But, given the incredibly inaccurate and misleading attacks on my father, Woody Allen, I feel that I can no longer stay silent as he continues to be condemned for a crime he did not commit. I was present for everything that transpired in our house before, during, and after the alleged event.
Ivar Lovaas' landmark study, scientific and legal attention has been lavished on Applied Behaviour Analysis as an autism treatment.
Dr Lovaas' supporters and opponents, whether principled or opportunist, have been loud, plentiful, prolific, and well-credentialed. But when it comes to the test of ethics, to allotting autistics rudimentary ethical consideration, all sides and factions for and against ABA have persistently and thoroughly failed.
In an investigation of this failure, diverse aspects of ethical standards in the autism-ABA industry are explored and compared. A framework emerges suggesting the nature and scope, as well as the causes and motives, of the unethical treatment of autistics.
At the same time, a narrative emerges. It resonates with the past and current unethical treatment of other atypical human beings. Since ethics problems do not spontaneously resolve themselves, instead tending to accumulate and escalate, the interlocking framework and narrative are put to work.
This results in specific ethical challenges, and some proposed remedies, for behaviourists of all kinds who have as their goal extinguishing autistic behaviour, and therefore autistic people. Introducing behaviourists and behaviourist ethics Not everyone is a behaviourist these days, but so long as the target for behaviour modification is autistic, the ranks are impressive.
Apart from the behaviour analysts themselves, autism-ABA adherents include therapists, educators and instructors; parents, grandparents, friends-of-the-family; funding bodies, autism societies, professional and pressure groups; professors, lawyers, judges, and journalists; politicians, bureaucrats, and the Quebec Human Rights Commission.
All have failed to notice that they themselves are behaving unethically. Instead, they are taking for granted that any ethical concerns about ABA have already been dealt with and disposed of.
When systematically hurting autistic children in ABA programs raised ethical concerns, to the point where laws were passed, ABA became non-aversive: The just concerns about continuing physical punishment of autistics in other programs can no longer be used as ammunition against ABA.
Then there is the behaviourist quandary of whether a controlled trial of autism-ABA would be ethical, since the controls would be deprived of this presumed-to-be-effective treatment.
ABA goes nowhere without its unique vapour trail of adjectives like "scientifically-proven" and "medically-necessary". Parents and researchers alike have found this sky-writing difficult to resist.
In consequence, protocols like randomized assignment and matched controls have been switched from the good science camp to the bad ethics camp: An objective observer might notice how circular this logic is, and how expedient. Rhetoric in autism treatment Another issue has earned the attention of behaviourists.
Inthe mother of two autistic boys testified before a US bioethics committee. She pleaded that applying ethical standards, in the area of informed consent, to autism research would be harmful to autistics. ASAT's stringent scientific standards are splashed around its website and newsletter and are integral to its mission.
With the authority of its hefty advisory board, ASAT reported that good science and good ethics are incompatible in autism. Further, ethics would be destructive of autism research and the death of hope for parents of autistics everywhere.
More recently, Dr Catherine Maurice tackled a series of autism-ABA ethics questions, about recovery from autism, posed by an on-line journal with "Leadership" in its title. Her stratagem was to substitute in each question the word "cancer" for the word "autism".
She sealed her argument by rebranding ABA as chemotherapy, and who's against chemotherapy? This piece of rhetoric then showed up in ASAT's newsletter.
When I asked ASAT to explain the scientific basis for equating autism with cancer, they responded with silence, not science. The behaviourist behaviour of recruiting cancer has also found free reign in legal battles arising from the sheer expense of sustaining the autism-ABA industry.
In the Auton case, Canada's ABA legal epic, the autism-equals-cancer statement of Madame Justice Marion Allan echoed and was echoed in the autism-equals-cancer variations of the petitioners and became a media staple.
When a judge, or Dr Maurice, or any behaviourist yells cancer, any ethical consideration for autistic people obediently hurries to the nearest exit. False equations and false oppositions A false opposition is a perversion of reality using an if-then or either-or construction: False oppositions if autistic children must be treated ethically then they will be doomed and false equations autism equals cancer have elbowed aside empirical evidence and have become central to the legal, scientific, and popular promotion of the autism-ABA industry.
Here are some more: Autism equals tragedy, suffering, and doom. Either autistic children are successfully treated through early intensive behaviour interventions or they are condemned to a life of isolation and institutionalization.
Autism is incompatible with achievement, intelligence, physical and psychological integrity, dignity, autonomy, and learning: Either the autistic gets ABA, and comes to resemble a non-autistic, or the autistic is doomed. Autism equals a nuclear bomb, a stroke, diabetes, a terminal illness, being "riddled with pain from a terrible accident", and again, always, cancer.
If you are against ABA then you are for institutionalization. If ABA is criticized then children will be destroyed.Several people have asked me about this question from Cambridge IELTS 8.
I wrote the essay below with the help of some of my students. A few simple linking features are highlighted. Nowadays the way many people interact with each other has changed because of technology.
In what ways has technology affected the types of relationships that people . This is strikingly beautiful – one of the best I’ve read from you. One somewhat rambling thought I took away from this post, oddly enough, is that – in the face of a potential superintelligence – the status quo is not the only alternative to trying to build a Friendly AI.
Acculturation is the process of social, psychological, and cultural change that stems from blending between cultures. The effects of acculturation can be seen at multiple levels in both the original (native) and newly adopted (host) cultures. Historically speaking, acculturation is a direct change of one's culture through dominance over another's culture through either military or political.
In , my father, Michael Young, published a short book called The Rise of the Meritocracy, – An Essay on Education and barnweddingvt.com purported to be a paper written by a sociologist in about the transformation of Britain from a feudal society in which people’s social position and level of income were largely determined by the .
Disclaimer: This essay has been submitted by a student. This is not an example of the work written by our professional essay writers. You can view samples of our professional work here.. Any opinions, findings, conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of UK Essays.
Ah, but super-human AI is not the only way Moloch can bring our demise. How many such dangers can your global monarch identify in time? EMs, nanotechnology, memetic contamination, and all the other unknown ways we’re running to the bottom.