The "Autism family": Is this acceptable?

[SecondmateFlint]

I think she's addicted to having children. Addicted to that feeling of "something new." It's like why we all buy a lot of fish or have a lot of cats. We all like to have something new and exciting. Now, that may not be her case here, but it's what I'm thinking.

While I do not think we have the right to completely stop her from having children, I don't think she should have more. She should spend the time loving the ones she has. Autistic people seem to be happy (from what I've seen). They're very nice, hardworking people. Why would you want more children? And for the love of God, let them receive treatment and therapy. I'm sure some of it is mental therapy to help the cope and adjust to the new things in their lives. They're growing up! It's hard for everyone, disability or not.

 

[Adzma]

SNIP

I agree with you completely. She should not have more children. Harsh, but true.

 

[CZS PublicEnemy]

Yah the worlds already over populated. The last thing we need is a couple who is purposely trying to have more autistic children that will end up having to be taking care of their entire lives.

 

[Shifty Tortoise]

To be honest i don't think anybody should have more than 5 children, it's not fair on the kids as each new born means less attention for them.

But who knows, maybe their catholic or something

 

[Bat Vader]

You're an idiot.

The Third Reich did it solely on hair color, eye color, and religion. None of which have anything to do with my solutions. Shoo.

And you're doing it based on social status.

You're right, that's completely different.
Maybe you should come up with a genius plan to get rid of the homosexuals while you're at it.

See, all the replies I have gotten have basically said exactly this. It proves something. What does it prove, you ask?

That you're all idiots unable to figure out a basic thing.

Social status does not determine if they are able to have kids. It determines how MANY they are able to have.

If a rich person has bad genes, they would be sterilized and unable to have any kids, just like a poor person with bad genes. However, if both the poor person and rich person had good genes, the rich person would be able to have more children. Why? Because he'd be able to provide better, and thus be able to handle more children monetary wise.

Get a brain.

I don't really think there is a need to insult people just because they don't understand what you are trying to say. If that is the case perhaps go back and edit your original post.

If you keep insulting people like this you are going to get reported quickly and either get a probation or suspension.

 

[Casual Shinji]

That you're all idiots unable to figure out a basic thing.

Yes, we are indeed idiots for we can not grasp the simple notion that people with mental and physical disabilities...

...should be put down.

 

[Bat Vader]

That you're all idiots unable to figure out a basic thing.

Yes, we are indeed idiots for we can not grasp the simple notion that people with mental and physical disabilities...

...should be put down.

If that user is going to act like that I just say report them. I understand that they have an opinion but to insult someone because that person did not understand what they were trying to say is immature.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

First of all, fuck your society. I care about living autistic children first. These people have a disease. Some of you are talking as if they are a disease. This is serious stuff- just be sure you give it due deliberation.

This is a tragedy any way you look at it. I think parents should understand the risks involved in genetic disorders and spare their potential progeny unnecessary suffering. As long as they make an effort to understand the risks and dangers, I likely won't begrudge their decision.

But in my opinion, it is better not to procreate in many cases.

 

[Paksenarrion]

being mentally handicapped means that they will most likely forever be taking more away from society than they can possibly put back

Wow, you're not that familiar with autism are you? Last time I checked, Sir Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein and Paul Dirac all made HUGE differences to the world.

If you plan to shoot me down by saying that those 3 were rare cases let me ask you how many non autistic people made contributions to the world that were on par with those 3, and work that out as a percentage of the total number of normal people. Now look at the severe autism cases, and work out THAT percentage.

There are millions, maybe even billions of people who will take out of society more than they can put back in, and it's not genetic. Those people are leeches because their upbringing hasn't given them morals or somewhere down the lines things have gone very, very wrong for them. Those kids, assuming that they have a good upbringing, and it's likely that they will given that she certainly seems to be a family person, will most likely put more into the world than the millions of people with poor upbringings. If you really think that just because they're DNA may give them some trouble in life, you're clearly damn near incapable of thinking in the long run beyond "Oooh, autism isn't too good, and there's a lot of autism here, it must be so bad that I should start a thread about it".

Edit: My apologies that turned into a rant. I believe that she should stop having kids in the same way that anyone else whould stop having kids after a certain point, though I believe that the autism is completely besides the point and I think very little of you for using it a centre point for your argument.

The Kraken, my friend; you have released it. ^_^

I babysit an autistic child, and he is adorable. He is always playing with his sister and cares for her very much; he kisses her goodnight whenever I put them to bed. So far, I can't spot a difference between him and his younger sister, other than a slur when he talks, and having a slurred speech isn't any difficult to comprehend than how most people street talk (know what I'm sayin'?) or spell in text messages or forums (i dunno my bff gill?).

 

[Escapefromwhatever]

I read an article about something similar to this for my Bioethics class, except it was about Huntington's disease. The author's opinion was that people with Huntington's disease should get pre-embryonic genetic screening in order to see whether or not their children would inherit the disease. If the embryo would Huntington's disease, it would be aborted, and if it didn't, it would be allowed to be born. Of course, if the parents were pro-life, the author thought that if there was any chance that the child could get Huntington's disease, that those parents should not conceive. I'm not quite sure what I think about this issue yet (Gattaca would hit me if I agreed with the article, though, and I love Gattaca), but perhaps the same logic could be used here. I guess it would have to depend on how serious the autism is- my best friend has Aspergers, and he functions just fine.

 

[Casual Shinji]

That you're all idiots unable to figure out a basic thing.

Yes, we are indeed idiots for we can not grasp the simple notion that people with mental and physical disabilities...

...should be put down.

If that user is going to act like that I just say report them. Members like that are what drag down the forums.

I never report anyone.

Everyone has a right to say what they want even if it's something like this.

 

[leviathanmisha]

NIEN! Sie sind eine Beleidigung für die meister rennen!
(translate it yourself)

Ok, so I find a tiny bit of humor in this, maybe it's cause I'm in Social Injustice and I'm hit in the face with this stuff everyday.

But she doesn't need anymore kids. I'm glad that her kids are functioning members of society, but no more...

 

[CD-R]

Not to be a thread derailer but..

AOL Health: Five of your six children are autistic. What role do you think genetics play?

JO: I believe that in my family, it's genetic. Kiernan, my youngest and my most severely affected [Kiernan is not verbal], has never had a vaccination. I didn't vaccinate him because when he was born, I was sure that it was vaccinations that [caused autism]. And three of my daughters were born in a birthing center, so they had no medical interactions.

Interesting he had no vaccinations but still got Autism. So is Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy going to finally shut their big fat traps about vaccines causing Autism?

OP if you actually read the article the mother thought that it was vaccines and modern medicine that caused her kids autism. She didn't think it was genetic until after she had all the kids.

For awhile a lot of people thought Autism may have been caused by vaccines. There was never any link. However, thanks to Jim Carrey and other celebutards shooting their big fat traps off about things they knew nothing about we wasted tons of time and energy trying to link vaccines to Autism when there wasn't one instead of looking for the real cause.

The media should really listen to this Cracked article.

http://www.cracked.com/article_18416_5-things-media-loves-pretending-are-news.html

 

[911 fox]

depends if they have asperger syndrome if so then maybe continue having kids but other than that no.

 

[Pimppeter2]

OP if you actually read the article the mother thought that it was vaccines and modern medicine that caused her kids autism. She didn't think it was genetic until after she had all the kids.

Thats why I said that the 6th kid would be hypothetical.

 

[Booze Zombie]

I don't know if I like this idea that Austistic people "live a lesser life" or "enjoy themselves less" than other people.
I have Aspherger's Syndrome, the less severe version of Autism and whilst not social, I am very happy sitting around living my life the way I like.

What exactly gives "normal" people the right to judge a person's life when that person doesn't even consider life to be the same thing they do?
I mean, all I hear from "normal people" is "virgin, social, virgin, sex, social, social" (simplified version) and it just doesn't interest me that much.
For me, life is not being dead, that's all it is.
For others, it's apparently being social and trying to be the best at these social dominance games and people with Autism and Aspherger's don't care about this, apparently.

If she gets all of her children to simply accept that they've gotta work and be educated, what's the issue?
Is it that they're not social?
They don't care about it...

 

[Nmil-ek]

I love all the fuckwits in this thread talking about keeping the gene pool clean and survival of the fittest, newflash dipshits thats not evolution thats artificial selection all survival of the fittest means is the species with the traits best suited to survive will if it does not then it wont. And genetic defects are allways going to be present in nature, are you saying thye are less human? They have less rights no fuck you, you nihilistic prat heres hoping folks like you never procreate not out of some abstract "pure bloodlines" shit just so you cant teach your kids your moronic bullshit ideals.

 

[Slaanax]

I think its time for her to retire from the baby making scene, on a side note 6 kids that too many anyways.

 

[Tiny116]

If she can prove she can adequately care for the child, then why should we stop her?

Although I'm tempted to change my answer after having seen this:

No, we have enough people.

Having to care for 5 severly Autistic children and given the nature of their condition could possibly be very unpredictable and violent. Or just not realise that their actions have caused harm.. No I don't. How can she adequately care for a new born with that amount on her shoulders. Her family is all most the size of a special needs class (I've had some experience with special needs care).

If she had any more children they would not be safe.

But then again we havn't met her family to know.