to leave after 14 days. Currently there are around 4300 people in isolation, and this is expected to increase significantly over the coming weeks and months.

All COVID-19 tests that have returned a positive result are from returnees while they are in managed isolation. These are people who have brought the virus with them on their journey home. So long as the virus is on the loose in the rest of the world, those returning will bring COVID-19 with them. It does not mean that it exists within the NZ bubble of 5 million people.

Community transmission of COVID-19 has been eliminated from Aotearoa New Zealand and remains so. As long as all cases are confined to isolation facilities, it doesn’t matter what the number of infections are. At the height of the pandemic here, there were less than 90 active cases on any given day, and even if the number of cases among returnees in isolation ran into the hundreds, its a reflection of the situation outside the country, not inside it.

Currently, hotels emptied by the lack of tourists are being used as isolation facilities, but as the rate of returning expats increases, the pool of suitable accommodation will become more and more fragmented, increasing the risk of of COVID-19 escaping from isolation.

How many Kiwis will return of the coming months and possibly years? how long is a piece of string? There are half a million Kiwis living in Australia, and hundreds of thousands scattered across the rest of the globe. I can foresee a situation where it might be necessary to restrict the flow rate of our own nationals into the country.

Public opinion here is swinging towards hostility of those returning home due to the perceived risk of returnees reintroducing the virus into the community, and the fear that they will swell the ranks of the unemployed , or worse, take jobs from those already working here. Now where have I heard similar sentiment before, but applied to a different group of people? The simple fact is that immigrants to this country are now almost exclusively Kiwis!

I’m more sympathetic towards returning expats, and this is one situation where the wife and I have agreed to disagree. Actually I’ve agreed to disagree, she’s adamant she’s right and I’m wrong. As far as she’s concerned they are placing us all in danger, and they are being selfish by choosing to return home at this time. And this is coming from someone who is an immigrant herself!

There’s probably as many reasons for returning home as there are returnees, but I think a major factor for many will be the lack of a support network in a crisis. For example Kiwis living in Australia are not eligible for unemployment benefits or other forms of social security, even though they are required to contribute to those services in the form of taxes and levies at the same rate as Australians. I dare say the situation is similar in other jurisdictions.

The cost of managed isolation is around NZ$4000 per person, and let’s face it, hotels are not really set up for prolonged periods of confinement. Currently the taxpayer foots the entire bill and there seems to be growing public demand for most all all of the cost fall on those who are quarantined. I disagree. Having to stump up with airfare up to ten times higher than pre-pandemic days, many will not be in a position cover isolation costs as well.

As an alternative to using hotels for isolation, there is one very under used resource that wouldn’t cost any more be person than currently, but would for a more pleasant confinement. Anchored all over the world are large cruise ships that would provide more secure isolation and provide facilities that would no hotel can. Why not transfer a few such ships to NZ waters where they could provide more beds than the total capacity of all the hotels in the country?


4 Comments

Why, oh why didn’t I indoctrinate my kids?

There are times when I wish I had indoctrinated my children, especially my son. That way, he’d probably still hold beliefs and values similar to, or at least compatible with, mine. Instead, I encouraged them to think for themselves; to seek out evidence and then draw their own conclusions. At times. as happened yesterday, I begin to question the wisdom of that.

I’m not a believer in absolute or objective truths, be they religious, social, or even scientific. I’m old enough to recall “Scientific certainties” that are no longer certain and in some cases disproved.

I can recall a time when homosexual acts were criminal and when the medical profession classified homosexuality as a disorder. It was first declassified as a disorder in Australia and New Zealand in around 1972, in America a year later and throughout the most of the world within a couple of years. In Aotearoa New Zealand, homosexual acts weren’t decriminalised until 1984, and in some parts of the world such acts can still be punished by life imprisonment,

As an aside, as a teenager, I was an avid reader of periodical magazines and other publications, especially if they contained articles of a scientific nature, and I first became aware of the possibility that homosexuality was not “wrong” in the mid to late 1960s through a number of articles I read that were mostly highly critical of, and sometimes angry at, a pamphlet titled Towards A Quaker View Of Sex first published in 1963. Although I didn’t get to read the entire pamphlet until more than forty years after its first publication, excerpts accompanying the articles seemed more reasoned and well thought out than most of the criticism leveled at it. Most of the criticism was related at the morality, or rather the perceived immorality that the critics believed the publication advocated.

And yet, most (but not all) of the conclusions reached in the pamphlet are now widely accepted as the norm: same sex relationships are generally viewed as within the bounds of normality; here, and in many parts of the world same sex relationships have equal footing with heterosexual relationships; here, a partnership is legally recognised by its nature and duration, not by whether or not it has been formalised by a marriage or civil union. We have still some way to go in accepting and recognising forms of relationships that do not involve only two people. For example in this country there is no legal recognition of a relationship that involves A & B & C, although the relationships between A & B, B & C, and A & C may be recognised.

I have drifted off topic somewhat. Now where was I? Oh yes, indoctrination. If I had indoctrinated my son into believing the Bible was not the literal Word of God, nor a rule book to live by, then he might not have reached the conclusion about a decade ago that indeed the Bible is literally the Word of God and is to be believed and followed to the letter. Unfortunately I don’t think I ever mentioned, let alone discussed, the Bible. I regret that now.

And yesterday I realised that I did not indoctrinate him sufficiently to be suspicious of conspiracy theories. They are “conspiracy theories” and not “conspiracies” for a reason.

Yesterday I discovered that he is convinced that the collapse of the Twin Towers on 9/11 was due to controlled implosions on multiple floors within the buildings. I had to forcefully end the discussion when he declared that all demolition experts agree that the buildings could not have collapsed the way they did unless they had been rigged by a demolition expert to collapse that way.

Sigh! If he had said “some experts” or “an expert” instead of “all experts” I might have been prepared to hear him out. I’m not closed to rational disagreements, but the use of “all experts” was sufficient evidence for me to conclude any discussion would not be rational.

I must admit I’m somewhat curious as to who he believes the “conspirators” might be. After all if it was “controlled”, it was planned, so who planned it and why? But in the interest of maintaining a mostly close relationship with my son, it’s a curiosity I’m not going to try to satisfy.


Leave a comment

FC, RPM, and How Wikipedia Became Complicit in Silencing Non-speaking Autistics

This is one of a number of articles I am linking to in opposition to Wikipedia editorial policy that promotes “the complete erasure of living, breathing, autistic human beings and their experiences from the world’s largest encyclopedia”.

Over the past few months, I was involved in an editing dispute on Wikipedia involving the efficacy of facilitated communication (FC) and Rapid Prompting Method (RPM). What began with one contentious edit has now resulted in the deletion of the following biographical articles of autistic people from Wikipedia: Amy Sequenzia, a prominent non-speaking self-advocate who…

Source: FC, RPM, and How Wikipedia Became Complicit in Silencing Non-speaking Autistics