NPR show time seems definite now.

Standard

It looks fairly definite. They’re doing a show on All Things Considered tomorrow (Monday, June 26), and you can find the times and stations on this website.

Interviewed should be Michael John Carley, Jim Sinclair, me, and possibly others.

The blurb on the site says “Life can be difficult for autistic children. But imagine being diagnosed as autistic when you’re an adult. Many autistic adults say they aren’t hoping for a cure — just acceptance.” I want to clarify for anyone who comes here from there, in case it isn’t made clear on the show, that neither Jim Sinclair nor I were diagnosed in adulthood, but that they might be talking about Michael John Carley or other people who were interviewed.

About these ads

10 responses »

  1. We just heard the NPR story. Aside from the annoying use of “with autism”, we were surprised at the lack of frustrating moments such features usually have. They even explained why high and low functioning are not good labels. Waiting for Thursday now to hear what kind of comments the feature will get — may write one myself. Do you feel you were fairly represented (did they use enough of what you said to give a clear idea of what you wanted to say)?

  2. I’m going to have to listen to it a few more times before I remember what was on it, but as far as I can tell it wasn’t too bad, especially as shows like that go. The guy doing the broadcast wrote No Pity which was a history of the disability rights movement (minus the parts he didn’t know of at the time). So he’s familiar with disability rights as a concept, unlike most reporters, which is probably why the most serious kinds of obnoxiousness were avoided.

    Most of what I said in the conversation didn’t make it onto there, but I expected that, since it was fitting interviews with over three different people into a 15-minute show. What did make it into there was okay, but of course they edited out some of the clarifying nuance type statements, and I’ll probably end up blogging those eventually.

  3. Very nice. Considering how bad it could have been (in general), it was very nice. Thanks for the effort you put in to being a part of it.

  4. The “movement,” for lack of a better word, is still in its infancy. That they’re even trying to find their footing around the subject is to be commended. (Still, I was thinking cutting room floor.) :-)

  5. I really liked the interview and hearing the *voices* of those I’ve only read online:)

    I’m not dx’d and I cringe and get a sinking gut feeling about approaching a *specialist* again, these things have not gone well for me in the past.

    I do have a son who is dx’d with AS, another son whom I did not raise who has been dx’d with AS, Plus two other kiddo’s who definately have ASD related stuff…stims, Auditory processing difficulties, etc… I have difficulty with speaking up at support groups for my kids and saying that I have an ASD, perhaps because its not *official* or because I have been told I *function too well to be dx’d*. Argh.

    Kerry

  6. I just read the linked article by Mr. Sinclair about adjectives. I thought about the possibility of using the word “autist”. In that way the person is not separable from their abilities. Fortunately it also has a similar pronunciation with “artist” which has such a favorable connotation among society in general. Might this be a way to advance the acceptance of autists as a valuable part of humankind?

  7. Pingback: Autism Vox » Autism on NPR

  8. ok, tolerance acceptance education, thats fine. but trying to spin aspergers/autism as something that one should be proud of? i’m sorry, that is just going too far. it is a disability, and being proud of your defect is just a bit of self delusion. one should exist in reality ok? having a social deficit is a big negative when one has to exist in a human society. its just reality. it looks mean to rain on their parade and thats probably why no one bothered to point it out or speak up, but someone has to do it.

  9. Well.. a couple things here.

    One, people really are often proud of (or not ashamed of) their so-called defects, and it’s not self-delusion. But it’s not because they’re viewing themselves as “defective,” it’s because it’s how they are. Most humans are not ashamed of being human, even though it means their body doesn’t work the way other animals does (this has some positives and some negatives attached for humans, so one could say it’s a “defect” compared to other animals, or one could say it’s a “strength”, but in reality it’s really neither, it’s just what humans are).

    Two, in the oversimplistic worldview that divides things up into abilities and deficits in a very standard way, they’re finding that autism isn’t a social deficit, it merely causes those as a by-product, and seems to mostly be based on being able to do something non-autistic people can’t do. But, as I said in the radio interview (but was edited out), that’s not, I think, the basis for our lack of inferiority.

    But it’s fine that you said it. Frankly I was expecting truly mean responses, which yours is not. I just don’t agree with yours, either for autism or other so-called defects. Of course I look at these things as human variation, so I’m not going to agree with ability/deficit models of human variation in general. (I also don’t really see myself as “proud of” being autistic, but I certainly don’t view there as being anything inherently wrong with being autistic, and I certainly do see being autistic as a good thing, if you’re autistic. Being non-autistic is a good thing, if you’re not autistic.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s