Health knowledge made personal
Join this community!
› Share page:
Go
Search posts:

Guardian UK This Comment Removed By A Moderator

Posted Apr 01 2013 12:00am
Anne "Anne Dachel
22 April 2013 6:28pm
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted."
 
Here is the comment that was published and then removed.
The essence of Ms Chew's article is that autism is a genetic disorder that is inevitable.

There is no evidence that children are born with autism. My son wasn't. He didn't stop talking, stop looking at me and start showing all the signs of autism until he was vaccinated into his disability. Thousands upon thousands of parents say the same thing: theirs was a child that was born healthy and was developing normally until they received certain routine vaccinations.

This piece asks a question that isn't relevant because no official can tell us the cause of autism. The scary fact is that a once rare disorder is now so common we all know someone with an autistic child and we are being brainwashed into autism acceptance. This makes no sense.

Autism is an epidemic and there's never been a genetic epidemic in human history. Something is affecting the normal development of a generation of children and we have to stop covering up the truth.Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism
Kristina Chew, the mother of a son with ASD and an outspoken member of the autism community, published an article in the Guardian in the the UK on April 22, 2013. The title was sobering, Would you abort a disabled child?
 
And while the headline referred only to "a disabled child," a great deal of the focus was on children with autism.  Chew started the article by asking, "If you found out the baby you're expecting would be autistic, what would you do?"
 
She continued 
"Currently there is no prenatal genetic test for autism, the neurological developmental disorder that numerous children - 1 in 88 or even 1 in 50 - are being diagnosed with. Such prenatal tests exist for other conditions such as Down's syndrome. On learning their fetus could have this intellectual disability, between 70 and 85% of pregnant women in the US choose abortion, writes Amy Julia Becker, whose 7-year-old daughter Penny has Down's syndrome, in The Atlantic." 
 
Chew went on to talk about autism as a genetic disorder. She described what autism is like for her son.

"Scientists have been making gradual but continued progress in finding genes linked to autism, so the prospect of a prenatal text is not out of the question and it is often forced me to ask myself the tough question: would I have aborted my disabled child?

If I had known before Charlie was born that he would be severely autistic, I would still have decided to have him. I remember my OB-GYN finishing her explanation of amniocentesis by saying that "you just need to know your options" in case something "was wrong". I had long felt Charlie moving inside me. With memories from my college days advocating for a woman's right to control her body echoing in my head, I said to myself, Charlie's not even born, but I can't imagine life without him.


"Weeks shy of his 16th birthday, Charlie is a loving young man with profound challenges. He attends a school specifically for students with severe behavior problems and will always need 24/7 care. His EEGs reveal brain abnormalities that confound neurologists: Charlie does not have seizures but, at times, something goes 'off' in his brain. The last time this occurred, we had to call 911 and were soon surrounded by a crowd of police and EMTs."

Chew then turned to the impact autism is having on society.

"April has been dubbed Autism Awareness Month and also Autism Acceptance Month. Understanding the differences of autistic individuals also means recognizing that caring for an autistic person profoundly changes people's lives, affecting career choices and relationships. An expecting mother confronted with the news that her unborn child may have a disability isn't the only one who has to make 'incredibly painful' decisions.

"Autistic individuals have a normal life expectancy. Every choice we make for Charlie influences his entire life and ours. What if we choose wrong and he ends up neglected in a state facility, sedated with drugs rather than (as he does every weekend with his dad) enjoying bike rides on nature trails? What will happen after we are dead? Who will seek out Charlie's favorite bagels and sit with him through bouts of anxiety-fueled insomnia?"

Chew ended her piece with this ominous comment:

"As I walk behind Charlie (he's almost six feet tall with a stride to match), I know I can't imagine life without him. I regret none of the choices I've made. But given the state of services for adults like Charlie, I can only fear. Faced with the results of a prenatal test about their unborn child, we must still have the right to choose what to do."

This was very disconcerting for a number of reasons.  First of all, the not-too-subtle message here is that kids are born autistic.  When we have perfected genetic testing, it may be possible to detect which children will develop autism while they are still in the womb.  This is a complete surrender to autism.  Autistic children happen; there's nothing we can do to prevent it.

No longer are we blaming cold, unaffectionate refrigerator moms for autism. Now we have our sites on the parents with defective genes that produce autistic babies.  There's no mention of kids who are fine and who meet every developmental milestone but who suddenly regress into autism. Even asking the question makes no sense.  How can a disorder that no one ever heard about just 25 years ago now be something babies are born with? 

After reading the article, I posted my own comment, which was published. Here it is
The essence of Ms Chew's article is that autism is a genetic disorder that is inevitable.

There is no evidence that children are born with autism. My son wasn't. He didn't stop talking, stop looking at me and start showing all the signs of autism until he was vaccinated into his disability. Thousands upon thousands of parents say the same thing: theirs was a child that was born healthy and was developing normally until they received certain routine vaccinations.

This piece asks a question that isn't relevant because no official can tell us the cause of autism. The scary fact is that a once rare disorder is now so common we all know someone with an autistic child and we are being brainwashed into autism acceptance. This makes no sense.

Autism is an epidemic and there's never been a genetic epidemic in human history. Something is affecting the normal development of a generation of children and we have to stop covering up the truth.Anne Dachel, Media editor: Age of Autism

To my surprise, the Guardian removed my comment after a couple of hours.  My photo was still there along with the explanation that what I said "didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted." 
 
 I looked at the standards at the Guardian and they warned that comments that were "personal attacks, extremely offensive, or threatening are not tolerated." 
 
Likewise, opinions that involved sexism, homophobia or other forms of hate-speech are not allowed.  Spam is also not permitted. 
 
I looked over my comment.  I didn't attack Chew personally.  I used no term that could be considered offensive or vulgar.  I merely pointed out the increased prevalence of autism and all the parents who say that their child was fine until they were vaccinated.  I explained that autism is now an epidemic---something that couldn't be caused solely by genetics.
 
The Guardian doesn't allow free speech.  Pure and simple.  I've posted endless comments on literally thousands of stories over the last 15 years, challenging the opinions of doctors, health officials, and reporters.  I've been attacked by lots of people who disagree with me.  This is a very heated issue.  For the Guardian to delete my comment because it brought up the controversy that isn't tolerated in Britain today, is nothing less than censorship. 
 
It seems the free exchange of ideas can't happen in Britain when the subject touches on vaccines and autism.  The First Amendment we take for granted allows anyone to voice an opinion, but it has no place at the Guardian in the UK.

Anne Dachel is Media Editor for Age of Autism.
 
 

Posted by Age of Autism at April 24, 2013 at 5:46 AM in Current Affairs Permalink

Post a comment
Write a comment:

Related Searches