hyper Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Good luck, but if you precede in the way you've started this thread I don't think you're likely to achieve anything.I think cyclone has opened up a sensible tangent to the thread. That is that people with autism aren't always the best diplomats needed to drive through a change of public and/or fundholders' opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 Lastly, simply stating something is a legal requirement is facile: if there is no cash in the budget to pay for something then service providers will resort to the bare minimum when it comes to additional training - people must put pressure on government to provide sufficient funds. No- if the NHS, or any organisation, is breaking the law, then they can, and, IMO, should, be invited along to a court proceeding where they can be directed to make the necessary 'reasonable adjustment'. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 12:31 ---------- Incidentally, I don't like people being labelled "autistics"; perhaps "people with autism" is more positive and respectful? Imo. I'm fine with it personally. Obviously I'm a fully diagnosed autistic (person) myself and don't myself find it problematic. But I'm open to input on this one- are you able to consisely express what you feel is disrespectful about the term? I'm always happy to modify my position if there's good reason. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 12:33 ---------- Good luck, but if you precede in the way you've started this thread I don't think you're likely to achieve anything. Thanks for the good wishes somethings already been achieved- I've got 2 other autistic (people) interested in attending the first meeting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 I suppose that's technically an achievement. But the stated aim isn't to get people to a meeting, it's to change the behaviour of government organisations like the NHS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 I suppose that's technically an achievement. But the stated aim isn't to get people to a meeting, it's to change the behaviour of government organisations like the NHS. There isn't a stated aim Cyclone- check the original post. There are instead, several aims, all of which require, to have a chance of fruition, that some autistic people have a meeting. That in return, requires several autistic people to express an interest in such a meeting. The aim you've picked (as if it were a small cherry ) is something that will be addressed when/if the meetings are successfull. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 You listed 3 numbered aims in the OP. 1 was in support of 2 (which is the one I referenced), 3 is the easiest to achieve and appears to be relatively straight forward to address. Which is why I referenced the biggie... Anyway, good luck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 You listed 3 numbered aims in the OP. 1 was in support of 2 (which is the one I referenced), 3 is the easiest to achieve and appears to be relatively straight forward to address. Which is why I referenced the biggie... Fair enough Anyway, good luck. Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-xsf Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 I think Cyclone provided the most constructive response. Regards the labelling; to describe someone as "autistic" implies that all they are is "autistic". You might also be a pensioner, parent, muslim, mechanic, spouse, etc. We are all more than one label. One person with autism may experience very different difficulties than someone else with the same diagnosis. It's easier to dismiss a group by simply labelling them as "autistic" or "Jews" or "migrants" or "the elderly". Adding "person" or "people" helps to tackle the dehumanising element of a label. You can probably find a more eloquent explanation with Google*. I would expect that any training on ASD would address the potential harm and limitations of labelling people. *other search engines are available Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
onewheeldave Posted October 5, 2015 Author Share Posted October 5, 2015 I think Cyclone provided the most constructive response. Regards the labelling; to describe someone as "autistic" implies that all they are is "autistic". You might also be a pensioner, parent, muslim, mechanic, spouse, etc. No, it doesn't imply that. Just as describing someone as a pensioner doesn't imply, or suggest, that all they are is that. I've decided the best thing to do here is simply ask any autistic people who do come to a meeting, how they feel about the term. One person with autism may experience very different difficulties than someone else with the same diagnosis.Absolutely! I hope you're not under the impression I think otherwise. That is one of the very common mistakes NTs tend to make i.e. they see an autistic person having a profound difficulty with something, and, do not take it seriously because they've known an autistic person who didn't have any issues whatsoever in that situation. ---------- Post added 05-10-2015 at 16:07 ---------- It's easier to dismiss a group by simply labelling them as "autistic" or "Jews" or "migrants" or "the elderly". Adding "person" or "people" helps to tackle the dehumanising element of a label. True about terms like 'migrants', 'jews' etc. I'm not sure that adding "person" helps however. Our government is currently treating many disabled people on benefits in such a way that large numbers have/are committing suicide when their benefits are removed. At the same time, the officials are very focused on maintaining political correctness by referring to them as 'disabled people', but....... disabled people are still taking their own lives, cos, what they want isn't politicaly correct language, but, money so they can keep a home and eat. I, like many other autistic individuals, have been denied access to medical services, employment and education- usually the rejectors were very polite, and, used politically correct terms. So, I distrust that way of speaking. But, it will be interesting at any future meeting to see how other autistic people feel about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mindbending Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 Excellent initiative, I wish you well. My 11yr old daughter has autism and initiatives like this will no doubt help the overall lack of awareness of this increasingly common difficulty. Would be interested to hear about progress on this thread, please keep it going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cgksheff Posted October 5, 2015 Share Posted October 5, 2015 .......... I think it's unlikely that waiting times can be altered simply because people with autism find them intolerable. ...... This is actually one example of reasonable adjustment that is referred to in the NHS guidelines of expectations. Probably worth pursuing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now