So it had things on it like “Amanda will initiate and sustain ______ number of interactions with her peers on a daily basis.”

Silence followed, because there were no arrangements for a student to in fit BOTH categories. They patched together a program that satisifed no one and did nothing for him, so they were highly relieved when he simply dropped out of school 3 months later, got a GED and started college.

I can see where this kind of misperception and misunderstanding would be more common with any condition that can’t really be seen (and therefore are harder to understand for people who haven’t experienced them). But even with comparatively straightforward, physical conditions, people can sometimes get confused.

For example, it happens that I have broken or sprained the same ankle (right one) repeatedly over the past 7 years, including tearing the tendons. As a result, the tendons in my right foot are signficantly shorter than they were 8 years ago, meaning that I can no longer run or jump, and that navigating down steps is more difficult for me unless I have a really good railing to hold on to. So that’s my more chronic foot condition.

But then, on top of that, a year or two ago I had plantar fascia in the same foot, but in the flat of the heel not the ankle. And my mother immediately assumed that the older ankle problems had somehow caused the plantar fascia when, in fact, there was no good reason to think that this was the case, or at least not from what my foot doctor said. (If anything, I tend to favor that foot because of the ankle problem, which I would think would generally put LESS stress on the heel, not more.) I admit I didn’t ask him directly, but he was very much aware of both problems so I would think he would have said if he had seen a clear possible connection.

I guess any time people hear of two “unusual conditions” occurring together (“unusual” actually meaning “any condition they’re not personally familiar with and don’t really understand”) they tend to have trouble processing the idea that just because they might happen to occur together in the same person, it doesn’t mean they’re necessarily linked. So they look for the link even when there’s no real logical reason to think there is one.

Each child has a gift that is unique to them. You have to see the child, and not the disability.

As an aside, I went to the Holocaust Museum last week. It’s no surprise the “cleansing” began with the handicapped. I will bring out more info as I read a book I bought there.

Because apparently, autism cancels out all those other things, in some weird way, or can’t co-exist with any other kind of neurological or mental variation. Well, unless you describe it as a “co-morbid condition” or as a “coping technique”– in that case, then some people will believe it exists, albeit that it’s pathological, but they’ll also decide that it must all be part of autism in some way, and start trying to compose theories around that notion, or start seeing it in every other autistic person they run across even when it isn’t there.

Of course, it isn’t any better when autistic people themselves are the ones doing the self-pathologizing and theorizing and claiming to see it in a bunch of other autistics they run across.

I also see you have linked to more blogs including mine–thanks! (Except it’s spelled “Reunify Gally” … “Gally” being an affectionate nickname in the Deaf community for Gallaudet University)

Will look forward to your finalized background!

I really like the new decor – it’s almost Australian somehow:) The background scene looks like Moontwingee, an Aboriginal sacred place (for good reason).