• A group's members must never be censored from sending each other messages about any fairness problem

    It is common sense to the ethic of support, in any supportive group set up as caring for our needs and problems, that any member of a group can raise with the others, for their thoughts, any problem with how fairly the group is working. This includes raising it personally with anyone on a contact list and/or who you are on confident enough terms with for it. I'm concerned with aspie local groups in real life, here, and what it means for them to work properly.

    Imagine if members were banned from spontaneously raising issues with each other about the group, telling each other there is any problem. Then the group's leadership, one person even, could cover up anything they liked about their reaction to any problem raised by any member. That would not be an ethical way to run a group, it would be a dictatorship. Also, when a group compiles a policy or code about how it is going to cope with any sorts of difficulty, it needs to gather views from its members on what needs they need the code to reflect. That is responsible. It works in the Elas group in Edinburgh. Otherwise the policy can expect to run into unforseen problems and clashes. You can't have one centralised leader simply announce that she alone is going to write "a strict code of conduct" to suit herself and slap it on everyone.

    As of yesterday there is an actual case of this, in Scotland. It illustrates, worldwide, why it is important to any aspie group's ethicality, its medical fairness to hearing all its members' needs, that a group must never be constituted as owned by one person who is the leader, who has final say over everything and can decree new policies.

    Constraint on the way we can talk about problems, so that it does not itself turn into personal bullying, is sensible. But a group should discuss its constraints and make sure they don't amount to censorship of the expression of any problem at all. It's right that you should not be allowed to identify a person and make attacks, same as here. It's right that you should have to try, firstly, to get a personal problem solved in the gentlest and least disruptive way. But what happens when the "proper channels" for this don't work? e.g. because they let you down and don't solve or recognise the problem? This is a possibility anywhere, throughout life, it is why one of the safeguards of freedom is entitlement to speak out about it, as a failing of the system. It's why free speech matters instead of offices of the astate deciding everything and what is ever heard about it.

    You must be allowed to describe the nature of the problem, keeping names anonymous, and the nature of how you think the system for solving it has let you down, and consequent ideas for change. Anything you can support factually you must be allowed to say, not gagged on the excuse that it is a libel risk - the whole point of speaking factually verified is it's not libel. This is basic to the freedom and uncorruption of any group, to keeping leadership cover-ups impossible, hence to any group's sheer medical ethicality. This is a standard for local groups' ethicality that needs campaigning for.

    Suppose your group leadership then expects you to take part in group praise of work in support roles, done by a member who has abused you by setting you up for a horrible rejection experience and turned his back on you when it happens. You are then in an emotionally bullied position. Suppose there is a generous supply of private "proper channels", to raise it through, including a bigger support organisation that assists the group, but all you get is noncommittality that by default changes nothing, evasion of direct comment on the case at all, and libel scares against describing it as the crime of vulnerable adult abuse it is. Suppose you email other members in the group's contact list, keeping it all anonymous and raising as a system failiure that this injustice was happening. Don't be so naive as to ask them to care to do anything for you at all, of course. So suppose you just set out the situation and the proper moral non-abusive solution that would keep the group running properly and keep everyone safe, and you tell folks they need do nothing at all, for you have put the solution in place just by writing the message, unless anyone actively says otherwise, and why they will be in the wrong if they do. You say, read the message then comfortably move on from it and everything will be fine.

    This is common sense, and an act of discussing with the other members how to deal with a problem in the group - anyone in any group must naturally be willing for that. If the one overcentralised leader rules this a misuse of members' contact details and likely to upset folks, and just announces her own rules about it, she is seizing back the power to keep the final decision on all problems and to censor members from discussing with other members when there is anything wrong with the group. Then the wrong outcome, even on an abuse issue, could be imposed by leader decision and all talking about it would be banned! Ever mentioning any problem to anyone except through the leader, even anyone you closely trust, will be banned in the code and will count as subjecting them to upset and misusing the contact list. This would be like communism and AFF. I won't stay in a group that requires submitting to this, I won't class msyself or anyone else as safely protected under such a regime. This needs the scene to campaign on as a principle to watch out for everywhere.

    It's like saying: the country needs placing under some strict codes to stop disorder upsetting folks, in which our leader must keep us feeling safe by never being told otherwise, so let's abolish parliament and ban news of anything the government disfavours. On occasions in history this solution really has been popular. It has never turned out well.

  • have your mood dictated by your doctor

    From Mind Freedom News, copying an article in Psychology Today.

    The American Psychiatric Association's convention held a serious debate on classing bitterness as a mental illness.


    www.mindfreedom.org/kb/diagnostics/dsm-bitterness

    At least thasnkfully "Part of the incredulity the APA discussion has generated in the media and blogosphere is doubtless because bitterness strikes the person feeling it as a justified response to a social ill or personal wrong." Obviously this is about Orwellian docility conditioning. Force everyone to be happy with their lot in life or else drug them, yet pretend there is still democracy. Anti-bitterness propaganda has been used by religion and psychology for 3000 years as a trick for telling the unheard working majority to be more accepting and less critical of society.

    "Now I grant that there's a lot of anger and bitterness out there. Part of it, I'd wager, is targeted appropriately at a Republican administration that managed in eight years to bring a largely healthy economy to its knees.

    Do we need to give additional reasons for bitterness at that outcome? The Bush administration managed to lead the country into a protracted, illegal war, based on trumped-up evidence; ignored memos that said the country faced credible terrorist threats; locked up large numbers of suspects afterwards without trial or due process; lied to its citizens about the widespread use of torture; eliminated every sensible, necessary check on financial regulation to prevent a fiscal meltdown; mocked the facts of climate change; and dithered as Hurricane Katrina devastated a large city.

    Heaven knows, there are reasons enough to be bitter about the untold number of opportunities squandered, the problems that have escalated in their place, and the crises now with us that were once entirely avoidable.

    But when justified anger at such incompetence is discussed as a sign of mental illness, it's borderline insulting, especially because half the reason for the discussion is to ensure that drug companies—anxious to prod their faltering revenues—can promise relief from the alleged disorder with yet more pharmaceuticals. "

    ... " Just one of the many reasons for alarm here is the thought of the DSM, of all documents, trying with a few vague, open-ended criteria to legislate what is reasonable bitterness and what is not. If you knew that "fear of eating alone in restaurants" and "avoidance of public restrooms" were both official symptoms of social anxiety disorder, among the most widely diagnosed of mental illnesses in the United States, you would share my concern. "

    I share his concern.

    You don't need to be a genius to realise, fo instance, that when President Obama says no prosecutions of CIA torturers from the Bush era because "America should look forward nor back", the propaganda of letting go and anti-bitterness serves totally consciously as a tool for state perpetrators of atrocities to escape justice.

  • State circulating inaccurate info on your condition ?

    This comes from Unlock Democracy.

    Modern Liberty - what's next?
    The Convention on Modern Liberty took place this weekend across the UK. Thousands of people participated in person and online. The media have hailed it as a tremendous success.

    The big question is "what's next?"

    DO THIS TODAY: STOP CLAUSE 152!

    The Coroners and Justice Bill is currently going through Parliament. The most outrageous part in this Bill is Clause 152, which would allow any Minister by order to take any information gathered for one purpose from anywhere, and use it for any other purpose.

    Your information, your family's information, arbitrarily used without your consent or even knowledge. This is the very reverse of 'Data Protection'.

    An 'Information Sharing Order', as defined in Clause 152, would permit your information to be trafficked and abused, not only all across government and the public sector - it would also reach into the private sector. And it would even allow transfer of information across international borders.

    Write to your MP - www.WriteToThem.com makes it very easy - and tell him or her that you 'refuse consent to having your information shared under any information sharing order', and ask him or her to vote to have Clause 152 removed entirely from the Coroners and Justice Bill.

    For more information see the Stop 152 page on our website. www.unlockdemocracy.org.uk

    Spectrumites' angle -

    This concern can be linked to the government's announcement on Feb 23, of a duty upon local government to share with "other agencies" information on autistic adults and all forms of disabled children, living locally. That is without permission, behind the folks' backs.

    Yet, Mark Lever, Chief Executive of the NAS is not acknowledging that side of it at all. He said: "The failure of many local authorities to recognise the needs of people with autism made it absolutely necessary to try and create an autism law. Today, thanks to the overwhelming level of support galvanised by Cheryl Gillan MP's Autism Bill from our campaigners, across all the political parties and the 15 other autism charities we have been working with; we have achieved our major political goals. This is a landmark victory which could also have a far wider reaching impact on others in the disabled community. We warmly welcome the announcement and look forward to hearing the Government categorically reaffirm their commitment to transforming the lives of people affected by autism when the bill is debated in Parliament on Feb 27."

  • campaign for an electric shock therapy victim

    MindFreedom International - 12 November 2008
    Human Rights Update: Please Forward
    http://www.mindfreedom.org/shield/pawlenty-electroshock

    MindFreedom International Launches Phone-In Campaign!

    Where does Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty
    stand on forced outpatient electroshock?

    If it's Wednesday, then it is time to phone up
    the Governor of Minnesota and ask some questions.

    A MindFreedom investigation revealed that every Wednesday morning,
    Ray Sandford, 54, is escorted from his supported living home in
    Columbia Heights, Minnesota to Mercy Hospital for another course of
    electroshock over his objection.

    Each and every Wednesday, Ray gets electroconvulsive therapy (ECT)
    against his expressed wishes as an outpatient using court orders and
    special Minnesota laws.

    And MindFreedom found out Ray is not the only one.

    Join in a new MindFreedom international phone-in campaign!

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~ * * * ACTION * * * ACTION * * * ACTION * * *

    Telephone Governor Pawlenty's office!

    From anywhere in the world phone (651) 296-3391.

    From inside Minnesota phone toll Free: (800) 657-3717.

    You can leave a message at any time. You can reach staff any non-
    holiday weekday from 8:00 am to 4:30 pm Central Time.

    Call any day, but especially call on Wednesdays.

    Be polite but be firm and persistent.

    Ask one or more of these questions:

    **Does the Governor support Minnesota laws allowing involuntary
    outpatient electroshock?

    ** Is the Governor aware that some Minnesota citizens are being
    escorted from their homes using court orders to receive involuntary
    electroshock?

    ** How many Minnesota residents receive electroshock against their
    wishes, as either an inpatient our outpatient? Who collects this
    data? How is this data reported to the public?

    ** Why is the Governor's human rights department not returning
    MindFreedom's calls about involuntary electroshock?

    ** And if you have any doubts about this campaign, go ahead and
    ask, "Are reports on the Internet true that some Minnesota residents
    receive electroshock involuntarily on an outpatient basis?"

    You may be directed to another department such as Human Rights.

    Do not give up. Keep asking. If you do not get a return call soon,
    call back to complain.

    If you do receive any helpful information, e-mail it to
    news@mindfreedom.org.

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

  • Wikipedia and Wikinews

    News that it's more of the same at Wikipedia. Copied into a main item, from a comment on "a gem of Wikipedia corruption." - Site.

    Wikipedia and wikinews is absolute corrupt. I have documented double
    standards and corruption by it's editors and administrators. When I
    posted a letter of complaint, Blackpearl14 went into my letter deleted
    portions of it, changing it. They also blocked me. Thus they generate
    bogus excuse after excuse. They spam google. If you want proof, check
    out the "history" pages and see how certain pages of even TALK &
    DISCUSSION are altered or outright deleted by Wikipedia's so-called
    volunteers. They also have their own business agenda, which I have documented in
    their own history, yet they accuse me of going into their own bios
    (which is impossible to do) and creating it. Wikinews also deleted a
    story about this "Wikipedia Corrupt" from their site within 5 minutes.
    Also editors/administrators go back and forth. I will be happy to provide
    photos "screen shots" of their corruption, double standards and
    reckless abuse. The full letter was placed in TALK / Discussion yet it w
    as either repeatedly deleted or as now has been edited by
    Blackpearl14, who deleted various portions of it especially involving her
    corruption and bias (check the history). Then I was blocked, banned etc...

    Here is a portion of my letter (A full copy is available upon request)

    - Attn: Wikipedia community & Mr. Wales - Through certain editors &
    administrators, Wikipedia continues to uphold double standards including
    to not follow it's own policy of communications over issues. Thus the
    editors/administrators have total control, with a set of ever changing
    policies and double standards, including deleting anything that
    challenges their abuse of power and their own violations of wikipedia's
    written policies. This site continues to solicit itself as a free public
    forum that anyone can contribute and anyone can communicate as detailed
    by wikipedia's own written policies. Yet based on the continuing
    actions of particular editors and administrators, they have made wikipedia
    their own private forum and have taken away all of those things.
    Meanwhile Wikipedia is generating hits, ranking status, income and clout from
    their various statements, and thus wikipedia is committing at the very
    least fraud upon the public with it's continuous promotions, solic
    itations and statements.

    Other editors and administrators who have proven their practice of bias
    and manipulative and outright double standards practices include
    “SVTCobra” and “Whoville” and “Chris Mann”. We have documented that they
    say one thing, yet practice another. We have documented that they
    enforce one set of wikipedia polices yet discard and ignore those same
    policies when it applies to themselves or their selective circle of peers.
    We contributing writers also wonder just how many editors and
    administrators have a conflict of interest to various articles.

    Here is a collection, from 2007 through August 2008, of some of
    BLACKPEARL14 (uses various alias wikipedia names) self published bias quotes.
    She has outright stated her bias purpose, her own bias causes and her
    own bias business. “I am Pirate Lord-ess of the Caribbean Sea along
    with my mate Jack Sparrow.” “I am the first Pirates of the Caribbean
    fan in the universe.” “I manage and contribute to my obsession Pirates
    of the Caribbean.” (Lists many pirates of the caribbean articles in
    wikipedia) “I am working my way into managing all Pirates of the Caribbean
    articles in the future that I can.” “I am the biggest Pirates of the
    Caribbean fan of all time!” “I have proof of it as well.” “I’m
    writing a book”. “I’m also a Pirates of the Caribbean consultant, if you
    have any questions, I own Bring me that Horizon forum.” “I am a big fan
    of Johnny Depp” “I am a big fan of Pirates of the Caribbean movies”. I
    have a “Pirates of the Caribbean obsession page - I’d advise you to
    keep your hat on and not vandalize the pages or you won’t be happy.
    Seriously.” “I am principal contributor of Pirates of the Caribbean
    articles.” “My knowledge on pirates spans from my favorite films Pirates
    of the Caribbean 1-3. Hence I am a Pirates of the Caribbean
    consultant.” “My Harry Potter obsession pages...” and much more.

    Meanwhile like Blackpearl14, Whoville and SVTCobra both continue to
    delete any critical fact or information, stating that it doesn’t meet
    their requirements, claiming it’s not newsworthy, not being current, or
    some other bogus excuse. But these reasons are actually double
    standards, because other information in the same article which does not meet
    those always changing requirements are allowed. Even if your
    contribution is neutral and has been in the news, both Whoville and SVTCobra will
    generate yet another reason to delete it. Yet they don’t delete other
    critical facts or information using the same standards. Instead those
    are allowed. Hence Whoville and SVTCobra continue to apply double
    standards. When challenged, they bring in their peer who immediately
    deletes, and bans IP addresses etc..

    Royce

    2 Sep 2008

  • simple question: on trusting a Jackson forum

    2 of the original cases of medical abuse, exposed when SF began, were by the groups GFCF-Kids-UK and HE-Special-UK advertised in the Jacksons' books. The totally un-aspie vicious group psychology and thought control in those groups, which can still be read about on SF, made lies of all the social ideals for aspies that the Jacksons had been writing about, but the Jacksons were entirely free to make the right moral choice, to disown those groups and have them urgently removed from their books. If they had done that, they would have come out entirely clean, not tainted at all by the groups' hate violations. But they never did. For 5 years now, they have maintained an arrogant cynical ignorement of the problem, exploiting the public and leaving them vulnerable to hate abuse in places claimed to be supportive.

    Now, Luke Jackson is proposing to open a forum on his own website, as if there weren't enough forums already - but seems to be lacking in support so is having to spend time inviting notifications of interest first. Anyone wise will ask for a watertight commitment in the forum's legal terms, to tie itself to the same standard of personal fairness as is expressed in SF's introduction, and not to have the same standards and GFCF-Kids-UK and HE-special-UK. This necessarily means taking an absolute committal position to explicitly denounce as a medical wrong those groups' actions.

    Because of the history of association with those 2 groups, this simple caring action is what Luke needs to do to make his own forum ethical and emotionally safe for anyone who thinks of joining it. If he chooses to do it, it will show it would never have hurt to do it sooner, at any time in the last 5 years !!

  • petition about Autism Speaks

    The Autism Speaks: Don't Speak For Me petition

    www.autism-hub.co.uk/autism-speaks-dont-speak-for-me/index.php

    We, the undersigned:

    • Utterly repudiate the notion of murder being an acceptable response to disability
    • Vehemently deny that most parents of autistic — or otherwise disabled — children harbour thoughts of murder
    • Testify that the false 'reality' concocted by Autism Speaks film 'Autism Every Day' is not a true reflection of the reality of parenting an autistic child
    • Call for a public apology from Lauren Thierry for increasing ignorance regarding autism
  • Youtube group for exposing Wikipedia

    Site: Nadir Ali Rahman, one of thousands who have experienced the corruption of power and aggressiveness at the core of Wikipedia's admin system, has circulated a notice of a project to spread the alert against Wikipedia through Youtube. His heading, on the page linked to, contains an anti-Zionist personal view, but the resistance to Wikipedia should be nothing to do with whether you support Zionism or not.

    youtube.com/group/stopwikipedia

    Get a youtube account and select the link where it says join this group.

    If you find any anti-Wikipedia videos you can just add it to our group page for everyone to see.
    All the best & hope you & your friends join.

  • david cunningham on simon baron-cohen

    Site: David Cunningham, the angry parent in Fife, perceives Simon Baron-Cohen to be too pro-government in his writing in the Times, 15 Dec 2007, and asked for his grounds for saying that to be circulated.

    PM Brown is my MP and although he has ignored and dumped my son due to the embarrassment of his party's policies in Scotland he knows that my son is typical of the bulk of people with Autism where my son has received no quality, competent Education for nearly 4 years, locked in the house with only his parents for support.

    In the last 18 months, after fighting Gordon Brown's Fife Social Services for over 10 years they gave my son 16 hours per week of support. The fact that my son's Psychiatrist Dr Rosemary Logan, son's Senior Social Work Mangers Janice McCrimmond, Dave Lister, Donald Ramsay and Senior Social Worker Arlene Honeyman have all stated that my son's needs are 24 hour 7 day has had no impact on a system that is now bankrupt.

    On Friday the 14th December 2007 (my son's adult birthday) my son was totally dumped by the PM's Constituency for Xmas and New Year. All professionals in the PMs constituency know the situation and despite the fact that the 16 hour per week funding ran out on the 16th October 2007 I received a communication from Senior Managers within the Prime Minister's Constituency that the Social Service Committee set up and reporting to Mr Stephen Moore Director of Prime Ministers Fife Social Services had again rejected the package for my son. BUT IT IS WORSE THAN THAT. SENIOR SOCIAL WORK MANAGERS JANICE MCCRIMMOND, AND DAVE LISTER HAVE ASSESSED MY SON AS REQUIRING 24 HOUR 7 DAY PER WEEK SERVICES. YET THEY HAVE BEEN TOLD BY THEIR BOSS'S TO ONLY APPLY FOR 33% OF 24/7. SO MR STEPHEN MOORE DIRECTOR OF FIFE SOCIAL SERVICES NOT ONLY KNOW'S THAT 66% OF MY SON'S NEEDS WERE REMOVED BUT WORSE MR MOORE EVEN REFUSED TO APPROVE THE 33%.

    SO SINCE THE 14TH OF OCTOBER 2007 ALL FUNDING FOR MY SON RAN OUT. BUT IN A DESPERATE EFFORT TO COVER UP MR MOORE KNOWS THAT ONE OF HIS MANAGERS MR JIM BURKE IS REFUSING TO HAND OVER £7,803-40p OF FUNDING THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN SPENT. THE CORRUPT PM'S CONSTITUENCY WANT TO MAKE OUT THAT FUNDING IS STILL LEFT EVEN ALTHOUGH THE SERVICE PROVIDERS HAVE ALREADY SPENT THE MONEY PRE 14TH OCTOBER 2007. SO PROFESSOR BARON-COHEN THIS IS THE REALITY THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY PUBLIC SERVICES ARE LYING THROUGH THEIR BACK TEETH TO PAINT A LOVELY XMAS SCENE. ...

    NHS Fife have also refused to support the bulk of my son’s needs over the last 4 years Professor James McGoldrick and Dr Francis Elliot have stolen over £27k of my son's health budget. A budget that instead had to be fund raised through Car Boot Sales and Jumble Sales. Dr Elliot Director of NHS Fife Services has also personally intervened with our GP.

    So in conlusion please will the 2400 on my distribution list pass this e-mail round the world.

  • How your autistic brothers and sisters are being treated

    Read the parts that are bolded.

    Tom Taylor
    28 Oct 2007

    women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article2732991.ece

    Shock tactics

    Hundreds of children no other school wants — from the autistic to the merely troubled — attend a centre in America where electric shocks are administered for even the smallest misdemeanour. Forced to wear 10lb backpacks with electrodes attached to their skin, they never know when their teachers will deliver this `behaviour-modification' therapy. Why hasn't the school been closed down?

    Rob Santana awoke terrified. He'd had that dream again, the one where silver wires ran under his shirt and into his pants, connecting to electrodes attached to his limbs and torso. Adults armed with surveillance cameras and remote-control activators watched his every move. One press of a button, and there was no telling where the shock would hit – his arm or leg or, worse, his stomach. All Rob knew was that the pain would be intense. Every time he woke from this dream, it took him a few moments to remember that he was in his own bed, that there weren't electrodes locked to his skin, that he wasn't about to be shocked. It was no mystery to him where this recurring nightmare came from – not A Clockwork Orange or 1984, but the years he spent confined in America's most controversial "behaviour-modification" institution.

    In 1999, when Rob was 13, his parents sent him to the Judge Rotenberg Educational Center, in Massachusetts, 20 miles outside Boston. The institution, which calls itself a "special-needs school", takes in all kinds of troubled kids – autistic, mentally retarded, schizophrenic, bipolar, emotionally disturbed – and attempts to change their behaviour with a complex system of rewards and punishments, including painful electric shocks to the torso and limbs. Of the 230 residents, about half are wired to receive shocks. Eight states send students to this institution, with New York providing the most. The price tag for a year there is $220,000; states and school districts pick up the tab.

    The Judge Rotenberg Educational Center is the only institution in the US that disciplines students by giving them electric shocks, a form of punishment not inflicted on serial killers or child molesters, or any of more than 2.2m inmates in US jails and prisons. Over its 36-year history, there have been numerous lawsuits and government investigations. Last year, New York-state investigators filed a blistering report that made the place sound like a high-school version of Abu Ghraib. Yet the programme continues to thrive – in large part because nobody, except desperate parents and a few legislators, seems to care about what happens to the hundreds of kids who pass through its gates.

    In Rob Santana's case, he freely admits he was an out-of-control kid with "serious behavioural problems". At birth he was abandoned at the hospital, traces of cocaine, heroin and alcohol in his body. A middle-class couple adopted him when he was 11 months old, but his troubles continued. He started fires; he got kicked out of preschool for opening the back door of a moving school bus; he cut himself with a razor when he was six. His mother took him to specialists, who diagnosed him with a slew of psychiatric problems: ADHD, post-traumatic stress disorder, bipolar disorder, obsessive-compulsive disorder.

    Rob remained at the Rotenberg Center for about 3 1/2 years. From the start, he cursed, hollered and fought with employees. Eventually the staff obtained permission from his mother and a court to use electric shock. Rob was forced to wear a backpack containing five 2lb battery-operated devices, each connected to an electrode attached to his skin. "I felt humiliated," he says. "You have a bunch of wires coming out of your shirt and pants."

    Rob remained hooked up to the apparatus 24 hours a day. He wore it while jogging on the treadmill and playing basketball, though it wasn't easy to sink a jump-shot with a 10lb backpack on. At night, he slept with the backpack next to him, under the gaze of a surveillance camera.

    Employees shocked him for aggressive behaviour, he says, but also for minor misdeeds, like yelling or cursing. Each shock lasts two seconds. "It hurts like hell," Rob says. (The school's staff claims it is no more painful than a bee sting; when I tried the shock, it felt like a horde of wasps attacking me all at once. Two seconds never felt so long.)

    On several occasions, Rob was tied face down to a four-point restraint board and shocked again and again by a person he could not see. The constant threat of being zapped did persuade him to act less aggressively, but at a high cost.

    "I thought of killing myself a few times," he says.

    Rob's mother, Jo-Anne deLeon, had sent him to the Rotenberg Center at the suggestion of his school district in New York, which, she says, told her that the programme had everything that Rob needed. She believed he would receive regular psychiatric counselling – though the school does not provide this. As the months passed, Rob's mother became increasingly unhappy. "My whole dispute with them was, `When is he going to get psychiatric treatment?' " she says. "I think they had to get to the root of his problems – like why was he so angry?"

    She didn't think the shocks were helping, and in 2002 she sent a furious fax demanding that Rob's electrodes be removed before she came up for parents' day. She says she got a call the next day from the executive director, Matthew Israel, who told her: "You don't want to stick with our treatment plan? Pick him up." (Israel says he doesn't remember this conversation, but adds:

    "If a parent doesn't want the use of the skin shock and wants psychiatric treatment, this isn't the right programme for them.")

    After Rob left the centre he moved back in with his parents. At first glance, he seems like any other 21-year-old: baggy jeans, black T-shirt, powder-blue Nikes. But when asked to recount his years at the Rotenberg Center, he speaks for nearly two hours in astonishing detail, recalling names and specific events from seven or eight years earlier. When he describes his recurring nightmares, he rubs his forehead with his palms.

    Despite spending more than three years at this behaviour-modification institution, Rob still has problems controlling his actions. In 2005 he was arrested for attempted assault and sent to jail. (This year he was arrested again, for drugs and assault.) Being locked up gave him plenty of time to reflect on his childhood, and he has gained a new perspective on the Rotenberg Center.

    "It's worse than jail," he told me. "That place is the worst place on Earth."

    The story of the Rotenberg Center is in many ways a tale of 2 schools. Slightly more than half the residents are what the school calls "high functioning": kids like Rob and Antwone, who have diagnoses like attention-deficit disorder (ADD), bipolar disorder, and post-traumatic stress disorder. The other group is even more troubled. Referred to as "low functioning", it includes kids with severe autism and mental retardation: most cannot speak or have very limited verbal abilities. Some have behaviours so extreme they can be life-threatening – chomping on their hands, running into walls, nearly blinding themselves by banging their head on the floor again and again.

    The Rotenberg Center has long been known as the school of last resort – a place that will take any kid, no matter how extreme his or her problems are. Residents range in age from as young as 9 or 10 up to their forties. For desperate parents, the institution can seem like a godsend. Just ask Louisa Goldberg, the mother of 25-year-old Andrew, who has severe mental retardation. Andrew's last residential school kicked him out after he kept assaulting staff members; the Rotenberg Center was the only place willing to accept him. According to Louisa, Andrew's quality of life has improved dramatically since 2000, when he was hooked up to the shock device known as the graduated electronic decelerator (GED).

    Louisa and many other parents like the Rotenberg Center's policy of not giving psychiatric drugs to students. At Andrew's last school, Louisa says: "He had so many medicines in him he'd take a two-hour nap in the morning, he'd take a two-hour nap in the afternoon. They'd have him in bed at eight o'clock at night. He was sleeping his life away." These days, Louisa says she is no longer afraid when her son comes home to visit. "[For him] to have an electrode on and to receive a GED is to me a much more favourable way of dealing with this," she says. "He's not sending people to the hospital [with injuries]."

    Marguerite Famolare brought her son Michael to the Rotenberg Center 6 years ago, after he attacked her so aggressively she had to call the police and, in a separate incident, flipped over the kitchen table onto a tutor. Michael, now 19, suffers from mental retardation and severe autism. These days, when he comes home for a visit, Marguerite carries his shock activator in her purse. All she has to do, she says, is show it to him: "He'll automatically comply to whatever my signal command may be, whether it is `Put on your seat belt' or `Sit appropriately and eat your food.' It's made him a civilised human being."

    State officials have twice tried to shut down the Rotenberg Center – in the 80s and again in the 90s. Both times parents rallied to its defence, and both times it prevailed in court. The name of the centre ensures nobody forgets these victories; it was Judge Ernest Rotenberg who, in the mid-1980s, ruled that the institution could continue using "aversives" – painful punishments designed to change behaviour – so long as it obtained authorisation from a local court in each student's case. These days, the court rarely, if ever, bars the Rotenberg Center from adding shock to a student's treatment plan.

    Whenever the Rotenberg Center faces criticism, it relies on the testimonials of parents like Louisa Goldberg and Marguerite Famolare to defend itself. Not surprisingly, the most vocal parent-supporters tend to be those with the sickest children, since they are the ones with the fewest options. But at the Rotenberg Center, the same methods of "behaviour modification" are applied to all kids, no matter what their behaviour problems. And so, while Rob would seem to have little in common with mentally retarded students like Michael and Andrew, they all shared a similar fate once their parents placed them under the care of the same psychologist: a radical behaviourist known as Dr Israel.

    In 1950, Matt Israel was a freshman at Harvard looking to fill his science requirement. He knew little about B F Skinner when he signed up for his course, Human Behaviour. But he became fascinated with Skinner's scientific approach to the study of behaviour, and he picked up Walden Two, Skinner's controversial novel about an experimental community based on the principles of behaviourism. The book changed Israel's life. "I decided my mission was to start a utopian community," he says.

    Israel got a PhD in psychology in 1960 from Harvard, and started two communal houses outside Boston. In one of these houses, Israel lived with a three-year-old named Andrea, the daughter of a roommate. He recalls she was out of control: "Wild and screaming… When company would come over, she would walk around with a toy broom and whack people over the head." Through experiments with rats and pigeons, Skinner had demonstrated how animals learn from the consequences of their actions. With permission from Andrea's mother, Israel decided to try out Skinner's ideas. When Andrea was well behaved, Israel took her for walks. When she misbehaved, he snapped his finger against her cheek. Israel says his methods worked: "Instead of being an annoyance, she became a charming addition to the house."

    Israel's success with Andrea convinced him to start a school. In 1971, he founded the Behavior Research Institute, an institution that would later become known as the Rotenberg Center. Israel took in the children nobody else wanted – severely autistic and mentally retarded kids who did dangerous things to themselves and others. To change their behaviour, he developed a large repertoire of punishments: spraying kids in the face with water, shoving ammonia under their noses, pinching the soles of their feet, smacking them with a spatula, forcing them to wear a "white-noise helmet" that assaulted them with static. After nearly 20 years, Israel began to move away from these methods and towards another one: electric shock. From his perspective, shock offered many advantages: "To give a spank, a muscle squeeze or a pinch, you had to control the student physically, and that could lead to a struggle. A lot of injuries were occurring." By using electric shock, which requires just pushing a button, he could eliminate the need for employees to wrestle a kid to the ground.

    Israel purchased a shock device then on the market known as Sibis – Self-Injurious Behavior Inhibiting System – that had been invented by the parents of an autistic girl. It delivered a mild, two-second shock. Between 1988 and 1990, Israel used Sibis on 29 students, including one of his most challenging, Brandon, then 12, who would bite off chunks of his tongue, regurgitate entire meals, and pound himself on the head. At times Brandon was required to keep his hands on a paddle; if he removed them, he'd get shocks, one per second. One infamous day, Brandon received more than 5000 shocks. "You have to realise," Israel says, "I thought his life was in the balance. He was vomiting, losing weight. He was down to 52lb. I knew it was risky to use the shock in large numbers, but if I persevered that day, I thought maybe it would eventually work."

    This day was a turning point in the history of Israel's operation: that's when he decided to ratchet up the pain. The problem, he decided, was that the shock Sibis emitted was not strong enough. "So we had to redesign the device ourselves," he says. He created his own, much more powerful shock device: the GED.

    30 years earlier, O Ivar Lovaas, a psychology professor at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA), had pioneered the use of electric jolts to try to normalise the behaviour of autistic children. But eventually Lovaas abandoned these methods, telling a reporter in 1993 that shock was "only a temporary suppression" because patients become inured to the pain. "These people are so used to pain that they can adapt to almost any kind of aversive you give them," he said. Israel encountered this same sort of adaptation in his students, but his solution was markedly different: he decided to increase the pain once again. Today, there are two shock devices in use at the Rotenberg Center: the GED and the GED-4. They both administer a two-second shock, but the GED-4 is nearly three times more powerful – and the pain it inflicts is much more severe.

    The Rotenberg Center is a bit like a carnival fun house, I found, during a two-day visit last autumn. Giant silver stars dangle from the lobby ceiling; the walls and chairs in the front offices are turquoise, lime green and lavender. Israel, 74, still holds the title of executive director, and when he first greets me, he appears utterly unimposing: short and slender with soft hands, rounded shoulders, curly white hair, paisley tie. Then he sits down beside me and, unprompted, starts talking about shocking children. "The treatment is so powerful it's hard not to use if you have seen how effective it is," he says. "It's brief. It's painful. But there are no side effects. It's two seconds of discomfort." His tone is neither defensive nor apologetic: it's calm. It's the sort of demeanour a mother might find comforting if she were about to hand over her child.

    Before we set off on our tour of the institution, there's something Israel wants me to see: Before & After, a home-made movie featuring six of his most severe cases. He has been using some of the same grainy footage for more than two decades, showing it to parents of prospective students as well as reporters. It shows how in 1977, an 11-year-old girl, Caroline, arrives at the school strapped on a stretcher, her head encased in a helmet. Next, free from restraints, she tries to smash her helmeted head against the floor. In 1981 it shows Janine, also 11, who shrieks and slams her head against the ground, a table, the door. Bald spots testify to the severity of her troubles; she's yanked out so much hair it's half gone. Compared with these scenes, the "after" footage looks almost unbelievable: Janine splashes in a pool; Caroline grins as she sits in a chair at a beauty salon.

    "These are children for whom positive-only procedures did not work, drugs did not work," says Israel. "And if it wasn't for this treatment, some of these people would not be alive." The video is very persuasive: the girls' self-abuse is so violent and so frightening it almost makes me want to grab a GED remote and push the button myself. Of course, this is precisely the point.

    Considering how compelling the after-footage is, I am surprised to learn that 5 of the 6 children featured in it are still here. "This is Caroline," one of my escorts says later as we walk down a corridor. Without an introduction, I would not have known. Caroline, 39, slumps forward in a wheelchair, her fists balled up, head covered by a red helmet. "Blow me a kiss, Caroline," Israel says. She doesn't respond.

    A few minutes later, I meet 36-year-old Janine, who appears in much better shape. She's not wearing a helmet and has a full head of black hair. She's also got a backpack on her shoulders and canvas straps hanging from her legs, the telltale sign that electrodes are attached to both calves. For 16 years – nearly half her life – Janine has been hooked up to Israel's shock device. A few years ago, when the shocks began to lose their effect, the staff switched the devices inside her backpack to the much more painful GED-4.

    In 1994, Israel had just 64 students. Today he has 230. This astonishing rate of growth is largely the result of a dramatic change in the types of students he takes in. Until recently, nearly all were "low functioning" autistic and mentally retarded people. But today slightly more than 50% are "high functioning", with diagnoses like ADD, ADHD, and bipolar disorder. New York supplies most of these students, many of whom grew up in the poorest parts of New York City. Yet despite this change in his population, Israel's methods have remained essentially the same.

    Students spend their days in classrooms, staring at a computer screen, their backs to the teacher. An elaborate system of rewards and punishments governs all interactions. Teachers and aides watch them all day, tallying their misbehaviours. Well-behaved kids can watch TV, go for a pizza, play basketball. Among the most prized rewards is a visit to the Big Reward Store, an arcade with pinball machines, video games, and flat-screen TVs hooked up to Xbox 360s. Each time a student curses or yells or disobeys the rules, a staffer marks it down on the student's "recording sheet". Staff then use the sheet to calculate what level of punishment is required – when to just say no and when to shock. They carry students' shock activators at all times, hooked on to their belts. Each activator is contained in a plastic case, or "sled", and each sled has a photo on it to ensure employees don't zap the wrong kid.

    Employees shock students for a wide range of behaviours, from violent actions to less serious offences, like getting out of their seats without permission. Every time they shock a child, they are encouraged to use the element of surprise. "Attempt to be as discreet as possible and hold the transmitter out of view of the student," states the employee manual. This way, students cannot do anything to minimise the pain, like flipping over their electrodes or tensing their muscles. "We hear the sound of [a staffer] picking up a sled," says Isabel Cedeno, a former student. "Then we see the person jump out of their seat."

    When they talk about why they use the shock device, Israel and his employees like to use the word "treatment", but it might be more accurate to use words like "convenience" or "control". "The GED – it's two seconds and it's done," says Patricia Rivera, a psychologist who serves as assistant director of clinical services. "Then it's right back to work." By contrast, it can take eight or 10 employees half an hour or more to restrain a strong male student: to pin him to the floor, wait for him to stop struggling, then move his body onto a restraint board and tie down each limb.

    Even with the GED, the stories both students and employees tell make the place sound at times like a war zone: a teenage boy sliced the gym teacher across the face with a CD; a girl stabbed a staffer in the stomach with a pencil. While staff have been contending with injuries since Israel opened his institution, the recent influx of high-functioning students, some with criminal backgrounds, has brought a new fear: that students will join forces and riot. Tellingly, among high-functioning kids most of the violence is directed at the staff, not each other.

    Rotenberg staff place the more troubled (or troublesome) residents on one-to-one status, meaning that an aide monitors them everywhere they go. For extremely violent students, the ratio is two to one. Before I set off on my tour, a small crowd gathered: it seemed that almost the entire hierarchy of the Rotenberg Center was going to follow me. That's when I realised that I'd been put on 5 to 1. As I roamed the school with my escorts, my every move monitored by surveillance cameras, I realised that it would be impossible to have a private talk with any student.

    In the world of the Rotenberg Center, Katie Spartichino is a star. A former student, she left the institution in 2006 and now attends community college in Boston. Around noon, a staff member brings her back to the institution to talk to me. We sit at an outdoor table away from the surveillance cameras, but there's no privacy: Israel and Karen LaChance, the assistant to the executive director for admissions, sit with us. Katie, 19, tells me she overdosed on pills at 9, spent her early adolescence in and out of psychiatric wards, was hooked up to the GED at 16, and stayed on the device for 2 years. "This is a great place," she says. "It took me off all my medicine. I was close to 200lb and I'm 160 now." But when she first had to wear the electrodes, she says: "I cried. I kind of felt like I was walking on eggshells; I had to watch everything I said. Sometimes a curse word would just come out of my mouth. So being on the GEDs and knowing that swearing was a targeted behaviour where I'd receive a [GED] application, it really got me to think twice before I said something rude."

    As Katie speaks, LaChance runs her fingers through Katie's hair again and again. The gesture is so deliberate it draws my attention. I wonder if it's just an expression of affection – or something more, like a reward.

    "Do you swear any more?" I ask.

    "Oh, God, all the time," Katie says. "I've learnt to control it, but I'm not going to lie. When I'm on the phone, curse words come out." The hair-stroking stops. LaChance turns to Katie. "I hope you're not going to tell me you're aggressive."

    "Oh, no, that's gone," Katie says. "No, no, no. The worst thing I do sometimes is me and my mom get into little arguments."

    For Israel, of course, one drawback of having so many high-functioning students is that he cannot control everything they say. One afternoon, when I walk into a classroom, a 15-year-old girl catches my eye, smiles, and holds up a sheet of paper with a message written in pink marker: "Help us." She shuffles it into her stack of papers before anyone else sees. When I move closer, she tells me her name is Raquel, she is from the Bronx, and she wants to go home.

    My escorts allow me to interview Raquel while 2 of them sit nearby. Raquel is not hooked up to the GED, but she has many complaints, including that she has just witnessed one of her housemates get shocked. "She was screaming," Raquel says. "They told her to step up to be searched; she didn't want to, so they gave her one." After 20 minutes, my escorts cut us off.

  • Faculties Not Gifts


    www.scottishautismnetwork.org.uk/FacultiesNotGifts.doc

    A write-up against homework + on how ASD has finally totally discredited the gifted children movement.

  • Adders: a new cull

    Site: A report of yet more purges on the Adders ADHD site has been added to the post of March 1 titled "Adders again", which may be found below, as it is a natural extension of it and continuation of the argument around it.

    7 Jul 2007.

  • David Cunningham: Gordon Brown's Constituency - NHS Fife Break Health and Safety Legislation To Maximise Systematic Abuse

    Site: Passed on at his invitation.

    Senior NHS Management in Gordon Brown's Constituency of Fife have for the last 3 1/2 years maximised the systematic abuse on a severely Autistic boy by playing politics with his health while breaking Health & Safety Legislation.

    Nearly 3 1/2 years ago a severely disabled, vulnerable Autistic boy was identified by his Psychiatrist Dr Rosemary Logan as in desperate need of support for his "health and Well Being". The Clinical Advisory Panel (CAP) in Fife approved the health package as being desperate and indeed not to deliver it was agreed by all in CAP as breeching Health and Safety Legislation.

    But what followed next highlighted just how bad things are in Gordon Brown's Constituency.

    Dr Francis Elliot stated that while the service was going to have a significant impact on quote "the Autistic boy's health and well being" it was not within NHS Fife's competency remit to deliver the service because it was not what she called (Dr Elliot is now Director of health services Fife) "Direct Health Services". So she with the full support of Mr Brechin Senior Finance Manager and Professor James McGoldrick Chairman NHS Fife refused to release the funding to the service providers used by the parents. Instead CAP said it would only be paid when Fife Council delivered it. The reality was that Fife Council did not have the competence or the service to deliver so the the parents and family were forced to pay for the Service. The parents had no choice to pay for the service because for them not to would in the words of CAP and the Psychiatrist severely damage the child's health.

    Please pass this round.

    GORDON BROWN'S CONSTITUENCY OF NHS FIFE ARE PLAYING POLITICS WITH DISABLED , VULNERABLE PEOPLE WITH AUTISM WHILE FORCING FAMILIES AND FRIENDS TO BUY IN HEALTH SERVICES BECAUSE OF THE CHANCELLOR'S AND JACK MCCONNELL'S POLICIES THAT ALMOST GUARANTEE THE SYSTEMATIC ABUSE OF PEOPLE WITH AUTISM. WHILE NHS FIFE HAVE STARTED TO PAY SOME OF THE FUNDING IN THE LAST 2 OR 3 MONTHS THEY STILL REFUSE TO PAY IT TO THE PARENTS WHO ARE STILL EMPLOYING AND PAYING FOR THE SERVICE. THEY ARE ALSO REFUSING TO PAY THE PARENTS FOR THE 3 PLUS YEARS THAT THE PARENTS WERE LEFT TO PAY FOR THE SERVICE, EVIL OR WHAT!

    WHEN WILL GORDON BROWN'S LABOUR PARTY START DELIVERING THE BILLION'S OF POUNDS REQUIRED. FOR TOO LONG THIS UNCARING IMMORAL PARTY HAS DELIBERATELY TARGETED AND SYSTEMATICALLY ABUSED PEOPLE WITH AUTISM.

    THE ABUSE HAS GOT TO STOP.

    FROM AN ARTICLE IN THE LOCAL PAPERS GORDON BROWN'S LAST VISIT TO AN AUTISTIC CENTRE IN HIS CONSTITUENCY RESULTED IN HIM SAYING THAT "THE USE OF REDUNDANT NCB COAL BUILDINGS WERE AN EXCELLENT USE IN A SOCIALLY DEPRIVED AREA". HE TOTALLY MISSED THE POINT THAT THE REASON THE DISABLED AND VULNERABLE ARE FORCED TO USE OLD RUN DOWN BUILDINGS WAS BECAUSE THE LABOUR PARTY HAD SLASHED YEAR ON YEAR THE AVERAGE ANNUAL SPEND ON A PERSON WITH AUTISM.

    Dave Cunningham who's severely Autistic son has and still is being Systematically abused by Gordon Brown's Labour Party.
    25 Apr 2007

  • David Cunningham on "systematic abuse of the disabled"

    Site: Passed on at his invitation.

    Firstly a big Welcome to those 'Decision Makers' who have joined my 1700 distribution list. As a reminder the primary aim is to highlight the Labour Party's systematic abuse Of the disabled, particularly people with autism. Gordon Brown is my MP but with Ming Campbell also being in Fife you will get first hand how their constituency Of Fife is equal to if not worse than any other area of the country in perfecting the systematic abuse Of the disabled, particularly people with autism.

    Back to the farce of the so called £25 million for carers. The facts are:

    1. Education. The Labour Party gave teachers £2 billion in Scotland and not one penny was to improve services to normal children far less the disabled and people with autism. In addition Gordon Brown and Ming Campbell's Education Authority like the rest of the country get rewarded whether they deliver one second of education or not. Take my severely autistic son the Labour Party and Executive has allowed Fife education to effectively steal over £200k of my son's education funding for doing nothing. This is because like the £25 million proposed for carers there are no measures or requirements to prove that the money gets to the child. Indeed it is estimated that in Scotland alone that at least £75 million pounds per annum that was supposedly identified for disabled/special needs children is routinely stolen by the councils because there is no requirement for any of the country's councils to prove that they spent the money on the disabled/people with autism. SO THERE ARE LITTLE GUARANTEES THAT ANY OF THE £25 MILLION WILL GO ON CARERS.

    2. Social Services. An Independent Review identified that over 90% of disabled/people with autism had NOT got an approved Social Services assessment report. Similar situation for carers assessment. Again Gordon Brown and Ming Campbell's Constituency seems to have perfected the act of avoiding this. Indeed for several years Fife Social Services has totally refused to agree to issue an accurate report. The Informed Parents of Scotland and others believe that the reason for this is simple. Like education there is no requirement for councils in the country to prove where that they are spending the funding on disabled/people with autism. But by not issuing assessment details or reports then even if the incompetent Labour Party or Executive asked then this makes it easier for Gordon Brown and Ming Campbell's constituency to effectively steal the social services money as well.

    3. NHS. NHS is the same. The incompetent Labour Party gave doctors hundreds of millions of pounds for effectively reducing the standard of care to patients. But specifically take Professor James McGoldrick (Chairman NHS Fife) and Dr Francis Elliot (Director of Health Services NHS Fife) they deliberately blocked payment for my severely autistic son's health care for over 3 years by trying to tie it into a so called Integrated package with the immoral and incompetent Fife education and Fife social services. Yet for the 3 years having starved my son of his healthcare and knowing full well that I and relatives had to borrow they finally caved in to the fact that they were breaking Health and Safety Legislation but refused to reimburse us for the previous 3 years.

    Conclusion

    The services for disabled and people with autism were described by the Children’s Commissioner as a national disgrace. UNICEF has also highlighted that Scotland and the UK as a whole is one of the worse places to bring up children. BUT THE BIGGEST LIE THAT THE CHANCELLOR OF THE EXCHEQUER CAN DUMP ON THE DISABLED/PEOPLE WITH AUTISM IS THE FARCE OF CREATING 'SMOKE AND MIRRORS' THAT THE MONEY GETS TO THE DISABLED/PEOPLE WITH AUTISM AND THEIR FAMILY CARERS. SO NOT ONLY ARE HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF POUNDS BEING EFFECTIVELY STOLEN BY THE COUNCILS ALL OVER THE COUNTRY BUT IT IS A NATIONAL DISGRACE THAT THE EVIL IMMORAL LABOUR PARTY IN SCOTLAND SHUT DOWN THE CROSS PARTY GROUP FOR AUTISM, WIPED THE WEBSITE BUT WORSE SLASHED THE AVERAGE ANNUAL SPEND FOR A PERSON WITH AUTISM.

    FOR THE SAKE OF OUR CHILDREN'S HEALTH, WELFARE AND DEVELOPMENT DON'T EVER VOTE FOR THE IMMORAL INCOMPETENT LABOUR PARTY AT THE NEXT ELECTIONS.

    FINALLY CAN ENGLAND NOT TAKE SCOTLAND'S INCOMPETENT EDUCATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES MINISTER HUGH HENRY WHO PRIDES HIMSELF IN NOT LISTENING TO THE INFORMED PARENTS OF SCOTLAND? NO DOUBT HE'LL DO HIS USUAL STICK HIS FINGERS IN HIS EAR, SING LA LA LA, DELETE THIS EMAIL AND WITH A SMILE ON HIS WARPED FACE GET ON WITH IMPLEMENTING A SYSTEM THAT CONTINUES THE SYSTEMATIC ABUSE OF PEOPLE WITH AUTISM.

    PLEASE PASS THIS EMAIL ON.

    Dave Cunningham Parent whose severely autistic son like thousands of others is being systematically abused by Labour. No education for over 3 Years. No social services for longer and basic healthcare. The legacy of the incompetent, uncaring and immoral Labour Party
    22 Feb 2007

  • Zyprexa Files Not Secret But Lilly Targets MindFreedom website

    MindFreedom News - 15 January 2007

    Nonviolent Revolution in Mental Health

    The New York Times reports today that Eli Lilly's files on the
    psychiatric drug Zyprexa are no longer secret, and are still
    available on the Internet. Yet, as the Times also reports, Lilly
    continues to target the MindFreedom web site for censorship with a
    Temporary Restraining Order.

    MindFreedom's Ted Chabasinski is one of the attorneys arguing against Eli Lilly and for free speech tomorrow, 16 January 2007, in US District Court in Brooklyn, New York.

    British Medical Journal, journalist Evelyn Pringle and other media
    are covering the controversy. Why is mass publicity of the exposed
    files about Zyprexa a threat to Eli Lilly?

    For all this news, analysis and more see MindFreedom News Update #26
    published 15 January 2007:

    www.mindfreedom.org/know/psych-drug-corp/eli-lilly-secrets/

    or: tinyurl.com/yx6k9x

    ACTIONS:
    STOP THE CENSORSHIP!

    Please redistribute this news to all appropriate places on and off
    the Internet.

    See the alert about how you can contact you Attorney General and ask
    for criminal prosecution of Eli Lilly execuives.

    For more info on MindFreedom see the newly redesigned web site at
    www.MindFreedom.org

  • Adders again

    Adders.org are at it again, this time trying to shut up a member who
    has criticised (not nastily) a member of admin (sounds familiar).
    Suddenly her posts get locked, admin starts to make sarky remarks...people are allowed to make unpleasant remarks about her... again familiar. Perhaps this time they've learnt a lesson, as they've not banned her, perhaps free speech will finally be allowed on adders.org? I particularly liked it when one member of admin commented that they'd never ban anyone for having an opinion because seems to me that's exactly what keeps happening, specially if that opinion is about a member of admin doing something out of order e.g. Exfactor with Adrian and now this person with Dr Billy.

    Think power of being admin is a bit much for some people hmmm. They get to lock posts whenever they feel like it and to boot off anyone they don't like.

    Unimpressed
    30 Dec 2006.

    Site: All sites discussed have a right of reply. Hence here are some comments copied into the main article, for the sake of even-handedness of prominence for them. But it is not "comment behind people's backs" for Unimpressed to post here, as it is done openly for anyone to read, and nobody can reasonably be asked to "put up or shut up" on a site where they find intimidatory group dynamics being allowed, can they?

    Now they've banned her completely!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Why not just call it a support site FOR ADMIN??????????????????????

    Unimpressed, March 10

    I have made enquiries to ascertain the validity of your statement and find that it is untrue. Nobody has been banned. Perhaps you should ensure you have all the facts and that they are correct before making misleading and incorrect statements.

    Unimpressed2, March 16

    As with all people calling names they never have there facts right. Too much in a rush to open there mouths and say something without checking first

    there was no ban the person requested to leave for reasons of there own.

    If the person writing this finds it such an issue why not say so publicly on the site instead of comments behind people's backs
    or is it a case of they will find that the support they enjoy at the moment wont be there for them when the truth about things are reveiled.

    And the other members will not find this kind of helpful to a site they feel comfortable with.

    Perhaps its time to put up or shut up.

    Angry Person, March 16

    July 7 !
    Now there's been another cull!

    Darky, Chrissie, FeeinLeeds
    The site has gone riiiiiiggggghht down the pan.

    Even their posts saying bye were deleted. As always admin were allowed to make negative comments about Samantha's SENDIST tribunal with JM saying she couldn't see the point but then when people objected posts were locked and when people said bye we're leaving and mentioned it their posts were deleted. someone needs to ask Caroline what's going on, such rubbish to say that everyone's entitled to there opinions and then to delete messages which express opinions about other peoples opinions Not a support site anymore, not at all.

    Themostunimpressedofalltheunimpressed

  • dangerous psychiatrist wants to return to unmitigated school atrocities

    This Sunday Mirrror item - that's a tabloid paper, remember - www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/tm_headline=naughty-kids-need-discipline-not-drugs-&method=full&objectid=18109811&siteid=94762-name_page.html

    is exploiting the well-funded fear of overpushed drugs for ADHD, to call for a return to belief in discipline instead of in the reality of ADHD at all.

    This when evidence up to a generation old, of serious life-wrecking abuses committed by schools in the name of discipline, are still being systematically suppressed from public awareness. They are neither getting published nor covered in the media - how work pressure and teachers deciding they know best a child's abilities can make a child's life impossible. Resulting in a clash that can even be called life-threatening if running away or suicide are the child's only escape options, otherwise results in descent into the social service/mental health underworld.

    Growth in understanding of the neurodiverse or autistic spectrum, whichever you prefer to call it, is the only major gain that has been achieved in the direction of overturning the wall of silence around teachers' atrocities. A silence there has been a unanimous criminal consensus in the media and politics to maintain. Only the crime of that silence is served when a psychiatrist comes along and says to the tabloid press, okay I'll back you, dictatorial power for teachers is right and the autistic spectrum isn't real.

    Quoting: "Consultant child psychiatrist Dr Sami Timimi argues that medicalisation of childhood problems is due to a search for "an easy cure that fits in with our fast lifestyles and gives us a quick answer".

    Consultant child psychiatrist. A profession with an overwhelming history, familiar to many spectrumites, of siding with persecution of us and with medical crimes seeking to destroy us. Do you see how Orwellian is the inversion of reality this sinister whitecoat Timimi is trying to pull? Under a cloak of opposing the medical crimes that involve drugs, he is promoting a wider agenda of medical crimes to be perpetrated through sheer authoritarian bullying. He is medicalising us by opposing accepting our reality! A politics of group destruction..

    (link to a comment on Aspergian island.)

    A worldwide emergency alert by the ASD scene is important.

    Maurice Frank, 1 Dec 2006.

  • Patients' Association

    The Patients' Association, certainly its Scottish branch, is ruthless, self-interested, + not interested a damn in the patients in whose name it exists.

    When it is approached concerning corrupt warping of the procedures in the NHS complaints and Ombudsman systems,

    the Patients' Association's chair will just say, sorry can't help, you have tried all possibilties, nothing we can do. When she knows there is something she can do, she can expose what is going on. This can be done both on the Patients' Association's website and in all the representational material it produces at a general level on NHS patients' behalf. But the PA's response to being told this, + told it has an AUTOMATIC duty to do it or else is itself criminally culpable towards many people, is just to ignore it.

    When an "advance statement" under the 2003 Mental Health Act is presented to the NHS, and contains declared information affecting every other person either presenting such a statement or using mental health systems, the information must be acted on. It is not enought just to file away the advance statement in the personal files of the person who wrote it. Because it is potentially evidence in every mental health case, it is a legal corruption of the case of everyone in the system unless that is done, which makes it an automatic duty. This is a description of the case the PA's assistance in was applied for. Its reaction is a deliberate siding with suppression of facts. It is a criminal act towards all users of the mental health system.

    Everyone thinking of trying the Patients' Association, for anything, instead tell it you know of this + enquire as to how it explains a claim to be entitled to say not he exposing any, that's any, corruption in health service procedures !!!

  • more David Cunningham anger with the Labour Party

    (his politics are personal, of course)

    This e-mail has been sent to over 600 of those influential people who in Scotland who claim an interest in Autism

    Question

    -------------
    1. Why is it when every Labour MSP know's that report after report has demonstrated that things are worse for Scotland's People With Autism that they have starved Scotland's Disabled People With Autism of funding while Westminster MP's are now going to significantly and quite rightly increase funding in England (reference the attached web link to the BBC article

    news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/5352262.stm

    BBC Headline
    More funding could be found for teaching autistic youngsters in England, a minister has said.

    Quote:

    The pledge for action came after the children's commissioner for England described existing provisions as "shocking and appalling".

    Unquote

    PLEASE PASS THIS E-MAIL ON TO WORLD. SCOTLAND'S EVIL, UNCARING, INCOMPETENT REGIME CALLED THE LABOUR PARTY HAS DEVELOPED A MISSION AND STRATEGY TO MAKE SCOTLAND A SECOND CLASS COUNTRY BY SYSTEMATICALLY DESTROYING SCOTLAND'S DISABLED PEOPLE WITH AUTISM.

    EVERY DAY (YES DAILY) NEARLY £400 MILLION POUND OF OIL, GAS AND GOLD REVENUES GO DOWN TO ENGLAND FROM SCOTLAND WHILE SCOTLAND IS TREATED LIKE SCUM.

    YES SCOTLAND GIVES ENGLAND NEARLY £142 BILLION POUNDS PER ANNUM FROM OIL, GAS AND GOLD FROM ONSHORE AND OFFSHORE.

    IT IS NO WONDER THAT THE BULK OF SCOTTISH PEOPLE HATE LABOUR MSP'S WITH EVERY FIBRE IN THEIR BODY AND WHY THEY ARE TELLING ALL SCOTTISH LABOUR MSP'S TO FCUK OFF OUT OF SCOTLAND AND GO AND LIVE IN ENGLAND. THE SCOTTISH PEOPLE DON'T WANT YOU AND TRUTH BE KNOWN IF YOUR FAMILIES AND FRIENDS KNEW WHAT YOUR WERE DOING THEY WOULD DISOWN YOU TO.

    Dave Cunningham Fife parent of a severely disabled Autistic Boy who's Labour Stronghold of Fife have chosen to be one of the best examples of Labours lack of caring and delivery by refusing to deliver any Education for 3 years and who have stated in writing for 6 years that it is the lack of funding that stop's them delivering David's Social Services needs.

    David Cunningham 18 Sep 2006

  • an undoing of police public order powers, passports + tickets

    Police forces are being required statutorily to compile "diversity policies" to make sure they are operating with understanding of minorities with any type of limitations or disability, however you like to class these things. The Elas AS society in Edinburgh has been invited to contribute to this for the Lothian/Borders police area.

    It is fortuitous how AS includes a genuine reliance on having the full explicit logic in any situation expressed openly. It means we can't be expected to guess, culturally or from the state of politics, what will or won't be counted as acceptable. As many abuses are made possible by expecting folks to guess, everyone, the folks without AS too, are better off if because we exist nobody can be expected to guess. AS's existence excludes the option of deciding the public should be expected to accept regular situations of challenge on a basis of unannounced rules culturally assumed by police officers to exist.

    Because we can't be distinguished on sight from the neurotypical population, our existence makes this apply to everyone! The state's duty not to commit population-scale abuses on any section of population, exists at a supraparliamentary international level regardless of what domestic laws on public order are in force at any time. It defines in human rights law the state's own validity, this is the principle all the supranational trials for population crimes have established. So AS's existence imposes on the police everywhere - a duty never to enforce on any person any rule that has never been specifically enacted, under generally worded laws of public order giving the police situational powers of interpretation.

    This annuls every generally or discretionarily worded power that can ever be enacted, from the medieval English/Scottish law of "breach of the peace" to the modern powers created since 911, from being used to impose any rule that has no separate specific enacted existence. This is a massive thing to say, an advance in democracy, a constitutional and supranational fundamental in the relation of law enforcers and public. It now stands irreversibly recorded as police notified, creating a formal (we'll see about what really happens) entitlement for all to expect it will be followed. It's in Scotland but it's by reasoning that is not confined to here, so it's everywhere. This is simply thanks to an anti-discrimination duty given to them because the spectrum exists.

    The AS scene worldwide should record this for citation + use in all police situations + all liaisons with governments, + all other civil liberty groups should seize on it too. Notify your politicians of it too.

    • Note the parallel with the Dalgety Bay library case. It and this stand separately, don't depend on each other, but each can be quoted in pursuit of the other. It is a timely example, that though every incidence of unclear or improperly discretionary rulemaking is worth fighting, the position you fight from is stronger when you know you have made a review of anti-discrimination standards at state level answerable to the AS case against this type of rulemaking.
    • It also meant an opportunity to suggest to police, in a situation of their formal duty to have an answer to it, though not of addressing the right force area, so this is just a marker for when other force areas do their "diversity policies" - that to be seen as non-discriminatory in their response to AS means having to take up the stalking issues around AFF and the offence committed against SF by Schlund-1and1.
    • What advances in democracy can be proved from other conditions, in the same way?

    ADHD and dyspraxia, for a start, each prove it a minority persecution for anyone ever to be judged by their bearing of any physical document. This is simply because all physical documents are losable. Because you can't tell by sight who has ADHD, this applies to everyone too. The fact of human fallibility that any physical document can be lost or stolen, may no longer be conflicted with by allowing such loss or theft to result in a disastrous situation. Spread the word on this, make it widely known as fast as possible, to force recognition of it. You can bet the system will be reluctant to concede this if it's not widely known, they prefer it to be possible for anyone's life to be devastated in an instant + by chance as you move through the day. It's absolutely fundamental to personal safety in moving around, that the loss or theft of a physical document which may not be your fault should never place you stranded at the mercy of any official who can hold you responsible for it not to have happened.

    This would overturn and prevent identity cards!!! Including the identity cards already used to govern international travel - passports!!! Regardless of the effect on how public transport shall be paid for, it would force an end to the use of losable tickets!!! Thanks to ASDs! and I report this being notified to 3 MEPs, that's for each non-Labour party - MEPs in order to claim for EU-wide synchrony on it.

    Can you beat the importance that people-action like this should abolish tickets? It's funny how we don't even have an equivalent of how in Victorian times anyone without money in any place had a right to admit themself to the workhouse for a night. You can have any view you like on how transport should be paid for, but you can't argue it's practical that whenever you are distant from home there is an ever-present danger of your life being devastated in an instant by loss or theft of a little scrap of paper or of money, which may not be your fault. This removes, deliberately don't you think, a position of security from existing when you are moving around, so that there isn’t really free movement.

    Once these advances are made, think how barbaric the present situation we have accepted as normal for 200 years will seem in memory! For now, it's a question of persistence in spreading the word.

    Sep 28: Update on 2 MEPs' responses. Elspeth Attwooll (LD) has promised a response to follow her acknowledgement. This never came - these promises are often just a way of shutting you up until time has moved on and they can pretend to foregt about it. Struan Stevenson (Tory) has responded to the identity cards issue only, expressing his opposition to them and the mass surveillance trends under Labour and "interest" in the angle of using AS and ADHD against identity cards. Oct 19: the third one, Alyn Smith (SNP), has obviously ignored it. How does that contrast with the recent SNP conference going on about winning public confidence, with a Scottish election on in 7 months?

    Dec 1: Following a letter in the Metro that mentioned how on the commuter trains into Glasgow, the operators are refusing to bother to sell tickets on trains, instead making passengers queue to get them at the ticket barriers when they each the city, + this can take over 5 minutes, adding unfairly to journmey times + resulting in avoidable latenesses for work. I wrote today to British Transport Police in follow-up to the Lothian police item, to point out that it is now a proven consequence of disability discrimination that there can no longer be such thing as train tickets. Consequently, it is criminal false imprisonment to keep passengers stuck at these ticket barriers, + hence the police are now obliged to back the passengers' right to proceed without tickets.

    2007 election: Mark Ballard, Green transport spokesman until he lost his seat, ignored a lobby about this issue., Nor even about more ordinary dumb behaviour by the giant transport company First which operates some bus and train services in duplication between the same places but without interchangeable fares, as if they were competing services. Not wanting to make any fight about that is a disgusting depth of cycnicism for the party most popularly associated with public transport as a cause. Ballard wouldn't make any election campaign comment on either issue. His behaviour is too bad for his own candidates: the Green council candidate for "Almond" (west Edinburgh) gave a private answer in support of renationalising most transport in order that multimodal fares could be introduced mostly in the good form of wideranging travel passes. But there was still no comment on not having tickets any more.

    Maurice Frank 19/20 Sep 2006

  • public libraries

    AS means we can't be expected to guess things, including rules, by instinct, right? Hence we can't be held accountable to obey any rule without knowing it existed. Autism too.

    Which being a biological fact about us, is also a fairer approach to everyone. As a principle, it would be a great advance in demcoracy. It would abolish all generally-worded rules and discretionary authority.

    In public libraries, it means 3 things they have to observe or else they are perpetrating discrimination against us against all the international human rights structures! Because we can't be distinguished by sight from the NT population, it means they have to apply these things to everyone!!

    • No library can enforce on any user a rule for which there is no display telling users it exists.
    • No library can have generally-worded rules that give discretion to staff to make up more specific rules moment to moment, that have no separate existence as specific rules.
    • No library ever has the power to decide or announce "We don't approve of..." anything.

    All it needs to establish these principles, as binding on every public library throughout the EU, is a single test case where a library breaks them.

    This has now been provided, by Dalgety Bay library in Fife, Scotland. After a case there, Bob Izatt, head of Fife libraries, has replied to a notice of these public rights just by a reiteration of the present system, making no reference to AS at all. He simply stated that libraries have generally-worded rules and staff discretion, and claimed staff are trained to exercise it consistently. Which achieves not a shred towards library users knowing what to expect.

    He is illegally blatantly testing his chances of pretending AS doesn't exist. This in a county that for a while has been operating a "Roving Autism Resource Library" in partnership with a local group. His bad example can be cited by name all over the EU, and in any other country where human rights challenges are possible, as proof of systematic violations of minorities unless the opposite of what he wants happens, the 3 rights listed become recognised as applying to all users in all libraries.

    Sep 28: An attempt to rejoin Fife libraries on these terms as a precedent, and to ensure they stick, initially by means of circulating a notice of the precedent to the staff of a string of Fife libraries at once, is being made. Awaiting its results, good or bad.

    Oct 19: The result is, predicatably, not satisfactory to the extent of actually getting further acknowledgement of the precedent out of Fife libraries, in response to said circulation. Take everything written before Sep 28 as standing, except only that Fife libraries require further challenge to actually acknowledge on explict record that they won't break the precedent, that has been attained still only in theory.

    Maurice Frank 9 Sep 2006

  • "Adders" - a prominent ADHD site

    As emailed to the membership of the prominent ADHD site Adders by a hurt member, who has received many supportive messages form other members (see comments):

    Standing up against unfairness!

    Dear Adders people,
    Imagine that your child was permanently excluded from school. One deputy head said it was because your child had been 'causing arguments', but could give no evidence about what arguments had been caused, when or with who.
    The headteacher gave another reason, but it completely contradicted the reason given by the deputy head.
    Would that seem fair to you?
    Wouldn't you then keep asking for a reason why your child had been excluded?
    Wouldn't you kick up a fuss and protest the exclusion?

    My analogy, as many of you know, relates to me - banned from Adders for a reason nobody will tell me. If you're a newbie, watch out: this could be you, too, if you disagree with any of the Admin team about anything!

    Why was I changed to guest status in the first place and where is the evidence of my causing of arguments?

    Sometime in June, I agreed with Samantha on the Adders forums that Adrian (loverablemole/ possibly Cheekychap too) had been a bit rude to her in a post; I also said he probably didn't realise he had come across so rudely. This was apparently 'abuse' of Adrian, although Samantha remains able to post. I also started a thread talking about censorship on Adders in general, like when Bojangles got banned for having opinions others disagreed with. At no time was I ever rude about any individual.

    I then had trouble replying to Adrian's test emails, as they kept getting returned to me.

    I posted the following to him on the 3rd July:
    "I've now had two emails 'undelivered' to your email address.
    Perhaps this is why people can't reply to your test emails? Just a thought.This is exfactor. I do not choose to post anymore at the moment, but wish for my membership to remain should I choose to contact anyone through the website in the future."

    I got the following reply from Adrian:
    "funny no-one else has a problem replying to my tset email and if we chose to delete memberships we do this for a number of reasons and i have every right as admin for the site to put your membership on restictions as you have caused arguements a nuber of yimes on adders.org and it is yor end as i have people reply to their test emails and also your membership has been put onto guest status"

    I then obviously complained! I got the following message from Caroline:
    "Sorry but you have not been banned. We were simply carrying out your own request. You sent email to Adrian saying that you no longer wished to post but you wished to leave your membership open so you could get in touch with people from the forum boards Therefore we changed your membership status to that of Guest."

    (SO ALREADY THESE CONTRADICT - TURNED TO GUEST BECAUSE I 'ASKED' TO BE - NOT TRUE - JUST SAID I DIDN'T WANT TO POST AT THE MOMENT - ASKED TO REMAIN A MEMBER" OR BANNED FOR 'CAUSING ARGUMENTS' ? )

    I emailed her back to say, oh, well you misunderstood, but she ignored me, only to respond when I had tried to post about it on the boards saying "after that you decided to spam the boards this is abuse and therefore the final reason was for abuse of the boards (now they had another excuse!)I do not have to explain myself to you anyway at the end of the day I pay for the site - ok so there are some donations now which help - however still the bulk of the costs come from my own pocketyou have
    >> abused the rules of the board by spamming and using numerous log in names (like Adrian - Loverablemole and Cheekychap (probably) - but it's OK for him, hey?) therefore I am free to do as I see feel fit" (but it's not censorship, oooh no)

    JD tells me, yesterday:
    "You were temporarily changed to guest status as you were posting offensively on the boards about a member. "

    (Oh...who was I 'posting offensively' about? Can you quote the offensive bit, please, just to enlighten me?)

    So, what's the truth? Someone's distorting things, aren't they - why was I turned to guest in the first place? It all contradicts - someone's not being honest.
    I apologise to members of the forums whose evening on the 3rd July was disturbed when Caroline chose to turn the boards off, but if what they were doing by banning me was so ok, what is the problem with letting people read about it, like I am doing now? A lot of you will think: go away, you silly woman, and that's fine (I'm sure Madhouse, Noogsy and Keeny will be able to tell me how 'sick' and 'sad' I am again as on the thread started about me on 4th July- obviously I'm not allowed to say Adrian is rude, as that's offensive, but they can say that about me and that's fine - no hypocrisy there then!), but surely I am entitled to ask a question???????! All I was doing was posting this information, but they kept deleting it. I appreciate that my behaviour on that night broke terms and conditions, but NOTHING I had done up till then ever had, so the reason for banning me just seems to come down to Adrian not liking being told that his manner can sometimes be a bit snappy and rude when people are asking a question.

    So, consider my question: Why was I changed to guest status in the first place and where is the evidence of my causing of arguments?

    Not only that, but a 'number of times', apparently! If anyone has got that evidence of me 'posting offensively' before the 3rd of July, please forward it to me so that I can at least know why I have been banned from a website I have been posting on supportively for over a year, offering advice and support to others...cos Admin refuse to tell me why I am banned and can't even agree themselves on the reason!

    JD, having emailed me this week to say I could start posting again if I agree to the Terms and Conditions (which I agreed to), has now said I should go away and set up my own website rather than tell me the answer to that question, cos I said I agreed to the T&C but wanted my question answered first!I have also been asked to apologise to the person I offended, but as they won't tell me the reason I was banned, I can't tell who I was banned for offending!

    You may think it is silly to be bothered, but unfairness from anyone, adult or child, to anyone else, adult or child, really really annoys me, especially when someone is prevented from expressing their opinion and people won't back up the accusations they make!

    I am able to get onto the adders site, and am even able to post under another identity, although the Admin team have tried to block most of my IP addresses to stop me from even READING the forums, but that's not the point. 'Exfactor' should not have been banned in the first place!

    I know most of you will totally be against what I am saying, and that's fine. I don't need to you email me to tell me that! However, if you have any actual evidence that what happened on 3rd July was fair i.e. any proof of me breaking the rules prior to that by offending you or others/ causing arguments, which would justify me being turned into a guest, please do pass it on.

    I wouldn't put up with this if my son was excluded from school for no good reason, so I won't put up with it for me either.

    Exfactor, 26 Jul 2006.

  • Labour Party has ensured that disabled people are being starved of their right to their Health

    David Cunningham, a parent in Scotland with a long-running problem case, has contributed to SF before. He now wishes this further strong message about his anger with the Labour Party's management of classical autism services, to be circulated worldwide, as he explains. - site.


    The sleaze ridden, uncaring Labour Party are systematically ensuring that disabled children, specifically people with autism, are starved of their health.

    This is frighteningly demonstrated within the Labour stronghold of Fife where NHS Fife under the management of Professor McGoldrick and Dr Francis Elliot Medical Director (supported by Mr Brechin and George Cunningham) have for years now played games and politics rather than deliver health services to a severely autistic boy.

    The latest rhubarb came from Dr Elliot Medical Director NHS Fife in a letter dated 24th July 2006. In the letter she makes a desperate attempt to prop up Labour's Policies by misrepresenting the facts and doctoring the truth to suit her demonstrably unethical position. I understand from my communications with hundreds of parents and relatives throughout Scotland that the following examples of NHS Officials playing "Labour's Game" are becoming the "norm". Please pass on this e-mail and all of the 25 facts (another 23 to come) to all interested parties around the world. We have to let the world know just how bad things have degenerated in Scotland under Labour.

    Dr Elliot as chair of the Clinical Advisory Panel (CAP) did (she is trying to deny it through an incompetent technicality that is described below) block the release of funds for a severely Autistic boy. She will claim what she did was in accordance with the new Labour legislation. That is she will not issue the funding for the little boy's health care until the parents start taking the garbage offered by the 'yet to be proven competent' Fife Education. This child had a major medical breakdown in the first place due to Fife’s handling of his Education.

    The world must hear this. This sleaze ridden, immoral Labour party has effectively given all Health Authorities the mandate to starve any disabled person of their health care under Labou'rs requirement for 'Integrated Assessments' and delivery. In that Health, Social Services and Education must be delivered 'as one'. This means that in Fife £17,000 per annum that was allocated for my son's healthcare has for 3 years been frozen while the parents, through no fault of their own, watch the 'yet to be proven competent ' Fife Education' play their part in the Labour sham by refusing to provide details of a competent education service for my son. In addition Fife Social Services are also in on Labours immoral attempts to destroy the lives of disabled autistic children and there families. In that Senior Social Services Management in full collusion with Senior NHS Fife and Fife education management deliberately and without consultation with parents removed a small but critical number of hours of service. They all knew that this would cause maximum negative impact to my son and his family. But significantly how do I know that Professor McGoldrick, Dr Elliot, Mr Brechin and George Cunningham know all this? Well the basis for NHS Fife CAP's approval of the £17,000 per annum was to support the small number of hours from Social Services.

    But in an evil and immoral twist in the letter dated 24 July 2006 from NHS Fife, Dr Elliot and Professor McGoldrick state and I quote....'At that time and on regular occasions since then you (she's talking about me) have declined to accept this integrated package of care'...unquote. This is where Elliot and McGoldrick are liars. In a desperate attempt to prop up Labour's Policies they know that Fife Education have never offered any package of care. They also know that at the same time and to back Fife Education Fife Social Services timely removed (as detailed above) their Service. Indeed to complete the 'Triad of Destruction' and in full alignment with Labour's Grand Design NHS Fife simultaneously froze the £17,000 per annum to maximise the negative impact to our son and his family. PLEASE PASS THIS TRUE SEQUENCE OF FACTS AROUND THE WORLD AS IT DEMONSTRATES THAT LABOUR'S POLICIES ARE DESIGNED NOT TO DELIVER SERVICES BUT DESTROY THE HEALTH OF SEVERELY DISABLED AUTISTIC CHILDREN AND THERE FAMILIES.

    A SEPARATE BUT KEY QUESTION IS WHY ARE THE LABOUR PARTY DOING THIS? IT IS TIME THE OPPOSITON MSP'S STARTED TO ASK THIS QUESTION.

    I present more evidence not that anymore is required. The recent Labour publication admitted that under their management there has been a 1000% increase in people with autism in Scotland over the last 10 years. This means that 1 in 25 grandparents have no choice but to accept the Labour Party’s gift that they will have a grandchild that will develop autism. Yet for the same period Labour has refused to listen to the explosion of parents and grandparents who have been telling them what has been happening.

    SO IT IS NOW HISTORICAL FACT THAT HAD LABOUR LISTENED AND ACTED THEN THOUSAND’S (CERTAINLY HUNDREDS) OF SCOTLAND'S CHILDREN WOULD NOT NOW BE AUTISTIC.

    There are several more facts that I can present which overwhelmingly support the statement that the ‘Labour Party has ensured that disabled people are being starved of their right to their Health'. But I will close with one final fact. The Labour Party in a desperate attempt to prevent many facts from getting out has shut down the Cross Party Group for Autism. But worse in shutting it down they doctored the minutes of some meetings in a deliberate and systematic attempt by Elaine Smith, Labour Chair, to cover up the issues those Parents, Grandparents and other relatives and friends of People with Autism were raising. In an unprecedented move Labour also shut down the Cross Party Group for Autism Website and removed all minutes - COVER UP OR WHAT?

    I have another 23 or 25 facts to go. I re-emphasise that when finished it will show that the Labour Party backed up by an incompetent Executive have colluded and worked to cause maximum damage to People With Autism. But even worse, this has been done within a restructured justice system. Specifically the Scottish Legal Aid Board (SLAB ) has been structured and with no standards for Autism in existence then this makes it virtually impossible to get justice i.e. the rates paid by SLAB means that most of Scotland's legal firms cannot afford to take on complex cases like those described above because the SLAB rates and procedures means that legal firms are forced to take a loss for every hour worked (Reference is made to statements made by the Law Society, Law Firms and media reports). Also when the parents point to a best practice standard the Labour Party, Executive and Council shrug their shoulders and say "we dictate what standard of crap you're going to get in your services" thereby ensuring that no laws are ever broken. Unless of course someone dies. Many believe that it is no coincidence that cases of suicide amongst people with autism and their families have significantly increased under Labour.

    SCOTLAND WHERE THE LABOUR PARTY ARE SYSTEMATICALLY DESTROYING THE LIVES OF PEOPLE WITH AUTISM AND THEIR FAMILIES. IT IS TIME THAT THE WORLD KNOWS THAT WITHIN SCOTLAND THAT THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE (INCLUDING THEIR FAMILIES) NOW BEING EFFECTED ARE FAR MORE THAN THOSE IN THE PRESENT CONFLICT IN ISRAEL, GAZA AND LEBANON.

    Signed Dave Cunningham Father of a severely autistic boy who's son, under Labour, is forced to live with the following realities:

    1. Severe bowel problems, it is fact that the 'scoping' of People with Autism has been mostly banned because the Labour Party and incompetent Executive can't explain what they are finding. So opt for 'don't look, no problem' strategy;

    2. autistic colitis;

    3. SIGN and NHS refuse to recommend best practice medical protocol for People with Autism;

    4. Parents are forced to fund testing themselves. But even where partial reimbursement is given NHS Scotland refuse to pay for all the treatment because they say Labour, Executive, SIGN and BNF will not approve it.

    5. NHS official policy is to tell parents to go to charities to get 'charity handouts' as Labour's Policy does not allow funding of the best practice. Note much of which is a fraction of the cost of existing treatment.

    6. Where NHS do not have the expertise in their geographic area NHS are now systematically refusing to pay for the full costs of GP referrals out with their area. This practice in NHS Fife means that thousands of pounds in GP referrals are being refused to be reimbursed to parents by NHS Fife. Thereby preventing People with Autism getting access to Health care.

    7. Many people with autism have the measles virus circulating inside them. The Labour Party claim this is impossible and so again opt for 'don't look, no problem' strategy;

    8. Within Scotland parents are being deliberately refused funding to take their child to the 'Best Practice Clinic' run by the charity Autism Treatment Trust in Edinburgh. The trust is manned with professionals and with their extensive network of clinicians around the world can go on to provide a truly world class service. But under Labour parents have been banned from receiving funding.

    9. etc, etc

  • My Space

    This was posted on Aspergian Island, Jul 24.

    "
    Get away from My Space.

    I have it listed on my website as an unfriendly environment for Aspies - and I talk through experience. I noted that someone has been attacking your blogs and you had to create new ones. That's what I mean - Tom (the My Space owner) is useless when it comes to protecting Aspies.
    "

  • not answered by Save The Children

    Still not answered by Save The Children since Jun 29.

    Maurice Frank


    Glad you sent me your latest supporter's mag. ...

    On page 4 there was an upsetting item about the child author Libby Rees becoming a backer for you. In publicising any child author, there is an act of mass child cruelty done unless a fact about child authors is AUTOMATICALLY referred to. You may well not have known the item, as it is unjustly little publciised, but you will know it now - see ___ - and this needs updating urgently in your next literature. The item is, that there exist wronged child authors, whose chance to complete books was ruined by adult abuses towards us. I'm one, and my case represents a whole missing generation of child authors after Lindsay Brown in 1978. I was covered as a child author with a sci-fi/relativity novel in progress, by 2 Welsh newspapers in 1980-2 when they were reporting on early O-level passes at my school. The first item was by the young Rod Liddle. But my chance to complete it and succeed like Libby was ruined by abusive school homework pressure, which would eventually reach breaking point sand a crisis situation. The school, deservedly now closed, had the abusive stupidity to benefit from the public mention of my writing but then not give me enough spare time in my life to do it! and teachers believe they know best and give orders, they don't allow the child to decide.

    This is a crime of child ill-treatment and a deep wound. Given child authorship's now apparent association with Asperger Syndrome, not saying they all have it, it's even a medical wrong. As recently as the launch of an Asperger needs-survey project in Manchester 2 months ago, Aspect Action, I discovered a case of this school pressure happening to a child author RIGHT NOW.

    Don't you think wronged authorship is experienced worldwide by exactly the children wronged by poverty or wars who your work is full of? The crime upon all of us is worsened every time publicity of a child who WAS allowed to succeed does not mention wronged authors' existence. So you urgently need to mention it in follow-up to your Libby item and in all the work you intend to do with her.

    ETHICALLY towards children, you must not take an institutionally cynical position of wanting to prove for the sake of it that there is a discretionary choice over this. I have campaigning openings, as mentioned, to spead the word about that if it happens.

    You would agree is right to put to anyone, simple obligations against child ill-treatment. Hence, you must not feel insulted to be told that the responsibility to publicise wronged child authors is UTTERLY AUTOMATIC. It is demonstrated truth to say on public record that any party who wants any discretionary choice over this to exist even in theory, or who changes the word "automatic" to any other word a shred less committal, commits culpable and potentially actionable child cruelty thereby.

    You have not committed that because you likely didn't know of the issue, and now you can do the right thing for a group of child victims.

  • A Gem of Wikipedia Corruption

    The email list Wiki-en-l, for discussing Wikipedia, has a separate membership mechanism from Wkipedia. So it has been the only place for many of Wikipedia's victims to raise objections to bullying by the admins there and blatantly biased blocks and purges. Throughout the rest of Wikipedia, the openly corrupt trick has always been - that there are pages within Wikipedia where you are supposed to raise appeals against what an admin has done, but if you are blocked the block itself prevents you from writing anything on those pages!! And if you create a second log-in identity just so you can do this, this gets counted as the offence of creating a second identity to evade a block!!

    So now, of course, as Wikipedia turns in on itself as all purge-ridden tyrannies end up doing, it is being proposed on Wiki-en-l that objections to blocks should be excluded from being made on Wiki-en-l.

    A recent victim of Wikipedia's ruthlessness pointed out some good sense, here:

    • > Is this official? Should I update the wikien-l page to tell people
      > *not* to email for unblock requests?

      Why not go ahead and do the next logical step: Tell people to post
      their unblock requests to [[WP:ANI]], where they will be subsequently
      permbanned for "evading" their block and "disruption", and get their
      user page vandalized by an admin as a follow-up.

      Am I trolling? No. This is what actually happened.

    The answer, as you see here, was "Piss off."
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Oct 6, : a recent admin's quitting notice against the system there This is damning.

    Feb 23, : Check out Parker Peters's entry here for Feb 23 on how he had "exposed step by step" the behaviour of administrator cabals, in the Wiki-en-l forum before getting banned from it for it.

    Mar 2, : http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/03/02/wikipedia_fraud/ A story on "The register" - Bogus Wikipedia prof was blessed then promoted." Says -

    It's been a busy week for the pipeline that connects the consensus-reality wonderland of Wikipedia with Planet Earth. You won't believe what's just tumbled out at this end. Wikipedia's Maximum Leader Jimmy Wales, it transpires, has blessed an identity fraudster who bamboozled journalists last year, by rewarding him with a full-time job and promotion to Wikipedia's politburo. ...

    Wales' insouciance left onlookers amazed. "It does make you wonder about what else happens at Wikipedia that Jimmy Wales doesn't have a problem with," wrote author Stephen Dubner.

    Wikipedia co-founder Larry Sanger correctly describes it as an 'identity fraud'. And quite brilliantly, Sanger also gets to the core of the problem - the alternative reality, created by the Wikipedians cult-like devotion to the cause. (As with many cults, failings are attributed to outsiders).

    "Wikipedians have plainly become a very insular group: they have their own mores and requirements, which are completely independent of the real world," writes Sanger. "Indeed, that's what this story is about, after all: real-world identities and credentials are rejected as unnecessary by Wikipedia. How could Wikipedia fail to become insular with that attitude? "

  • a rallying call to all survivors users and refusers of the psychiatric system, friends and allies

    Link:


    www.kissit.org/kissit12apr06_content.html

    KISSIT

    .
    A campaign, not yet personally joinable, but their website is worth following, to keep in touch with their events announcements. Including a Bed march from Brighton to the former site of Bedlam in London August 6-10.

    Things they say include:

    • The Kiss It campaign urges you to expose abusive psychiatric practices.
    • Pleas, cries, explanations, and experiences are invalidated and recorded as symptoms.
    • Forced treatment has immediate and long-term negative effects on the emotional well-being and mental health of those subjected to it.
    • Forced treatment is the direct cause of many deaths each year. Records of the names, circumstances, and numbers who are killed in this way are not catalogued or retained in a comprehensive and coherent form, inquests are rare, and accountability negligible.
    • Forced treatment and threat of it increase the likelihood of suicides.
    • The needles that are forced deep into the buttocks of those who are dragged to the Isolation Room, pinned to the floor, stripped naked, and left in a locked cell to recede into unconsciousness, pierce not only the flesh but their hearts. ...For the countless who don't survive psychiatric assault (fatalities are not uncommon) an epitaph awaits, Rest In Pieces.
  • FW: HMIE backed by The Labour Party Refuse To Issue Secret Report on Autistic Child. Executive Now Do What They Want, Parliament/People Are Now Irrelevant

    Circulated at the request of David Cunningham, a frustrated parent in Scotland and Cross-Party Group member - site.



    Attached is yet another of the hundreds of examples of the typical blocks and strategies being implemented by HMIe and Scottish Executive in preventing the parents of Scotland getting quality Education for their Special Need Children. This and the hundreds of other examples proves that there is systemic incompetence and cover up by the Scottish Executive and other bodies who are destroying Special Need Children and their families by colluding to protect themselves against basic challenge and questioning.

    The MSP's of Scotland have to see this as yet more evidence of the Council's and other public bodies covering their tracks by implementing a Policy of zero disclosure. Problem is the Parents of Scotland are being told by their MSP's that the Parliament is useless to prevent them doing what they want. I have examples from all over Scotland that prove that the Executive and Council's are a law unto themselves and that they see the Parliament and it's MSP's as nothing more than an irritant to their separate decision making. I will leave the other parents/relatives/friends of Scotland to present their own points but present the following 3 factual examples that demonstrate the case that Parliament is being ignored and is a toothless talking shop:

    1. HMIe carry out a secret, incompetently executed review on my son and then refuse to provide any terms of reference, don't interview the parents, don't interview the teachers and carer's and mainly interview senior managers and budget holders. HMIe then refuse to issue the secret report to the parents while all the other government bodies and council has been provided with a copy of the report;

    2.Marilyn Livingstone in response to my question as to why my Labour MSP wasn't issuing letters and questions of her own to Fife Education stated ...MSP's are just really just Facilitators I really don't know what you expect us (MSP's) to do?

    3. Murdo Fraser my hard working and caring MSP has said Dave, I really don't know how long I can keep on requesting answers and information. There are clearly many issues and they don't want to disclose them to me. I have even tried to use the Freedom of Information Act and well you can see what that's achieved. Due to the time that your case is taking I am not sure that I will be able to keep devoting time to David's case. There's not much more that I can do. What follows are now my words. Murdo has been ignored and as a caring MSP has been treated despicably by the Public Bodies. His numerous brave attempts for disclosure has achieved absolutely nothing but an increased collusion between HMIe, Scottish Executive and Fife Council.

    A serious question must now be asked.

    The Scottish Parliament under Labour are allowing an incompetent Executive and Council to spent the Tax Payers Money doing what they want, when they want. However worse of all The Parliament are Powerless to act against them. In addition MSP's who do try and get answers are branded as troublemakers. But worse of all the Executive and Councils string them along to the point that the MSP is forced and systematically pressured to give up on the children and families that they represent. The blame for this has to be put at the door of the Labour Party.

    Scotland where the Scottish Executive and Councils laugh, scorn and ignore the People of Scotland.

    The people of Scotland now know where the real power lives and it isn't in the Parliament. I am distributing this e-mail all over Scotland and the World, I suggest you do as well.

    Dave Cunningham Parent of a typical disabled and sick child who has had services, budgets and justice stripped away by the Labour Party, Scottish Executive and Councils
    27 May 2006

  • So Wikipedia is now fiddled, oh funny

    • May 25,

    on Wiki-en-l the publicly accessible mailing list of Wikipedians discussing the workings of Wikipedia and cases of blocking/banning,
    this appeared.(by member Molu)

    Protection of a Wikipedia page means a programmed block against the normal position that all-comers can edit and add to it. These protections are already applied as emergency temporary measures, to Wikipedia articles that become objects of heated argument. That is inevitable. But now, they are moving to secret, unannounced, protection controls programmed into many of their article pages on a permanent basis. On these "semi-protected" pages it will be like a moderated forum - any contribution won't get through or seen, in the first place, unless the Wikipedia admin who has been assigned to do the protecting chooses to let it.

    Not the orignal Wikipedia idea at all. Yes, give them the bad publicity. All Wikipedia's purge victims are vindicated.

    Oct 6, : a recent admin's quitting notice against the system there This is damning.

  • a wiki site on US democracy suppresses anti-wikipedia content

    Mainly US readers but also readers in all the countries US foreign policy affects -

    EH?

    - may have come across an anti-Republican group that organises lobbies of Senators etc, with the naff name "People For the American Way" which will never sound very appealing to hearers in the rest of the West. However, it has been circulating interesting emails opposing the constitutionality of some of the Bush government's more disturbing activities, as regards electronic surveillance, secret records of everyone's phone calls, + court nominations.

    But it becomes necessary for any thinking democrat not to trust or support PFAW, when you catch it suppressing information itself, concerned with injustice.

    PFAW set up its own version of Wikipedia,called "Wiki the Presidency": at www.wikithepresidency.org . It claims to be a place for sharing + exposing dirt on Bush + the Republicans, concerning civil liberties + war drives. "An ongoing record of Whitehouse wrongdoing for all to see", no less. In opening this site, PFAW described Wikipedia in positive terms, as popular and a public resource. "Authored entirely by the general public", which it isn't as anyone who reads Wikipedia's pages on its workings can easily see. In response, an article "Wikipedia" was created on Wiki the Presidency giving the dismal truth about Wikipedia, as revealed on Spectrum Fairness and elsewhere. In 3 days this article was deleted by PFAW, as "not relevant to the mission and spirit of this project." It's spirit is not about factual openness then, by its own admission! (WikiSysop, 1141 May 18).

    ONLY INTERESTED IN YOU IF THEY CAN EXPLOIT YOU. ONLY WANT TO SAY WHAT FITS A SLICK IMAGE. NOT INTERESTED A DAMN IN TRUTH AT GRASSROOTS LEVEL. NOT A SCRAP BETTER THAN THE FORCES THEY PAINT THEMSELVES AS FIGHTING. Clearly their site will contain no other information than they approve.

    Oct 6, : a recent admin's quitting notice against the system there This is damning.

  • carelessness of member "blogreader" towards other members

    "Blogreader" (Kim Hatton), who is shown here as a friend of this site, is not really. She is a new member * of blog.co.uk , who 2 weeks before joining it, circulated an invitation for another blog community and said with it that she liked what was being done here. However, her email supplied a link for accepting her invitation, which did not work, and when I emailed back to alert her so she ignored it. I also made efforts to get the message through to her by issuing a return invitation through blog.co.uk , which when she joined, obviously rersulted in her appearing here as a "friend". But then she immediately sent an unwarrantedly snooty and mean-spirited email saying blandly, I've not accepted any invitation to be a friend, please remove me! While saying nothing at all about the problem over her own original invitation!

    It needs tipping to all blog.co.uk members, how this means she is emotionally careless and cavalier, capable of alternating from nice to nasty in not a rationally predictable way, but far too erratically and hurtfully for any reasoning person, let alone a spectrumite, to find decent. Without following up a genuine frustration you had suffered in trying to take up her initial invitation. I mailed her back asking for an explanation of this before posting up this item, and she just answered, "How can I keep track of every invitation and where it might go?" What the hell attitude is that? Careless and non-genuine, so that any initially nice message you might receive from her is not meant in any solid way. If someone makes a friendly gesture and means it they don't ficklely forget about it like this.

    Note: On the same day as this item was posted, a personal message was received from a reader, for which thanks, indicating that despite appearances Hatton is not a new member and this has already been experienced many times.

  • notice for wronged child authors to the Adora Svitak machine

    An 8-year-old manic writer in Seattle, US, Adora Svitak, has emerged as the focus of an international campaign whose like has no precedent, to promote child authorship. It all looks very slickly managed in the typical style of US business PR.

    That will be fine as long as it shows responsiveness to ordinary personal justice. That is now being sought:

    Here is a copy of a message sent on Feb 23 through the www.adorasvitak.com website's interactive page. (Under "Ask Adora" then "Schools & Libraries".) Also copied to Charles Faulkner, of Aultbea Publishing who published Libby Rees, and Viv Bird, director of Reading Is Fundamental a literacy trust in the US. Both had spoken in the Observer Feb 19 in support of an imminently projected British tour by Adora Svitak. Both carry the same responsibility as her own publicity machine does, to be moral, which means: to make this

    the

    great opening for forcing mass public awareness of the

    wronged

    child authors,
    rather than to be just something "professional" and remote.

    The move made towards them was conciliatory and it was put on this site assuming the best about them. Now that there is nothing obtained from them over a significant time, they must begin to be considered disturbing.


    Copy

    I find it extraordinary that you actually have a section inviting schools to seek advice on encouraging child authorship.

    A whole stolen generation of child authors have had the rest of our lives deeply wounded and abused, by schools. By homework pressure destroying our chance to be child authors. Not leaving us enough spare time to finish books.

    As soon as any parties publicising a child author know about this obscene crime, it becomes a CITABLE AUTOMATIC duty to child protection for you to publicise the fact that wronged child authors exist. You just have to mention it alongside your publicising of your luckier child author. It becomes an act of cruelty to other children not to do that.

    The stolen generation period is 1978-2001. My luck that it was exactly the last child author to emerge before the stolen generation, Lindsay Brown, who inspired me to be one. Because the gifted children movement got a local newspaper fuss made of me for other reasons and my child authorship mentioned along with it while the book was still incomplete, in 1980, before abuse at school ruined its completion, I am historical evidence of the stolen generation. I can serve on behalf of recognition rights for them all. Have you thought of the ones whose countries just weren't democracies when they were children: I can be the stepping stone for their recognition too.

    I have Asperger Syndrome, which is associated with a mind focussed towards writing: thus Luke Jackson and Kenneth Hall. [Links to the Phad article and the Cross-Party Group minutes for 27 Nov 03 and 2 Feb 05.]

    Do you have any contacts in Britain who would like to support my placard protest, on March 8, 6:45 pm, outside the Strathclyde Hilton Hotel at Bellshill near Glasgow, while Luke Jackson's mother Jacqui is speaking inside? The protest is not against her, it does not prejudge her at all, it is against the organisers of her speaking tours (Centre For Development of Autism Practice) ignoring this issue. Wronged child authors should be mentioned by the Jackson family every time.

    Not being in America, I have discovered you from a blog comment made in response to the recent case of Libby Rees here. It seems obvious that since 2001, and thanks at first to writings about health conditions, there has been a massive breakthrough for the idea of child authorship and it has suddenly become fashionable to an intensity never known before. This after hardly existing at all for over 20 years. I seek your concerned action on speaking out about wronged child authors and giving our fight for recognition a loud place in this bandwagon.

    Maurice Frank (address)

  • protest outside a Jacqui Jackson talk in Glasgow

    I'm going to do a protest with a placard, outside the Strathclyde Hilton Hotel in Bellshill near Glasgow, on March 8. At 6:45 Jacqui Jackson is doing a talk there about how brilliant her family are, as a follow-up to Magnificent 7, and it will cost £30 a head to attend it. Seems like she is becoming a bit of an expensive celebrity. However, the protest will not prejudge her personally in any way, it is against the events' organisers. Jacqui herself would even come out of it personally enhanced if she chose to back the protest issue. She has that choice.

    The protest will be: that all promotions of them should care to also tell the public that aspie child authors wronged by abusive school homework exist. The placard will be directed at Jacqui personally at the event's promoters: her agency the Centre For the Development of Autism Practice. It is a snooty self-concerned business that ignores ordinary people and only wants to play the celeb game. What are the grounds for saying that? Simple: it has been ignoring this issue for a long time. How mean-spirited.

    I will do the protest alone if necessary! but will have plenty of time between now and then to tell local group friends about it. I have given the police advance notice already, based on not expecting it to turn into a large demo. They were perfectly civil about it and don't see any problem with it, so that's officially registered now.

    Bellshill is a station where 2 rail services into Glasgow converge: the slow line from Edinburgh via Livingston, and the local line from Lanark via Motherwell. The Strathclyde Hilton is on the west side of the A725 dual carriageway which crosses the railway 1/2 mile west of the station, and it's another 1/2 mile north of the railway. This A725 also leads from M74 j 5, or from the A8 gap section of the M8 3 miles east of the Baillieston M73 junction.

    Maurice Frank, 7 Feb 2006

    www.rxpgonline.com/1843100983.isbn - A link to a very perceptive teenager's discovery of common phrases that prove Jacqui a joint writer of F+G.

  • Labour MSP's corrupt act to prevent a vote in parliament

    David Cunningham, a parent who attends the Scottish Parliament Cross-Party Group on ASD.


    Subject: Apologies I Tried My Best But New Labour's Is To Strong and Ruthless

    As the e-mail suggests I tried to get improvements for People With ASD by getting the desperate need for an Emergency Recovery Plan for Autism agreed in the minutes tonight but I have to say that new Labour's cleverness and ruthless determination to continue the damage to People With ASD and their families hit an unprecedented low in the Scottish Parliament tonight.

    Although I had the backing or written statements from:

    • Mr Beuchamp CEO NAS (see attached letter);
    • Mr Macdonald CEO Scottish Society for Autism;
    • Mr Welsh Chairman Action Against Autism;
    • Mrs Macvicar Renfrewshire Chairperson Autism and Aspergers Support Group;
    • Mrs Sinclair Autism Rights;
    • Mr Bostock, Ayshire Autism Group;
    • A significant number of MSP's;
    • Bulk of attendees tonight.

    Elaine Smith Labour MSP, to prevent the request for an Emergency Recovery Plan being voted in with an overwhelming majority, stated very clearly that she would implement the new rule recently introduced. That was she would get up and leave the CPG meeting thereby requiring immediate disbandenment of the meeting and the prevention of a vote. This is based on the fact that a minimum of 2 MSP's must be in attendance.

    I therefore apologise to all of you that I let down but in the presence of such a ruthless Labour Party who in the action tonight and in Peacock's driving of the new Act for Learning have demonstrated there total inability to deliver for people with ASD. I would ask all who receive this e-mail to pass it on to all family and friends and let them know that New Labour are truly not worth voting for at the next Scottish Elections.

    Indeed the new change in the Terms of Reference for the CPG for Autism Group has finally made me realise what most attendees have said for sometime that I am silly to get passionate about minutes. As a few parents and grandparents recently said the words are totally meaningless as the Lib-Lab Pact won't allow anything significant to come out of the CPG for Autism meetings.

    So I apologise to Shabnum and others who I in my desperate fight (thinking the words were important) to get issues raised now realise that none of the words matter, the CPG Meetings are truly toothless , useless talking shops. My visits will now be significantly reduced. What's the point. Good news for some.

    GOD HELP PEOPLE WITH ASD NOW AND GOD HELP NEW LABOUR FOR THEIR RUTHLESS AND IMMORAL ACTION TO ALL PEOPLE WITH ASD IN SCOTLAND.

    David Cunningham, 1 Dec 2005

  • Autism Cymru - Racism in an "autism resolution to be sent to world bodies"

    Autism Cymru was the administrator of the recent Awares Online Conference, planned to repeat annually. (NB Dec 5: William Lamar, who was alerted as missing during the conference, is safely home.)

    Midway through it, Adam Feinstein circulated an

    "autism resolution",

    counting AS as part of autism as these organisations always do, that was going to the European Parliament among other places.

    The details that signers were asked for included "Country of origin". I responded that spectrumites' issues about sensitivity and metabolism...

    ...> raise compatibility with environment, that seriously proves it a
    > biological crime against a person's body to force the person into
    > association with a different climatic environment than they identify
    with.
    > Including when a bigot dictates which country he says a person belongs
    to,
    > and takes pleasure in kicking in the teeth the person's own expressed
    > national identity. Common, and deeply wounding, bigotries, sometimes
    > bullying but sometimes just simple-minded, are to take a person's accent
    > or surname or birthplace as a criterion that dictates arbitrarily their
    > country. These bigotries are acts of genocide, nations with a history of
    > dispersal like the Scots show how, and the spectrumite sensitivities thing
    > proves the biological seriousness of the offence.
    >

    Hence proving:

    that international law is
    > obliged to criminalise all birthplace bigotry as an atrocity of ethnic
    > persecution.
    >
    > So to back this petition - whose objective itself should help me get this
    > message across! - I need to know that it is not trying to categorise
    > people by the arbitrary location of either their birthplace or their
    > childhood. In which case, what exactly is it trying to record by "country
    > of origin"? and wouldn't a signer's present address be more relevant to a
    > petition?
    >
    > thank you for your care.

    On Oct 28 he answered:

    > You raise a good point. Country of residence would have been better
    > put.
    > Please assume that was what I meant, and apologies for any
    > misunderstanding.
    >
    > Please let me know if you are happy to be a signatory to the
    > resolution.

    Yet, when he circulated another email giving out post-conference certificates to the participants after it had ended (Nov 11), and he made another call for support for his resolution, "Country of origin" was still there. He had done nothing to alter it. He had not acted on taking the point. For that, I was obliged in conscience to withdraw from support already given!! Now you think about yours.

    It is carelessness towards the public. Now, this is Autism Cymru, right? The national outfit in Wales. This was being done from

    Cardiff.

    Indeed, the Awares conference had a picture of Cardiff on its entrance page.That itself is a place affected by the type of climatic unfairness I was telling him about! Cardiff lies near the head of a long narrow waterway, the Bristol Channel. Its strong tides, the second strongest in the world, and funnelling shape, cause saturated damp in the air, and on the mountainous Welsh side this works together with the rainy climate associated with mountains. In regions along long narrow waterways these effects often have a local trend to cause nasal irritation, catarrhal and cold-like symptoms. "Cardiff Nose". This frustrates self-discovery by folks who have minority sensitivities against over-dressing, such as shortists.

    Knowing about it, I asked Adam to get Autism Cymru to do local awareness raising on it in South Wales. Most importantly, before the present winter, in case there are any spectrumite shortists there who have not discovered themselves because of the local climate. When sensitivities are not catered to, it causes irritation and distraction and impairs performance - so our fellow spectrumites in the Cardiff Nose region, and others like it, the Thames Valley is another, have a biological right not to be left through another winter without awareness raising of this. Awareness raising which will also help the biologically serious civil rights struggle to uphold dress freedom throughout society including in employment and school.

    He's ignored it.

    and finally, you will find this one wearily predictable.

    Autism Cymru is hosting an International Autism Conference in Cardiff on 8-10 May 2006. Speakers include Jacqui Jackson.. Hence they have been asked to say they will comply with their duty to make participants know that there exist child authors whose chances were destroyed by the crime of abusive school homework, and it would be an act of child cruelty towards present cases not to do it.

    The answer that they will do it is still awaited. There is a clear picture of abuse in not having it by now.

  • Bush plan for mass psychiatric screening: "Project Censored" alternative media award

    http://www.MindFreedom.org - please forward

    Exposing President Bush's Plans for Massive Psychiatric Screening of the USA Wins a "Project Censored" Alternative Media Award

    Project Censored is considered the "alternative Pulitzer Prize" by some journalists. This Saturday, 22 Oct., Project Censored awarded the "Top 25 Censored Stories of 2006" -- important news that mainstream media covers up.

    Number 11 in the Top 25 is journalist Jeanne Lenzer whose series of articles in the _British Medical Journal_ showed how President Bush is calling for "mental health screening" for children and adults in the USA in a plan that could result in hundreds of thousands of more citizens being placed on psychiatric drugs without adequate protection of human rights.

    Even though President Bush calls for making this psychiatric screening "common practice" throughout the USA the corporate mainstream media has largely refused to inform their readers.

    BELOW is the forwarded announcement from Project Censored including an UPDATE from Jeanne Lenzer:

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~

    #11 Universal Mental Screening Program
    Usurps Parental Rights

    Sources:

    Asheville Global Report (British Medical
    Journal), No. 284, June 24-30, 2004

    Title: "Bush Plans To Screen Whole U.S.
    Population For Mental Illness"

    Author: Jeanne Lenzer

    http://www.agrnews.org/issues/284/#2

    Truth News, September 13,2004

    Title: "Forcing Kids Into a Mental Health Ghetto"

    Congressman Ron Paul
    http://www.truthnews.net/world/2004090078.htm

    In April of 2002, President Bush appointed a 22 member commission called the President's New Freedom Commission on Mental Health in order to "identify policies that could be implemented by Federal, State and local governments to maximize the utility of existing resources, improve coordination of treatments and services, and promote successful community integration for adults with a serious mental illness and children with a serious emotional disturbance."1 Members of this commission include physicians in the mental health field and at least one (Robert N. Postlethwait) former employee of pharmaceutical giant Ely Lilly and Co.

    In July of 2003 the commission published the results of their study. They found that mental health disorders often go undiagnosed and recommended to the President that there should be more comprehensive screening for mental illnesses for people of all ages, including pre-school age children. In accordance with their findings, the commission recommended that schools were in a "key position" to screen the 52 million students and 6 million adult employees of our nation's schools.2

    The commission also recommended linking the screenings with treatment and support. They recommended using the Texas Medication Algorithm Project (TMAP) as a model treatment system.3

    TMAP, which was implemented in Texas' publicly funded mental health care system while George W. Bush was governor of Texas,4

    is a disease management program that aids physicians in prescribing drugs to patients based on clinical history, background, symptoms, and previous results. It was the first program in the United States aimed at establishing medication guidelines for treating mental health illnesses.5

    Basically, it is an algorithm that recommends specific drugs which should be used to treat specific diseases. Funding for TMAP was provided by a Robert Wood-Johnson Grant as well as several major drug companies. The project began in 1995 as an alliance of individuals from pharmaceutical companies, the University of Texas, and the mental health and corrections systems of Texas.6

    Critics of mental health screening and TMAP claim that it is a payoff to Pharmaceutical companies. Many cite Allen Jones, a former employee of the Pennsylvania Office of the Inspector General. He was fired when he revealed that many key officials who have influence over the medication plan in his state received monetary perks and benefits from pharmaceutical companies, which benefited from their drugs being in the medication algorithm. TMAP also promotes the use of newer, more expensive anti-psychotic drugs. Results of studies conducted in the United States and Great Britain found that using the older, more established anti-psychotic drugs as afront line treatment rather than the newer experimental drugs makes more sense. Under TMAP, the Ely Lilly drug olanzapine, a new atypical antipsychotic drug, is used as a first line treatment rather than a more typical anti-psychotic medication. Perhaps it is because Ely Lilly has several ties to the Bush family, where George Bush Sr. was a member of the board of directors. George W. Bush also appointed Ely Lilly C.E.O. Sidney Taurel to a seat on the Homeland Security Council. Of Ely Lilly's $1.6 million political contributions in 2000, 82 percent went to Republicans and George W. Bush.7

    In November of 2004, Congress appropriated $20 million8 to implement the findings of the New Freedom Commission on Mental Health. This would include mandatory screening by schools for mental health illnesses. Congressman Ron Paul, R-Texas introduced an amendment to the appropriations bills which would withhold funding for mandatory mental health screenings and require parental consent and notification. His amendment, however, was voted down by a wide margin (95-315 in the House of Representatives).9 Paul, a doctor and long-time member of the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) states, "At issue is the fundamental right of parents to decide what medical treatment is appropriate for their children. The notion of federal bureaucrats ordering potentially millions of youngsters to take psychotropic drugs like Ritalin strikes an emotional chord with American parents." Paul says the allegation "that we have a nation of children with undiagnosed mental disorders crying out for treatment is patently false," and warns that mental health screening could be used to label children whose attitudes, religious beliefs, and political views conflict with established doctrine. Paul further warns that an obvious major beneficiary of this legislation is the pharmaceutical industry. The AAPS has decried this legislation, which they say will lead to mandatory psychological testing of every child in America without parental consent, and "heap even more coercive pressure on parents to medicate children with potentially dangerous side effects."

    Update by Jeanne Lenzer:

    Whether it's the pills we take or the oil we use, it would be reassuring to know that the information used to develop new medicines or to utilize natural resources wisely is based on science--not corporate spin.

    But blandishments from Big Pharma to politicians and doctors have a profound effect on health care in the U.S., making medical research closer to propaganda than science at times.

    One way drug companies, in collusion with doctors, increase their market share is to expand the definition of diseases. When diagnostic criteria were liberalized for attention deficit disorder in 1991, the number of children diagnosed jumped by about 60 percent.

    The American Psychiatric Association (APA) acknowledged in the July 2004 issue of Advocacy News that, "The BMJ story has gained some traction in derivative reports on the Internet." But, they boasted, "mainstream media have not touched the story, in part thanks to APA's work, for which the [Bush] Administration is appreciative."10

    The APA's boast is curious. The article was the most downloaded article in the history of the BMJ. It clearly struck a nerve with a public wary of doctors and politicians whose pockets are lined with drug company money.

    Given the interest in the BMJ story, it would seem that the APA, instead of attempting to keep the story out of the mainstream media, would be anxious to counter the widely circulated statements in the article. It would also seem that the mainstream press could provide the Administration and the APA the best possible vehicle to counter these supposed factual errors in the BMJ article.

    But, the facts might prove difficult to square with the public. More than one in every 100 toddlers and preschoolers in the United States are on powerful psychiatric drugs, such as Ritalin and Prozac, according to a study published in the February 2000 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association.

    Joseph T. Coyle, M.D., wrote in an accompanying editorial, "It appears that behaviorally disturbed children are now increasingly subjected to quick and inexpensive pharmacologic fixes, as opposed to informed mutimodal therapy." He concluded, "These disturbing prescription practices suggest a growing crisis in mental health services to children and demand more thorough investigation."

    But instead of issuing warnings about overmedication or inappropriate prescribing, the experts on the New Freedom Commission warn ominously that too few children are receiving treatment for mental illness. They cite escalating numbers of toddlers expelled from daycare as evidence of potentially serious psychological problems--problems to be diagnosed and cured with mental health screening and pills. Social and economic reasons for the rise in kiddie expulsions are left unexamined.

    As bad as this is for those put on drugs and labeled "mentally ill," the far bigger concern is the creation of a disease for every drug, a situation made possible by the hand-in-glove relationship between industry and the government.

  • links

    Transferred list of links that used to be on the old site.

    • aero-alternative education resource organisation

      American site on democratic and libertarian schools and their theory. Associated with a book The End Of Homework.

    • tarakimberleytorme

      A series of aspie short stories and poems, some "deep thinking serious", some on personal or environmental topics. Love the musical intro.

    • Learning and Behaviour Charitable Trust New Zealand

      "This site is designed to give you the information and resources you may need if you know someone with a learning or behaviour difficulty. We welcome all feedback and input, as it is our aim to make this the premium site for learning and behaviour difficulties in New Zealand. Please fell free to email us about anything you find or would like to see available here by using the links on each page."

      LBCTNZ has been very supportive on SF's question of internet communities needing to treat spectrumites fairly. :-) But an important feedback message from here is on the need to distinguish between ASDs, which don't involve any intellectual impairment, and "Learning Disabilities", which by the term's usual meaning do.

    • personalised education now

      "personalised" to what the child wants, whether home education or small school experiments. Child centred. Anyway, it's the UK's focal anti-school organisation and circulator of ideas. The only thing wrong with it is an element who are sceptical of ADHD's reality.

    • gfcf kids urgently stop child harmers

      A Yahoo group that exists for the sole purpose of ethically condemning the group gfcf-kids-uk for its practice of arbitrary unexplained bannings, and arguing that the ethicality of practising GFCF diet is conditional on having nothing to do with such practices.

    • indymedia link on psychiatric oppression in canada

      Posted: Mon Feb 07, 2005 6:44 pm Post subject: Sara Arenson Locked Up Again
      http://kangaroo-court.blogspot.com/2005/02/sara-arenson-locked-up-again.html
      Sara's words to consider on her situation - "These words were written by Sara on October 10th, 2004, and posted friends-only. She now wants them made public." Formerly copied in full on this site for quite a while, can now stably be found at the page linked to.

      A young, progressive vegan, named Sara Arenson, is being forcibly held and drugged at St. Boniface hospital in Manitoba, Canada – not because she has been deemed dangerous – but simply because she has been diagnosed with a biological brain disorder. She has been held there since January 23rd, 2005.

      On the unit, she has been declared incompetent because she sees the diagnosis and treatment of mental illness as a form of social control. She has been labeled Bipolar Manic because she would prefer to be outgoing, explore new and creative ideas, and because she has adopted a policy of radical honesty.

      As for the reason for her detention: It is worse yet. She has been certified, not because of danger, but because of a substantial risk of deteriorating farther. Any schizophrenia, schizoaffective, or bipolar diagnosis (probably among others) is sufficient for most psychiatrists to claim there is risk of further deterioration. In other words, simply being diagnosed is often enough to be committed.

      The Manitoba Mental Health Act allows involuntary commitment if a person “is likely to suffer substantial mental or physical deterioration if not detained in a facility.” Thus, she has limited recourse on appeal, and asks for activists to call, write, or do whatever is possible to help her.

    • Indymedia UK

      Indymedia UK is a network of individuals, independent and alternative media activists and organisations, offering grassroots, non-corporate, non-commercial coverage of important social and political issues. Sometimes there is cause to be cross about items unexplainedly not getting on there, but lots of important items about things the normal media would hush up, including the "court change" described elsewhere on this site, do get on there.

    • Rewriting history for their own ends

      A shocking article on Tito Mukhophadyay and how a message of autistic pride gets used by forces wanting to cure autism in bad ways. Why is it harder in America for an autistic to be heard?

    • pathetic motorways

      Amazing fun.

    • an old "autistic spectrum" news blog

      A blog, become inactive since 2004, still with long lists of links to
      "Current news on Autism, Asperger's Syndrome, diet, ADD, Depression, environmental issues and more. "

  • new scottish education act and changes of view on school compatibility

    The Education Additional Support For Learning Act

    (in Scotland) 2004, coming into effect Nov 2005, creates an entitlement for children passing through decisions on educational needs, to have their own views taken and consulted with. The expanded variety of needs that have come into recognition since the last act in 1980, and the harmful experiences of authoritarian education that preceded their recognition, compelled MSPs to accept this reform.

    It means the children and parents, in order to express their views, are entitled for all experiential evidence on past failiures of school practice and their results, to be publicly known, or else they would suffer disability discrimination. There follows an automatic right to publish these things.

    and meanwhile

    "special needs education" is a label that some have always found objectionable, because it covers children of normal intelligence with social adjusting troubles and simultaneously covers learning disability. This kind of uncomfortable feeling lay behind the swing, around 1980, to seeking integration into ordinary schools, of children with behavioural or other coping problems, or curricular difficulties. the government report recommending this move was made under the chairmanship of Mary Warnock.

    Now (still around in the Lords), she has said the application of this ideal has become too ideological and applied rigidly without thinking whether it fits each case. She hasn't said the ideal was always misguided, but she has had a change of heart over it based on its results. On radio 4 "The Westminster Hour" Oct 2, she has called it cruelty to send a child with Asperger Syndrome to a large secondary school. It's an incompatible environment to cope with.

    Now that has been said, the effects of the cruelty on its past subjects has a claim to be dealt with in any way that they indicate affects their present lives. It also affects the sum of knowledge available for applying to present children. All politicians need to give their positions on how this shall be organised and the information centrally pooled for reference. the likes of Children In Scotland need to push them to.

  • a notice to every education authority in 2001

    Sent on 2 July 2001 to all 212 education authorities in the UK as listed in Whitaker's Almanack.

    Concerning a parliamentary record on all dress codes and uniforms being A human rights violation in International Law.


    This record is in the submission I was invited to make to the Scottish Parliament procedures committee's enquiry into "Consultative Steering Group principles" and equal opportunities. Committee clerk Mr John Patterson appreciated the submission on June 26. Without prejudging at all the committee's response to it, its existence presents all operators of schools with a responsibility to absorb its implications for equal opportunities and human rights.

    "This is not confined to Scotland, it follows for every democracy that subscribes to international principles against discrimination and for minorities.

    In the submission, I cited the link between skin sensitivity, metabolism, and body electricity to show that comfort identities are scientifically serious and not frivolous. Comfort identities are minorities who make unusual choices of costume. It follows they are entitled to the same recognition and equal opportunity status as all other categories of minority, and this is violated by uniforms or dress codes, hence these are invalidated.

    It follows this applies equally to uniformities imposed by peer groups. Hence, until all experiential evidence on these comfort identities is published, it violates human rights to enforce school attendance at all for children who identify with costumes that peer group prejudice against exists.

    This has also been communicated to the independent sector.

    In duty to everyone who this question applies to.
    Maurice Frank "

  • anti-social behaviour laws also create a claim for publishing rights

    On 17 June 2004
    an anti-social behaviour act was also passed, an equivalent act had been passed in England in 2003, creating powers for anti-social behaviour orders that autistic organisations and the CPG believe could be used against autistic behaviours in lack of understanding, hence violation of a person's needs. For this reason too everyone on the autistic spectrum is entitled to automatic publishing of anything related to making any authorities empowered under these laws understand autistic or related behaviours and needs. The Education Additional Support For Learning Act passed on April 1 is linked to this, for by its provisions for consultation a state admission exists to not necessarily understanding our needs, from which the duty to understand them applies to the operation of these anti-social behaviour acts too.

  • he-special-uk

    It is possible that he-special-uk may be gone now, as it no longer shows up in a search of Yahoo groups. he-special-uk was a Yahoo group that worked only through email, that is advertised in the book Freaks Geeks and Asperger Syndrome as a support group for home education and school problems. That the book was never been recalled to strike out all reference to it, was an act of public medical deceit and child exploitation that reflects on every organisation that continues to have anything to do with the book.

    I belonged to he-special-uk Dec 2002 to March 2003. My first contact with it was to see if its members were interested in backing or using for themselves, a political situation I had just created. The illegal failiure of all child protection authorities covering Coventry to publish by automatic right experiential evidence against the gifted children movement, gives the public a legal claim on the government, on child protection grounds, to have any personal evidence on any bad outcomes in education published by automatic right. I emailed the group moderator about this, without in fact asking to join, and found that I was encouraged to join, the message was posted to all the group members and I got a friendly response.

    I had no way of knowing before joining that the membership included Jacqui Jackson. By the way the Freaks and Geeks book was co-written and she is the dominant author of it and adaptor of its content, though Luke has denied that Jacqui was quoted correctly in the Times 16 Aug 2002, when she painted herself as 12/13 the author. Look it up at a decent reference library anyway, as one source to confirm the picture of joint writing. Also Isobel Brookfield, of the National Autistic Society's national council, who has really strong anti-school views similar to mine and wanted to know more about my experiences. She wrote "I am sure the group will be sympathetic" and helped me overcome a technical problem with enabling my receipt of group emails.

    This was at a time when I wasn't yet sure I'm aspie, having not yet learned that the trait of taking metaphorical speech literally, which I don't have, is not essential. All books on AS until 2002 seemed to paint it as essential. But I'm also ADHD, that had more impact than AS on my school problems, and in terms of he-special being specifically about "special needs" angles on education, ADHD was mine and justified my membership.

    Members often posted abstract messages that were not to do with their own life problems, like poems or an essay from America Isobel posted satirising the nature of schools as like slave camps. I carefully followed and never exceeded the practices of other members in commenting on any issues that are abstract and not to do with people's problems. Like on uniforms: only after one of them posted a poem that referred to skin sensitivity, did I in reply post about myself lodging with the Scottish parliament on these grounds in 2001 an assertion that uniforms are against international law on minority rights. This posting was very popular and started a good exchange of experiences. At the level of personal problems I had relevant things to say about psychiatry and court cases and parents' difficulties at retaining permission to home educate, and a Scottish education bill then in its early stages. I seemed to be doing fine in the group and felt supported. Best was when Jacqui agreed that I should "keep persisting" in my legal claims to publish. She had shared with the group, that it had only taken her fame to even start overcoming a perception in her wider family that the Jacksons are just attention seekers. This is the unbalanced thing about a web group with one famous member and several other members belonging to the Jessica Kingsley writing establishment: any opportunity that benefitted them, they are civilly obliged to back all the group's members' entitlement to have.

    Then, just suddenly - I went to my first meeting of a really friendly local organisation that I have belonged to ever since. At that meeting I learned that the Scottish education bill has a good feature of backing children's own life choices against their parents' for them, and I reported this information back to he-special. A member, Fiona, was strongly hostile to this, and was of strong view that you must never perceive parents' choices critically in the home education movement and never approve of the state getting in the way of parents always being in control. This is not a liberal approach to home education, it is one motivated by control of children: hence it does not fit the reason why folk like Isobel are against school. However, both points of view should have been expressible in he-special. Fiona flamed against me in support of her point, by accusing my posts of being hard to understand and needing to be toned down. It is a fact, not an opinion, that my posts can't possibly have been hard to understand or else they wouldn't have got the intelligent lucid replies they did. So I replied that I found the accusation offensive and described how the "I don't understand" trick is often used to silence things that folk don't want to hear, so its use is a social wrong that must never be allowed to take root.

    The moderator, June, came down on me like a ton of bricks for this, treated it as me flaming Fiona while biasedly ignoring how Fiona had treated me, and sided with Fiona's position. "She thought she was helping you." Fiona was the one who had broken the rule, "don't send to others what you find hateful to receive", so this was now a situation of group bullying. June started making horrible accusations in offlist emails: that I was usually off topic to the group's purpose, that my answer to Fiona counted as upsetting everyone by accusing them of not caring about my experiences, and that I had always been hard to understand. No one had said any such things before. I could smell that June was politically hostile and constructing a way to get rid of me, so over the 2 days of this situation I usually replied to her onlist. I combined apologetic peacemaking overtures to the group for upsetting them in any way, with pointing out the injustices in June's stance and copying for all members to see the unfair things she had written in private. Are spectrumites supposed to get everything right socially, hmmm? Isobel for one remained quite pleasant and posted a sensible answer to me about the members being "not always in tune with each other", trying to put a closure on the situation and move on. But June on the same day emailed me claiming to have received offlist representations, and to have been in earnest discussion with the other moderators whoever they were, and that she was expelling me.

    Within 3 hours of reading this, I had emailed to every member whose email address I knew, 25 of them including Isobel and Jacqui, a notification that I was adding this experience to the content of my slow legal and political struggles over publishing. The he-special members already knew all about this, including that I entirely legally no longer pay council tax since my leafletting in Coventry on 28 Dec 2002 proved the government directly liable to publish me. I referred to the he-special experience in the council tax appeal I was then making and won uncontested. I told the 25, who include Jacqui and Isobel, I held them responsible to leave he-special themselves and disown it or else they would be liably wronging public health, after he-special had emotionally abused an aspie and buyer of the Freaks and Geeks book to whom it had been advertised as supportive. I emailed the 25 a further 4 times with notices of my fightback's progress, none of which were ever acknowledged. This includes by Isobel whose posting on the day of the explusion had shown she was not in favour of it, and who had been so nice to me at the beginning and legally informative, she used to work for a lawyer, about the impracticalities of fighting bad school experiences by court.

    A couple of he-special members pursued a hate vendetta against me into 2 other groups, one claiming I was "booted out" - how hateful is that? - for not being a parent or home educator, when they always knew I'm not a parent and you didn't have to be and Jacqui was not then a home educator either. Yahoo advised me to give the police a statement about this, and the police have clearly not done anything so I spoke out about that at the Sep 18 meeting of the Scottish parliament's public Cross Party Group on ASD and the education minister's reply led to submitting a legal statement on the experience to the education department, as part of his consultation on how to listen to children when taking needs decisions in education. At this moment it became the fault of the 25 how I had testified about them, and so any further cause to email them ended, there was now an irreparable ethical breach with them that can be followed up in the ASD scene's contacts with government on implementing the Scottish education bill.

    While I was doing this, an outstanding nutcase from he-special, called Beryl, had been working herself up into such a frenzy of hate towards me that she started sending a stream of sexually libellous hate mails to an organisation whose website I have some writing on, in which she accused me of having been expelled from twice as many web groups as she had ever in fact known me in, and mentioned nothing of a group I knew her expelled from. By this time I was a diagnosed aspie, while she was calling me a spuriously self-diagnosed one. My contact knew enough about my experience to know exactly where Beryl's efforts to harrass her were coming from. Beryl openly and recklessly stated, in this illegal hate campaign, that she was doing it on behalf of Luke Jackson and in admiration of him! Obviously he knew nothing of Beryl's misconduct, but it must be remarked that to admire a teenager by acting like this in his name constitutes maltreatment.

    When the Jacksons were on TV last summer(2003), I wrote recorded delivery to BBC viewer and listener correspondence saying the documentary would be unbalanced unless they publicly exposed my experience, as the bad hidden underside of the Jacksons' publicity machine. I also consider it child exploitation that the BBC ignored this, and I put this too into the parliamentary process so that it is on record that the BBC violated the workings of the Scottish legislative process by this. The documentary told the country Jacqui is mega university qualified in sociology of conflict resolution! The he-special experience, not told to the country, shows this is a joke. She looked the other way while an aspie was backstabbed.

    All this shows Luke Jackson is the front face of a ruthless adult publicity machine and the adults who claim to admire him care nothing for the ideas he expressed on social peace, and don't follow them in practice. They want to continue behaving in ways that are totally against that and abusing his readers. Mind, he has a responsibility to object to this if his social peace ideas are to be genuine. [[ News 8 July 2004: his renouncing of his former opposition to homework, absurdly just because a sister had a good "processing" experience she could have had identically with work done voluntarily, let down all his admirers. This makes the Jackson literature just fickle and not to be relied on, doesn't it?]]

    The education bill was passed by the Scottish parliament on April 1 (I know, but it was) and it includes the policy on consulting children in decisions, that I and my friendly contact wanted and my persecutors in he-special did not want.

    Maurice Frank 13 Apr 2004

    [[ News- Aug 2, Daily Telegraph, sourced from Parents Against Injustice "The parents of a child with Asperger's Syndrome fear adoption after being accused of neglecting him by not sending him to school - they say he can't cope." Answer that, disgusting wishful thinkers like Beryl - these are the parents in the front line of oppression who he-special let down. What do you expect happens to these kids' chance to become child authors? ]]

    www.rxpgonline.com/1843100983.isbn - A link to a very perceptive teenager's discovery of common phrases that prove Jacqui a joint writer of F+G.

  • gfcf kids uk

    This Yahoo group is advertised in both the books published under Luke Jackson's name but described in the Times 16 Aug 02 as more his mother's creations and under heavy adult control really. This should count as a nice thing to say, because it helps show nothing that happened was blamable on LJ, it is the adults around him who at present should be blamed for wanting to continue to advertise GFCF Kids UK. However, in imminent adulthood he too will have a public responsibility to disown it.

    Despite its name it is not a children's group and it covers GFCF diet knowledge for all ages, the name just comes from the diet being targetted at children, as with the original US based group GFCF Kids.

    Accordingly, it was entirely in keeping with the way it was advertised, for any adult who has newly learned about AS to join GFCF Kids UK to see if it helped with learning more about the AS scene and whether the diet was personally relevant or not. I don't have any serious food problems but there is dairy intolerance in my family and a history of angina and strokes. I chose from older childhood onwards that I felt more comfortable eating less dairy than the addictive quantities my family consumed every day: my grandparents were so militant that butter and full cream milk are both nicer than the alternatives, that I caused surprise by not sharing that perception. This family history should show that though I'm not on GFCF diet, learning more about it was relevant to understanding my medical background.

    All I ever did in GFCF Kids UK was post 1 message which was a technical enquiry about how offlist email worked. It appeared to me that perfectly decent friendly answers to this were posted. I had never given any personal or medical information to anyone. Then after only a week of membership, I was banned, and never told any reason why.

    This was in Jan 2003, before any of the personal trouble with he-special-uk and consequent hate vendetta had ever happened. Behaviour like this is emotional and medical abuse of the public, perpetrated exploitatively through a child figurehead. I know, it's a secret how, that Jackson participation in GFCF Kids UK has practically stopped entirely since last summer, but advertising of GFCF Kids UK is not being retracted. The library service in Fife was willing to put in writing its sympathies for this being an unjust experience, admitting an ethical question mark over stocking the Jacksons' books in its autism collection. Sunderland university however has not answered my notice that it and all GFCF diet promoters and parents will be child harmers unless - they automatically disown GFCF Kids UK and all sources that advertise it and all experiential findings on the diet that it has ever made known. Jessica Kingsley and the major book chains have a public health responsibility too. You are judge of whether they are meeting it.

    The justification of using such serious words as "child harm" is proved by a tip off I received from a parent, explaining that intolerant behaviour exists in the GFCF scene and may explain GFCF Kids UK's behaviour as paranoia to keep all its members under doctrinal control. There are fundamentalists of GFCF diet, who rigidly want children taken off both gluten and casein in every case, not to have the effects of removing each protein tested separately as the Sunderland Protocol advises. I had already seen arguments like this conducted on the Allergy Induced Autism website, and been suspicious, considering the full GFCF diet takes away a whopping great range of sources of nutrition. This parent told me she had a soya allergic child who would be undernourished following the full GFCF diet, so as a responsible parent she had reintroduced casein (dairy), and for this she had been screamed at abusively and called a bad parent, by a fanatic who runs an influential GFCF food shop service.

    Folk often selfishly don't think they should have to disown groups themselves in solidarity with just 1 socially wronged member. This case shows that all who take that view are party to empowering fanatics to put at risk children's access to adequate food.

    Maurice Frank, 20 Apr 2004

  • WrongPlanet.net

    SF has had 2 different bizarre and inflammatory clashes with former members of Wrong Planet.



    1. If any moderators of Wrong Planet are reading, you should know something concerning.
    An ex-moderator of your site, called Catffienated, who said you thought was "emotionally unstable", made a comment about it on SF's messageboard section about Aspies For Freedom. In reply he was asked if he wished to contribute to SF an account of the problem he considered he had with Wrong Planet. Then he posted his full story about it: that is in reply to being asked if he had such a contribution. That obviously was a making of his contribution, and permission for it to appear on this site.

    Yet now he has not only withdrawn it, which of course he is entitled to do, but he has denied that permission to use it was ever given. He has made that accusation publicly as well as privately. This is malicious and not true, and accompanied by an aggro threat about "need for more drastic action".

    Now - as he is a member of AFF and had come to favour it factionally against Wrong Planet, don't you find it fits the pattern of legalistic games by AFF members who have closed their minds against hearing of anything bad happening in it. Devotees of a cause. Don't you find it in character? Comment from WP would have been interesting: is his behaviour towards this site an example of the same emotional instability as towards your site?
    - site

    25 Feb 2005

    - following which, as long later as Sep 29, AFF demanded to have made clear that Catffienated's actions were a "personal situation" it was not involved in as a group and had no control over. It could have had that done at any time.




    2. Paul McGee, who likes to call himself Pikachu, despite being banned from Wrong Planet and having his own site exposing an alleged "great net scam" there, has the illogical double standard to disapprove of SF, on grounds that he prefers AS forums not to be subjected to public critique such as SF causes them. He does not explain how else personal injustices should be prevented or fought. His site, what's more, does exactly the same thing as SF, concerning the way he thinks Wrong Planet is run. The difference is that his site isn't at all sensibly written, it's a lot of rants.
    A link to his site appeared in the original text of another item in SF, and was removed by the item's writer after he objected to it. But his manner of objecting to it was to issue to SF an ultimatum demanding the link's removal within a matter of hours, accompanied by legal threats. "You have 12 hours to comply, and just to show you I'm serious about taking legal action you have 6 hours to comply. Any attempt to reply to this email will leave you with 30 seconds to comply and remove that URL Now." - absurd!
    (i) It was the item writer's absolute choice to remove the link, and SF is bound to comply with that. But there are no valid legal threats against a link appearing for purposes of information - that happens all over the web! Links are made for critical purposes on many sites.
    (ii) How many websites have administrators sitting by a computer permanently, 24/7, able to make changes at the instant they are requested? SF certainly hasn't. It is not technically reasonable for anyone to request, let alone demand, that anything on SF is changed within a time limit measured in hours. It may simply take longer than that before the email is read!! Suppose it took 2 or 3 days to get through? Anyone with common sense, dealing with a website of the old SF's size or with a blog, can reason that out, unless they are just being inflammatory.
    Pikachu went on to deny it was legal for SF to publish for its own protection the above relevant excerpt from an email of baseless legal threats. Yet his own Wrong Planet Scam website is full of unauthorised quotes from the Wrong Planet site and from a chat he had with its head Alex Plank, made to illustrate his point. So what Pikachu himself does on the site he was so concerned not to have linked to from here, is exactly the same thing as he wrongly accused it of being illegal for SF to do.
    In the end, we should have guessed - it turned out he too is associated with AFF. He has a blog, which is dotted with fandom for Gareth Nelson expressed in OTT terms resembling religious worship, using words like "hail" and "almighty" and clearly linked to their shared work on another website. The psychology of devotees of a cause again: illuminated why his attitude to threats was so wonky and wild.
    7 Sep 05

    Sep 14 - on seeing this Pikachu mailed in irately demanding to take personal responsibility for his own views and have AFF recognised as "nothing to do with this." That's fine, AFF is not responsible for his actions, it's just his factional sympathies for AFF and against the folk it has hurt that are an insight into his judgment.
    In a blog entry of Sep 13, he accuses "the owner of Spectrum Fairness" of "sucking up to Wrong Planet and Alex Plank", though no views for or against Wrong Planet and Alex Plank appear anywhere on SF. Alongside making up that story about an innocent person he accuses SF of making up stories about innocent people! and of containing lies. But he does not itemise these accusations at all, and SF has already invited him to use the right to reply against anything on SF, not only about himself, whose accuracy he thinks he can fault - and he hasn't done it. So he's just ranting hatefully, isn't he? On his 2 sites, which (Sep 14) he mailed in to strongly deny are hate sites though they contain statements of the form "I hate you". It's not rational to take the position: that he can expose his feelings of unfairness towards Wrong Planet and call that truth but insist that other people's feelings of unfairness towards AFF must be lies because he personally doesn't want to believe anything against his friends.

  • National Autistic Society - your involvement

    This is a Scottish parliament report on adult services. Scroll to and read the end sentence, which shows the National Autistic Society claiming to embrace the democratic involvement of aspies in improving the nature of our scene. This should be argued to include fulfilling the function of the SF site.

    You heard it here: the NAS was caught here saying it will start being responsive to ordinary aspies - which of course it still isn't. For years the position has been that NAS offices and officers don't even respond in writing or email, to ordinary aspies' issues and concerns that they cynically want to keep the NAS out of, but they are willing to give their backstabbing answers verbally when they meet you.

    The NAS is sponsored by Vodafone, btw.


    The Same As You? noted that there are not enough facilities for assessing and diagnosing ASD for older children and adults in smaller local authority areas and in rural areas. The Scottish Executive’s ASD Reference Group, Sub-group Diagnosis recently held a professional study day which, amongst many issues, looked at developing national standards for diagnosis of children and adults.

    Services

    ASD is wrongly perceived by some to be a childhood condition: ASD is a lifelong condition and children with ASD will grow up to be adults with ASD.

    Consequently, thousands of children in Scotland will soon need to access adult services. Currently, appropriate services which meet the needs of adults with ASD is patchy. The forthcoming NAS publication A Place in Society highlights the fact that statutory entitlements available to children and young people with ASD ‘disappear in adulthood, with entitlement to services typically dependent on an individual’s presenting needs. There is no equivalent for adults of the raft of current policy initiatives designed to join-up children’s services’.

    The Same As You? said that ‘even when there is a diagnosis, services may not be available as no agency sees it as their responsibility to provide them’. A survey found that adults with Asperger Syndrome receive either mental health or learning disability services, but often there is a lack of clarity between these services within social work or between social work and health. Many people on the medium to higher end of the spectrum are often assessed to be ineligible for learning disability services because of their average or above average IQ levels.

    Moreover, the recent Scottish Executive review of therapy services found that increased demand for therapy services have come from ‘children with complex health needs and children with autism’. Yet, when it came to adults, the review found that there were no adults with ASD and without an accompanying learning disability waiting to access speech and language therapy services in 2002. The review goes on to say that for this group of adults, ‘there are indications that services for the last client group are poorly defined and there are gaps in service provision’.

    Forty-nine percent of adults with ASD are still living at home with their parents with 8% living independently; only 6% of adults are in full-time employment with 4% in part-time employment; almost a third of adults are not involved in any social activities; only 11% of carers said that the adult they care for had ever used an independent advocate with 54% of carers being unaware of an independent advocacy organisation in their area which the person they care for could access.

    Types of services

    Although current provision is patchy, there are examples of specific services provided by statutory agencies and voluntary organisations across Scotland. For example, the adult autism co-ordinator for Lothian Primary Care Trust, Jane Neil-MacLachlan runs the Regional Autistic Spectrum Disorder Consultancy Service for adults with ASD. This is a multi-disciplinary assessment and diagnostic service for adults in the South East Scotland area.

    Voluntary sector organisations provide a variety of services for adults such as residential and day services, outreach services, short break/respite, supported employment, social groups and support groups such as the Scottish Society for Autism (SSA), The National Autistic Society (NAS), Moving Intowork, Edinburgh Lothian Asperger Society (ELAS), Parents of ASD Adults (PASDA), People with High Functioning Autism (PHAD), Strathclyde Autistic Society, Grampian Autistic Society and Fife Action on Autism, amongst many others.

    The Scottish Executive recently announced funding of £1.5 million to pilot a one-stop-shop of service provision for adults with ASD in the Greater Glasgow and Lothian area. It is envisaged that the projects will be an access point for adults with ASD and their families to get advice, information and support on diagnosis, health issues, training and employment, and much more. Evaluation of the projects will inform the development of services for adults across Scotland.

    Complementing this work, the NAS recently launched a consultation on a proposal for a National Autism Plan for Adults. The aim of the proposal is to create a single UK-wide good practice document for providing services for people with ASD aged 14 and upwards to assist policymakers and practitioners in service planning and provision. The proposal state that the recommendations and outputs should be driven by the views and experiences of adults with ASD who will be involved at every stage of its development. In addition, policy makers, professionals and members of the academic and research community from across the UK should be involved in framing NAPA. The proposed themes NAPA will cover are: contact with statutory services (e.g. health, education, social services), employment/meaningful activity, lifelong learning, relationships, impact on carers, and leisure activities. The consultation closed on 1st May 2004.

    Complementing this work, the NAS recently launched a consultation on a proposal for a National Autism Plan for adults. the aim of the proposal is to create a single UK-wide good practice document for providing services for people with ASD aged 14 and upwards to assist policymakers and practitioners in service planning and provision. The proposal states that the recommendations and outputs should be driven by the views and experiences of adults with ASD who will be involved at every stage of its development.

    12 May 2004

  • libel and the Feb15 European Court Case

    In view of the situation with Aspies For Freedom, the news today {as was} Feb 15 of the McLibel Two's victory in The European Court of Human Rights was of interest. These were 2 ecological campaigners in London who were sued for libel in England by Macdonald's over some leaflets about agricultural practice in Brazil. They had to conduct their own defence for financial reasons because of not getting legal aid. They have now won a decision by the European Court that this situation deprived them of the power to present their case properly, so they did not get a fair hearing. Fair "trial" the news says, though this was a civil court case not a trial.

    Many big organisations, in environmentalism and overseas aid just as in Asperger's, are unaccountable and just publicise whatever material they like without giving a damn about listening to ordinary people including their members. They won't like to hear, and have already not been publicising, something that voids what the McLibel 2 have achieved. The European Court of Human Rights is a void and illegal court that has not legally existed since 7 July 1999! The entire media have covered that up.

    You might think Spectrum Fairness would welcome what the court has done today. We would, in principle, but that is no excuse for silence about the true position of the ECHR, which the media have covered up deliberately for 6 years because it shifts power in favour of ordinary people. Nevertheless, it's on publicly traceable record through petitions 730/99 in the European, PE6 and PE360 in the Scottish, parliaments. Since 7 July 1999 all court or other legal decisions are "open to open ended fault finding by all parties and recapitulation therupon" instead of final.

    This, which I shall term "the court change", follows from European Court of Human Rights case 41597/98 on an insurance scam of evictions of unemployed people from hotels. This case referred to violation of civil status from 13 May 1997, yet the admissibility decision claimed the last inland decision stage was on 4 Aug 1995. ECHR made itself illegal, by claiming finality in issuing a syntactically contradictory nonsense decision that reverses the physics of time. It violates every precedent of member countries' laws recognising the chronology of cause and effect, in evidence.

    The European Convention's section on requiring a court to exist, now requires its member countries to create a new schismatic ECHR that removes the original's illegality, by its decisions not being final. It follows this requires inland courts to be compatible with open ended decisions and doing inland work connected to them. Hence inland decisions also cease to be final and become open ended, in the 46 Council of Europe countries.

    The concept of "leave to appeal" is abolished and judges no longer have to be crawled to as authority figures. Every party in a case is automatically entitled to lodge a fault finding against any decision, stating reasons. These are further return faultable, including by the original fault finder, stating reasons. A case reaches its outcome when all fault findings have been answered or accepted.

    This is now the true position around all court cases, including libel cases. There is no finality of outcome, and the court change can be used to fault-find for financial fairness in the process of conducting cases. It is a BIG democratic advance - if it was publicly known and hence operational.

    15 Feb 05

    This new principle applies to every bid AFF makes to destroy SF.

    [Oct 3: A curiosity. The Margaret Thatcher Foundation of all people says it is sure her lawyers are aware of the court change and would apply it to her present problem with the DeLay investigation (on US Senator corruption) if necessary. Well now, if that's the case and said on record, they could choose to make the court change known to the public. Don't see much sign of it happening yet!]

  • Aspies For Freedom


    Aspies For Freedom, the least free aspie site you have ever seen, first came to SF's notice by the sudden shock authoritarian takeover it suffered in July 2004.

    In the beginning it claimed to be a movement for self expression and advocacy and lobbying for aspies, so that we wouldn't be spoken for by professionals to our disadvantage. It opened as a forum, intending to grow into "real life" activities from there. But the members were only able to post their thoughts on group democracy, and how there should be no bannings without a democratic process, trustingly without the moderators ever actually implementing them. This was fatal: on July 10 moderator Amy introduced a regime where she could:

    • ban at her discretion all further discussion of a topic, at any time, without allowing a member about whom personal comments have been posted since his own last post, to answer them. This constituted AFF libelling members. No forum can operate this way in legal fairness to its members: you can't start a topic knowing you will be allowed to finish, or to react if topics are edited in misleading ways.
    • ban certain members from posting on certain topics, and without even telling the other members so. This was claimed to be for the sake of keeping a "balance" of flowing topics, but it means political manipulation and censorship, and falsely making members look like they have nothing more to say on the topic by choice. This was an experienced event, and AFF members at the time saw that onsite reference to it was not contested by the leaders.
    • take moderation decisions like these without allowing members to argue against them onsite. The claimed reason was to prevent arguments developing onsite! That is a dictatorship, with political repression done smarmily behind the scenes.
    • have the final say on whether a member has been personally misrepresented or not, again without allowing the member's arguments to be put onsite.
    • decide arbitrarily that some members don't have to answer any questions about anything they write, but others do.
    • agree with a member to discuss a problem in the chatroom at a fixed time, but come that time, hold him to ransom at banning point with the authoritarianism "I've made my decision ... are you going to accept it? ... if you don't you will have separated yourself from our cause ".
    • ban members for expressing an opinion, on another site, of what future policy directions will mean he can or can't continue to support AFF. Members of proper political movements are allowed to express opinions on their future course, but in this group there are signs onsite of a purge of members. You notice that bannings are not under democratic control after all!
    • refuse, with a selfish "I don't want to get involved", to solve a personal problem between 2 members offsite in this obviously sensible way: to tell each of them all the ways the other still feels misrepresented, exchange their answers and remove anything mutually offensive from them, then post the agreed final result onsite in a locked topic.

    It had shown a pattern of disposing of members' problems behind the scenes, off the record. It necessitated raising with the spectrum services community a legal alert against any involvement by AFF in advocacy or lobbying, on the reasoned grounds that it is made medically unethical by its social unfairness hence can be expected to hurt those who approach it for help. An immediate start was made on this in Scotland. Wouldn't you think spectrumites should actually be protected from AFF? It became a ruin in 2 months flat, and it should now be analysed historically as a case study of how freedom movements for any oppressed group go wrong if there is no practically working check on the use of power. Compare it to the loss of freedom in the early Soviet Union, completed by the Kronstadt sailors' massacre in 1921, after the revolution was launched on a theory of trust in the oppressed group's better natures and no checks on power had ever been allowed to be introduced.

    Aspies often like to generalise that we are more aware of personal fairness than the mob is, but we still can't all be trusted to be fair characters when given leadership roles. Also, any aspie who knowing these things chooses to remain a participating member of AFF is automatically party to an abuse of the public's confidence.

    In a message board that SF opened for the AFF members at the time of the authoritarian coup, AFF's Gareth logged in to write a serious libel and to reply sympathetically to an AFF member, and choose to keep him as an AFF member, called Bawbag who writes extremely sinister physically threatening and foul-mouthed messages!! For over a year, a query at the logical implication of sympathy for the violence Bawbag was writing about, sat on SF's old site. Suddenly only on 29 Sep 05, Gareth on behalf of AFF asked for it to be recorded flatly that they have no sympathy for violent behaviour. About time! There was never any unfair accusation: he allowed his loose words to Bawbag to carry that implication and he should have denied it promptly a year ago. At the same time, Gareth accused that the talk of a "takeover" of AFF was a lie because he and Amy founded AFF. But nothing conflicting with or denying that has been said anywhere. To change the way they ran the site, ending a democratic pooling of ideas where there was no active leadership and putting the leaders' will in charge on pain of exclusions, is an "authoritarian takeover".

    Meanwhile, on 16 July 2004, within a week of the takeover, AFF closed its original site at a speed that looked like legal panic and opened its present one with less than a third as many members. On July 22 SF reported: take a look at this page to see how AFF is being moderated on its new site, and how several users have reacted against their treatment!! Within a few months they had wiped the topic linked to, hence we will keep available the message concerned, here!

    On Aug 15 Gareth's family contacted Spectrum Fairness and made known how AFF's founders and leaders, Amy (Amber really) Roberts and Gareth Nelson based in North Wales, were a socially divisive pair of lovers aged 34 and 16. The point of a site having several moderators, besides workload, is for them to be fairly unpartisan in their actions. This couple, working together with their shared agenda, obviously never were. So AFF was founded less fairly constituted and under tighter control than any of the original members could tell. It's all their personal reckless escapade.

    The following email has been sitting on SF, published with consent, ever since that time, and it is public insight into where AFF came from:

    I have read your bit about the above site and agree with most of what you are saying. What you may not be aware of is the fact that Gareth is our son who quite suddenly left the family home at the age of 16 to live with Amy (34). He turned 17 when he was there and we can't get him back.
    It is destroying the family. In the meantime I have certain traits of the syndrome but at the age of 46 it is impossible for me to be diagnosed as such....
    It hurts to be cut off from him by her. e-mails are not responded too.
    I am the ogre because I do not understand what is going on.
    EXCUSE ME? Do you know of any way we can get him back? Is there anything in the groups that you know who could help us?
    Sincerely,
    Phil Nelson.

    Any readers who know of leads that could help him, can still post them on the message board or as comments.

    BTW you certainly can be diagnosed AS at 46 or older. At any age, it is best to establish your AS first with a group if you can find one, because understanding of AS is still inadequately spread among psychiatrists, and psychiatrists' politically abusable power of opinion makes them dangerous to go anywhere near unless you are known to an AS community as mentally healthy before you go to one: then it becomes entirely safe!

    • All spectrumites should have nothing to do with the Autistic Pride Day first declared for 18 June 2005, which was AFF's invention. Pride in dictatorship, pride in telling the world that spectrumites are gullible zombies? No, that's a con, don't have anything to do with it. What's more, if you browse the AFF site to see how they have been discussing promoting this (without any success), you will notice that it's all about trying to make socially uppitty connections with the NAS and with professors who go around lecturing in favour of prescribing drugs. AFF has COMPLETELY ABANDONED the line it was founded to take, only last year, against the medical establishment!!!!! This is exactly like the ruling pigs in George Orwell's Animal Farm, when they abandoned "all animals are equal" and made rulers' deals with the neighbouring human farmers. And of course like the real-life emergence of arrogant elites in communism which Animal Farm was satirising. AFF now only exists as a name for its leaders to use in craving for influence among the same medical toffs as they created AFF to oppose.

    • Now, at the date of posting this, AFF's purging of its stalwart New York based supporter Joe Mele, known in forums as "the AS Man", shows that it is turning in on itself and devouring its own like extremist or revolutionary movements often do, like Robespierre. It comes a couple of weeks after AFF also purged the founder of its first local group in Australia. If AFF finally collapses because its leaders risibly destroy every AFF initative with any automomy over its own actions, including every local activity remote from North Wales, then its dozens of purge victims can just watch its nemesis with satisfaction. But we aren't there yet, and meanwhile AFF's self-appointed claims to speak for the world's aspies in an advocacy role, starting Autistic Pride Day and getting in New Scientist, while in reality controlling and hurting aspies, make it really dangerous.
    • Yahoo group FAMSecretSociety is a sympathetic spot for anyone who has suffered at AFF's hands, or indeed have been hurt by other forum groups. As such, it can be said at present that it is being run really carefully with an eye on members' fairness to each other, and the only folk it has ever banned have been the perpetators of bans elsewhere who brought to there the spiteful arguments for them. No matter how nice any group is, it's always an active work to keep it that way,and SF stands as an independent failsafe. AFF itself seemed decent in its first month of existence, that's how the authoritarian takeover was such a sudden abuse of trust towards the early members - but hindsight shows that AFF had always been deceptively under Amy and Gareth's site control from the beginning.

      When the purged speak their minds on other forrms about what has happened to them, any AFF spokesmen present in the same forums have tended to accuse them of mental health conditions and to accuse that their aspieship is fake. These are pretty malicious forms of harrassment. Harrassment is when you follow a person with attacks and slurs, a series of actions, in the places where they are. By comparison, what is not harrassment is for an item to simply sit on a website for a long period, but AFF has regularly called it a harrassment instead of simply replying to it. AFF proved irreversibly how rattled it is, indeed. The aspie public have a consumer right to scrutinise the total lack of ethics of a membership group that claims to be an ambitious global movement for them.

    • On 5 Feb 05 Gareth emailed a third party with no responsibility for SF's content concerning AFF, threatening to sue for libel. These emails were copied onto the old SF site, in our defence and as a form of giving AFF its right to reply - which it hadn't asked for! It was done with a promise that the emails would be removed at any time at AFF's demand provided the legal threats in them were withdrawn - this never happened. Publishing the emails made clear to all readers of SF that Gareth denied the truth of everything said about AFF on SF. The emails did not contain any proposed refutation of any of the details, though, while everything on SF was sourced - hence wasn't libellous. That attempt at threatening was just stupid.
    • But then on Sep 29 came, out of nowhere and with no clear explanation for the timing, AFF's intervention with domain host 1and1 which got a result. 1and1 reacted by the illegal flagrant authoritarian bullying of SF and refusal to answer even legal challenges to its own behaviour, making it guilty of the offences listed in this site's intro. It was out of character with what until now has usually been seen to happen when malicious accusations are made against any website. Not high-handed non-listening bullying dictation to comply with everything the accuser says with no interest in scrutiny of the facts. Many websites that unlike SF contain shocking or illegal content, and far more personal content than SF ever has, carry on quite undisturbed. Are there any hidden agendas in the control-minded doctors' levels of the "autistic spectrum" scene, that are working in AFF's favour and helping it with backing to carry out legal intimidations? Because it's very desirable to the drug promoters who want to lure aspies into pharmaceutical dependency, and to the big psychologists who would prefer aspies seen as disordered and in need of intervention, to encourage AFF in its multi-continent claims to represent all aspies without in reality taking any notice of them?

      In one of 1and1's phone contacts with SF during the crisis, when its dictatorial hit-man Choudhry was annoyed with not being blindly obeyed, he let slip a mention of contacts by a lawyer hired by AFF. This is something 1and1 never mentioned in writing and were clearly trying deceitfully to conduct the whole crisis without ever mentioning. That's all the facts we've got: speculate as you will. The cost of hiring a lawyer just to posture with is not huge, but following up the postures you imagine would have a greater cost. If 1and1 were seriously and behind-the-scenes being made to fear a follow-up, only financially because there can be no fear of follow-ups legally when AFF is in the wrong, then what forces were backing it on AFF's side? or would have any motive to?

  • turning SF's case into a leverage for reform of the SSA and NAS

    What was done to the original SF site was medical deception and an extension of a personal cross-site stalking by AFF. 1and1 was told this and disregarded it. That makes its behaviour knowingly illegal with evidence recording that it did not even dispute so.

    A notification of it has been made to a relevant police office. Any other domain host tempted to behave in the same way as 1and1 did, is hereby told that you are constrained by this: it would be an interference in a matter with an already preliminary crime report.

    I say "preliminary" because it was just a declaration that the case exists, made to refer to in SF's own protection if needed. Before any full reporting of it, I declared an entitlement to have the SSA and NAS assist in showing how the stalking and the suppression of info impact the whole spectrumite community. This puts the SSA and NAS in the position that they are legal witnesses, the whole community can be told so and by it they are pulled into taking an active part in protecting personal fairness against socially ruthless groups. Something they have previously resisted doing, despite it having always been an axiomatic ethical duty for them. Delivering this change in the SSA and NAS would damn force them to be less arrogant and remote than in the past, and than still at present in the NAS's case, and help with directing a lobby at the police against any possibility of choosing not to bother, on grounds of obligations to a whole social group's safety. Also, if you don't like the word "autistic" in the SSA/NAS's names, or used about aspies, that is no reason for not wanting such a change in these 2 groups to happen. Instead, it's all the more reason why you should want it.

    I am also told by the Blogspot company (not the hosts here, so I thank them for their independent information) that it is against Section 230(c) of the Communications Decency Act to remove material in response to arbitrary allegations of libel. So there you have it: on Blogspot's legal information this site accuses 1and1 of breaking the law, and while this isn't libel anyway because it's verified, under the same legal terms 1and1 can't get it wiped by saying "we allege libel."

    Putting this in place, turning this case into a leverage for reform of the SSA and NAS, was necessary before restoring SF content about AFF and analysing why like the pigs in Animal Farm, the leaders of AFF have become indistinguishable from the medical elites they started out protesting against.

  • Wikipedia: a jungle of bullying and group hatefulness

    Wikipedia, the online encyclopedia project that invites the public to write and edit its pages, is a scam and a sham. It has got to be exposed as a HATE WEBSITE, a place of the worst forms of group bullying and acceptance of aggressive stalking, with openly emotionally abusive administrators who gloat online of having the choice to be as unfair as they like and can't be challenged.

    Penalties actually get worsened if you challenge their correctness, though nothing in Wikipedia's rules tells you that before it happens, and there is no mechanism for ensuring you can give a defence. These are demonstrated facts you can explore online.

    ON 27 NOV 2005 Wikipedia's founder Jimmy Wales

    openly wrote: "The HardAsses give credibility to the notion that going along with the
    mentorship of a NiceGuy is a Good Idea if you want to stay around."
    Is that how you like being treated in everyday life? Is that the type of society that deserves trust? Then keep away from Wikipedia and tell everyone about this!!

    All responsible people must keep away from Wikipedia, anyone who takes part in it knowing what is happening there is tainted.

    Jun 28: Here, a Wikipedia admin simply says "piss off", to an ill-treated member who described the alternatives' corruption when it was proposed to exclude objections to blocks from being made on the en-l email list any more!

    Admins in Wikipedia

    act alone and can block a user temporarily or permanently by personal judgment, the only check on which is their group popularity. There is no defence process to go through, against personal bullying decisions remaining in effect, that is judged by more than just the first other passing admin who wants to act. They are willing to put blocks on an indivdual whose view an ugly mob has already been stirred up against, at key moments when opponents are threatening you with lurid accusations - and without punishing the opponents for that, knowing inter-user threats are in name against the rules! The block's technical effects then gag you from taking part in the enquiry or dispute resolution or "request for comment" pages, or from starting a vote process against an article page that is entirely self-promotional for your threateners. So you see, there are no rules and no ethics in Wikipedia, because petty office-holders are entirely free to abuse their office by disabling your use of exactly the means to seek to uphold the rules at exactly the time when you need to - and appealing for another admin's intervention does not help. Besides, the nature of the dispute resolution system for those few issues that for appearance's sake ever reached it, was described by a user here as deliberately being full of discretionary catch-alls that ensure the admin will always win.

    They will not back a user against whom other users bring in feuds from outside Wikipedia and make character attacks upon out of nowhere - which is stalking, isn't it. Hence that gets done, exactly because organised intimidatory interests know how corrupt the system is.

    Some people who care deeply

    about independent media and circulating ideas, think Wikipedia should be supported while it's there, in the interests of spreading neutral facts against business agendas and helping to oppose Western wars in the Middle East, before the site eventually gets pulled under big business control. These voices are misguided because - it has already passed that point! It is already an unscrupulously controlled business game rotten with hateful personal backstabbing and bullying. The whole subtle nature of the scam is that there is a pull of wishful hope against admitting the point is already passed, but this is exactly the same as with mainstream TV news. As long as you are only interested in the article pages that matter less, you are less likely to experience the admin system and find out what is really going on. A source who these things were shared with, has noticed just in reading Wikipedia, "there do seem to be some nasty characters on there", and to illustrate the non-neutral political bias, some of them in the dispute pages "think mentioning anything negative but factual about Reagan or Bush constitutes bias." Whether you are against or for Reagan (remember Wikipedia does history!) and Bush, you can see how that is a misuse of peer group status to control factuality, and would be on behalf of any political side. So the neutrality is subverted by group bullying, while the lying claim to neutrality is kept as good PR.

    You are officially entitled to challenge blocks, but in practice their effect includes blocking your access to the pages for raising issues of dispute, where you could do that!!! Work that out. Challenges made in private are not passed on either, all a private email to the same admin as blocked you gets is a swaggering laugh in your face written openly on your "user talk page". Wikipedia's forum section "Wikien-l" is separate from the Wikipedia page system, so you remain able to post there, but it is a side-alley only read by a few users. So what happens if you post there pointing out the standards of fair play that have been broken by 1 admin acting in a biased way, who penalised only the victimised side and not both sides for exactly identical actions, and evidencing group bullying? Officially, any user is entitled to make a challenge like this. In reality, it gets punished very quickly, within 2 hours, with the gag of permanent blocking. Actually for challenging the rightness of a temporary penalty already imposed at 1 person's discretion without the community hearing a defence case, you get punished more heavily. If in exercising the officially admitted right to challenge a block, you claim any actual right to fair play, other admins count this as the offence of "making legal threats"! and it is a reason for getting rid of you straight away. That is a mediaeval level of totalitarianism..

    Just contemplate what it means that the figures who run Wikipedia deliberately invented a rule against "legal threats" to give themselves that power. The power to reject on principle any duty of fair play in operating in practice the policy of neutral page content, and to behave by any bullying group psychology that may take the fancy of a group's mood. No legal threats between users while editing pages is fair enough, but to use the same policy to gag the claiming of any rights to access the dispute-solving processes when 1 person has blocked your access to them, is CORRUPTION DECEIVING THE PUBLIC. To have dispute-sharing pages that exist in name alongside blocks imposable by 1 tyrant at any moment that prevent you using them, is a deceit, an abuse of public trust, and a deliberate arrangement for corrupt exercise of tyranny throughout the Wikipedia and for emotional abuse. But this makes its ENTIRE content an illegal public deception and scam.

    The entire tone of the Wikien-l forum section is power-bragging and taunting and gloating and macho. Anyone can read it and see. In the archive for August mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-August/thread.html the very first topic is called "abuse of power by admins as usual". What they openly say in public at Wikien-l includes "You are not entitled to anything" and "Wikipedia is not a democracy." These public statements are Wikipedia admin admitting Wikipedia has no rules and LIES to the public in claiming it has. Wikipedia quite openly says, as a "private organisation" if we don't want to uphold any ethics in your case we won't. If you get into any disagreement with a hot-headed group of bullies who are determined to control an article page, you kept getting thrown back in your face, swaggering bullying assertions that whatever the group chooses to say shall rule as the consensus, and this matters more than the publicly claimed policy of neutral page content. This happens because they know the corruption. Admins encourage it, while it is not threatening (as they suggest) to state the serious wrongs that would be committed if Wikipedia as a community claimed to have a discretionary choice not to find in the victim's favour in such a situation. Any organisation that decides to take offence at being told it does not have a discretionary choice to bully, is corrupt.

    Look here mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2005-September/028139.html where they openly tell a user in Australia who had been contributing to articles on democracy and constitutions: "We don't want your respect; we want you to go away."

    The only way for the claimed policy of NPOV (neutral point of view) to genuinely exist and not be a lie to the public, is if unconditionally anyone who falls victim to crowd psychology can lay claim to by right, not have to beg for by favour, any measure that prevents a force of group numbers keeping a bullying bias in place. Now, "laying claim to" anything, inherently means being entitled to anything.

    This is actually a case-study in how society emerged from the Middle Ages.

    To have any credible claim to work by any principles, a society must show they operate reliably fairly, and to do that means the people are entitled to it. No way out of that. Hence, as soon as any group tries to follow any policy code like "NPOV", immediately people are entitled to things and all things are not dependent on favour. So, it stands absolutely logically proved:
    either * it's wrong to say to any user ever "you're not entitled to anything",
    or * it's wrong to say to the public that Wikipedia has a neutrality policy that works.

    They can't both be right because anyone can see they contradict each other head-on. At least one must be wrong. Which is it? What this means is perfectly clear - by not having an answer to this, Wikipedia showed for itself why it is illegal. Here we uncover the point where its system breaks down and makes it so.

    Wikipedia admin is actually laying children open to maltreatment of health - and ignores the fact - by allowing the content of its article on AS to be directed utterly by the worst type of group bullying seen in the human animal. It is easily recognised orchestrated by the forces who want to control the public portrayal of AS and force it to fit with the greed interest of large business agendas. Is that what you trust: self-serving groups with no fairness standards who ingratiate with top whitecoats in the pocket of the pharmaceutical interests pushing to get aspies addicted to harmful antidepressants? That's who should force what gets written about AS on a page that claims to be written by the public? The page is under flagrantly vicious control by group force that breaks every claimed rule about Wikipedia's content, this group is biased entirely towards itself, and uses exactly the type of social victimising campaigns that aspies can least cope with, to keep the page's content uncontested by force - and not at all impartial. Consequently the page and all other AS-related ones are a sham abusing the public. It is a demonstrated example of Wikipedia content already being under business forces' control, and this self-inflicted through its abusive disinterest in user fairness.

    Here's a link to a reform proposal

    that Wikipedia ignored, back on July 6, by a user who had seen how unequal numbers of users could pool their editing rights under the "3 reverts" rule to use group numbers to force what an article page shall say. That is a totally corrupt situation in which Wikipedia's entire content carries no credence whatever and so would be illegal for any office to use as an information source on any health issue. Remember, a proposal to reform this anomaly was ignored, that's what changes it into a deliberate injustice.
    Often enough admins take part in this stuff at the same time as acting as judges on it.

    The spectrumite scene has a duty

    of care to its own to cooperate in forming a global alert against Wikipedia's blatant criminality. All organisations and health offices of all kinds have a testable responsibility to help with this, because then the scene on a widespread scale can push for police alerts against Wikipedia for taking part in crimes of stalking. The objective should be internationally a strong enough lobby that the police could be exposed such that they automatically have to choose in favour of doing anything or else be seen as accessory, and Wikipedia's closure is achieved.

    You realise too that by retaining page content that comes from abused and purged users, without their permission, Wikipedia effectively uses stolen writing. Any notion that it received their writing under a license for free use, is voided by Wikipedia not honouring its own terms towards users for solving problems. Hence, to retain any such content in Wikipedia's articles is a copyright breach and an ideas theft, and has been reported to the FBI's internet department accordingly (English Wikipedia being US-based). Every organisation can help to show that the whole spectrumite community needs it followed up: complaint number I05090317204525, 3 Sep 2005. You see, announcing this is not about simple-minded faith that the FBI's internet department would be interested in bothering to do something: you must not be all hardened and world-weary and say, "oh how naive, he thinks the FBI will want to do anything." It's about publicly lobbying for them to bother, by showing how it would be a wrong not to, affecting large numbers of people. We know law enforcement agencies are generally disinterested except to the political class's agenda, but it's wrong to just accept that. It's an important part of effort at active democracy, that you maintain a lobby of public opinion for the principle that law enforcers should bother, and of scrutinising interest in whether they do. This all contributes to keeping the public aware that law enforcement agencies should only be trusted if they are seen to behave with any signs of interest in the ordinary populace, and otherwise the fears of drift towards a police state are given stronger credence.


    But despite all the anger in speaking out, just knowing that the public are seeing through Wikipedia is also a cause for calmly feeling the peace of the just. It was always an implausible project given human nature, that would have to be run with unusually careful devotion to personal fairness to make it work. Any savvy observer would expect a scheme of chaotically editable web-pages to turn out as it has, and as the nature of the fighting leaks out step by step it reduces the site to a point where only the same minds thick enough to trust the gutter press will give it any credence - and they don't read encyclopedias anyway. It is important to expose what's going on and avert people getting hurt, and hope to speed up the end, but Wikipedia's own unviable instability towards facts dooms it.

    28 Aug 2005



    This is dynamite!

    Oct 6 : the words, when leaving Wikipedia just recently, of a former admin + high-level enthusiast who had met Jimmy Wales + other enthusiasts. He accuses them of creating an atmosphere of gagging by fear, just like in communism, that he experienced when watching purges of members.

    mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-October/054949.html

    " Too many admins whose first course is to insult a new
    user in order to see if they get a "reaction" so that they can spank the new user for talking back to an admin.

    I've seen too many admins block accounts for infinite duration on flimsy evidence or mere whim.

    I've seen more accusations thrown around of someone being a "sockpuppet" of another user. Time and again, I looked through the edits, and I didn't see it. Instead, what I saw were users who were systematically hounded until they finally broke down and broke the civility rules, and then as an afterthought someone came up and said "oh, it doesn't matter, they were a sockpuppet of X anyways", thereby removing all culpability on the part of the abusive users who had spent time hounding and abusing the newbie...

    The Wiki is broken. ... We, the admins of wikipedia, broke it. We broke it by being stuck-up jerks. We broke it by thinking we are better than normal editors, by getting full of ourselves. "

    A reply to him: mail.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2006-October/054957.html "We're actually developing a reputation as a place of arrogance and nastiness, a place of heavy-handed thugishness, a place where people treat each other quite badly. That's bad for the project."

    Feb 23: Check out Parker Peters's entry here for Feb 23 on how he had "exposed step by step" the behaviour of administrator cabals, in the Wiki-en-l forum before getting banned from it for it.

  • Mental Health Screening: Mind Freedom International statement

    1 October 2005

    MindFreedom International Statement About Mental Health Screening:

    President Bush proposes making "mental health screening" a "common practice" for adults and children.

    Here is why MindFreedom International opposes these "mental health screening" programs.

    President Bush and his New Freedom Commission on Mental Health recommend screening all Americans for mental health problems starting with youth through their schools. This screening has already started in a number of schools.

    We call for the immediate halt to these screening programs. Instead, we call for the implementation of far better alternatives for mental and emotional care.

    Until a broken and dangerous mental health system is fixed, mental health screening just adds fuel to the fire.

    Screening programs threaten to place hundreds of thousands of American youth on a conveyor belt type approach toward psychiatric labeling and drugging. Current mental health screening programs have specific steps. A screened individual is evaluated for a diagnosis. A diagnosed individual is frequently prescribed psychiatric drugs. For some the end result has even been forced drugging over the objections of the subject and their family (source: Mother Jones 5/05).

    The vast majority of Americans want to ensure that troubled kids and adults receive humane and safe help. However, there is ample evidence that the mental health system in the United States is now causing a great deal of harm.

    For example, the mental health system is based on a diagnostic labeling system that has been shown to be unscientific.

    Also, the Food and Drug Administration has recently acknowledged that anti-depressants carry serious risks to children, adolescents, and adults. Other psychotropic drugs have also been shown to carry serious risks of harm. This is of particular concern because of the skyrocketing rates of prescription of psychotropic drugs of all kinds for children and adolescents.

    Some proponents of screening argue that they are not calling for "universal" or "manadatory" screening. But whatever words are used to describe it, the fact is that massive and extensive screening programs heavily influenced by the psychiatric drug industry are entering many schools today.

    When the President of the United States announces he wants mental health screening of youth to be a "common practice" that is a lot of pressure on schools, kids and families. This is exactly what President Bush did when he endorsed his New Freedom Commission's Goal Four.

    In order to provide help for people who need and want it without causing additional harm, the following safeguards need to be implemented:

    (1) STOP CURRENT SCREENING PROGRAMS IMMEDIATELY

    The moment one applies mental health screening methods such as "TeenScreen" and "TMAP" on the basis of flawed diagnostic systems and questionnaires, one is making the problem worse. Screening misses some people with serious emotional problems on the one hand, and, on the other hand, mistakenly classifies other people as pathological.

    Questionnaires and formal diagnostic interviews often fail to catch kids who are going to kill themselves, for example.

    (2) PAY MORE ATTENTION TO YOUTH IN A COMMON SENSE WAY.

    A child ought to have the opportunity to voluntarily talk with caring adults about the things that are upsetting them in whatever setting they are, including schools. That non-medical, common sense approach is better because it yields real life qualitative information, not simplistic quantitative data like questionnaires.

    (3) FULLY INFORM FAMILIES.

    The public needs to be educated that many current mental health programs may be harmful to one's health. The public needs to hear that psychiatric drug companies helped create and promote many of these screening programs to get more customers for the highest priced drugs.

    Fully informed consent should always be required in any kind of mental health care. Full informed consent means explaining to children and their parents or guardians about the full range of approaches that can be helpful. Families need to know about the hazards of psychotropic drugs and the lack of clinical trials for young subjects. Today, primarily only two approaches are recommended almost exclusively: drugs and traditional types of psychotherapy which tend to be rigid and limited.

    (4) END THE BIAS TOWARD PSYCHIATRIC DRUGS IN MENTAL HEALTH CARE.

    For families who do seek mental and emotional care, there ought to be no cookie-cutter like "algorithm" or "protocol" that unfairly favors the use of psychiatric drugs above all other options. The psychiatric drug industry has unfair influence throughout the mental health system making it unsafe.

    Physical, nutritional or environmental pollutant problems are seldom addressed.

    (5) PROVIDE HUMANE AND SAFE ALTERNATIVES.

    A wide range of alternatives to drugs and traditional psychotherapy must be available to all who seek them. When there are only one or two "choices" for those who are desperate, that is one of the most insidious
    and subtle kinds of coercion.

    (6) ADVOCACY AT ALL LEVELS.

    Effective advocacy programs, including peer support when possible, ought to be widely available to help people gain access to the employment, educational and other social services they may choose.

    Advocates ought to help support the empowerment of individuals and families who wish to avoid unethical professionals and mental health agencies who may exploit and harm them. Advocates must help our democracy get more "hands on" with the mental health system.

    Making screening "common practice" threatens the health and human rights of thousands of Americans. Therefore we call for an immediate halt to these screening programs.

    MindFreedom International
    www.MindFreedom.org

    ~~~~~~~~~~

    This news alert has been forwarded as a free public service by MindFreedom International.

    You may read more information about President Bush's plans to make mental health screening of adults and youth "common" at www.MindFreedom.org.

    Since 1987 MindFreedom has won victories for human rights in the mental health system. MindFreedom unites 100 sponsor and affiliate groups and thousands of members.

    MindFreedom is one of the few totally independent groups in the mental health field with no funding from governments, drug companies, the mental health system or religions.

    The MindFreedom mission calls for a nonviolent revolution in the mental health system. Are you ready?

  • contribution: Asperger Friends Family and Support

    This too is a contribution on the old site.

    This is a Yahoo group whose moderator banned a member just for posting details for her local meetings:



    I don't think it's fair to ask us how we feel or how our day is if all we want to do is lurk on the list. I happen to know from another source that she is very controlling and very manipulative and very demanding.

    Tara Kimberley Torme
    30 June 2004

  • Jaromir Lhotsky, Essex psychiatrist

    This too is copied from the old site.

    This account comes from an anonymous aspie in England, concerning a psychiatrist in Essex, Jaromir Lhotsky, who was found guilty of serious professional misconduct concerning methadone, but the GMC is still allowing him to work in mental health and merely intends to review him after 3 years.



    I can understand perhaps why I was not diagnosed until I was 38.8 years of age but I still can`t understand why my 14 year old daughter had not been noticed as having ASD by the school/health care.
    Suppose I am lucky that my 5 year old daughter's school have noticed and picked up on her ASD which is really good and she will now receive some help, starting with speech and language help so its not all bad.
    Also back in 1998 I was accused of abusing my children because they acted different to NT children and they were put on the at risk register, I'm still waiting for an apology from social services but I suppose this will never happen, hence is probably why they won`t get involved now with my family as they know that they made a mistake there and any futher involvment with the family may result in legal action, who knows?
    What really makes me feel angry is that in 1998 I was mis-diagnosed by a psychiatrist with borderline personality disorder and over medicated on overdose levels with medication that I did not require who I`m now aware of has been in the papers for serious misconduct for another reason. news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2692901.stm
    I now have serious problems with my health and am showing signs of heart failure, I have tried to get a solicitor to act on my behalf but sadly I have not been able to find one to take the case on legal aid. You can also quote that he also told the whole conference room that I had a borderline personality disorder that was very dangerous.
    A record of medication and levels that he was prescribing me, 1998:
    (List not complete)

    • MELLERIL 50mg three times a day
    • OXAZEPAM 10mg three times a day
    • AMISULPRIDE 200mg three times a day
    • GAVISCON Four 5ml spoonful to be taken three times a day (I have not taken any of this for over 7 years now, for basically as long as I decided to come of all this medication myself against the doctors wishes, was only there to help with severe heartburn pains, had I not decided to go against this guy and come of my meds then I don`t think that I would be here anymore.
    • BECOTIDE 200 microgram 2 puffs at bedtime
    • ZOTON 15mg Once per day
    • PROCYCLIDINE HYDROCHLORIDE 5mg one three times a day
    • VENTOLIN 2 puffs prn
    • NITRAZEPAM 5mg three every night
    • AMITRIPTYLINE 50mg five at bedtime
    • LORAZEPAM 1mg

    This was my regular long term medication over a period of 18 months plus when I was admitted to a therepautic community for 14 months, there was other medication on top of this but I have got to find the details on my reordering slips.

    I have taken myself off all this medication and the only one I take now is NITRAZEPAM which helps me sleep but I'm having troubles coming of this as it is highly addictive.

  • contribution on the old site,on Chatautism and a former Aspies For Freedom group in Townsville, Australia

    copied from the old site
    Yep, it's Aspies For Freedom again, and the #chatautism chat channel that is the same couple's creation.

    Kathryn O'Neill, known as KitKatSavvy, founded a local group for AFF in Townsville, Australia, with the best intentions for helping the ASD community's development. It has only been running a couple of months and AFF purged a local group founder for asking a question.

    An entry from Kathryn's blog has been shared with SF.

    Why I got banned from AFF and why I left #chatautism

    *shrug shrug*.

    The reason why I got banned and why I left #chatautism is because EVERY view or every question that I asked regarding any possible blending in with aspies and NT's got TOTALLY rejected every single time! One quote that I got off Amy and that I used to start up a forum was (please dont kill me if it isn't exact) is 'being gifted - just make an autistic diagnosis as both'. So, I started a new thread using this quote and asked do autistic people have to be gifted and vice versa. I am seriously curious about this question, but as per usual, my quest to answer this question got rejected and bullied RIGHT away!

    Also, I have claimed that I am NOT autistic because last week I talked to my mum, dad and my twin sister about why I had to go to all of those early therapy places when I was younger. I have written an article on this here: www.psychopanic.com/autism.php

    Finally, I got banned from AFF because I asked Amy WHY the hell is she BANNED from WP here?
    http://www.geocities.com/wwawwtruth/WS-AspiesForFreedom.html

    So, it seems EVERY new idea that I suggested which just happened to question the actual diagnosis of autism got rejected flat in the face by EVERYONE!
    Now I know that nobody will believe what I am writing, but TOO bloody bad!
    This is me, this is NOT my hypomania stage of manic depression like every damn one wants to believe! I just happen to be having good things happening in my life right now as well.

    If you don't believe me, then I too will leave WP as well and chat somewhere else where my views with Aspies who blend as NTs; the fact that there is no big fat line between both, and that there are a whole bunch of geeks claiming to be autistic etc etc etc.

    I myself no longer associate with AFF because of the reasons on that post, but it doesn't stop our group trying to aim for the simple ideals of any autism front - to promote autism awareness and to get rid of any
    discrimination.

    Sep 5: I would like to announce that the newly formed autism group in
    Townsville has changed its name from AFFT to TAAC. The old name was
    Aspies For Freedom Townsville (AFFT), but NOW WE have changed it to the
    newer name OF TAAC (Townsville Adult Aspies Club). We did this so that
    we can be a fully independent group, without any associations with
    anybody else. Thank you very much for reading this. By the way, the
    new website link is www.psychopanic.com/taac

    Kathryn O'Neill

    1 Sep 2005

  • ethicality of Luke Jackson seminars?

    Copied from the old site

    Luke Jackson is doing a seminar speaking tour for several months from March 15, spanning Wrexham, Cardiff, Glasgow, Cork, and Sheffield.

    A legal notice was issued on January 27 to the host venues, organisers, and other speakers. All parties listed here were notified that every party to every seminar will commit a serious crime of mass child cruelty, and not libelled if named for it in public, unless they do one small simple thing.

    This should be done as an automatic duty, not as a favour they have any discretionary choice over. They have a duty to notify the public that wronged child authors exist: to do this in the advertising, alongside every mention of Luke Jackson, and to issue notices to every seminar participant. As simple as that.

    It's nothing personal concerning him at all, it is to do with other people's unmet entitlement to the same opportunities. You can tell by common sense why not doing it is as serious as child cruelty. It is part of the crime done to wronged child authors, for them not to have their existence recognised, when if their writing chances had not been ruined by adults' crimes,e.g.school homework pressure, they obviously would be recognised.

    At the time of posting this item, after March 15 had passed, the only party from whom any response has been obtained was Wendy Lawson. So she is in the clear, she has acknowledged this issue. But for all the others, before going to any seminars you the public are invited to ask them whether they have taken this action to make wronged child authors known. Check the advertising of each seminar, up to its date, for whether the issue appears in the advertising. If it turns out that they have done nothing, then they have committed a serious mass scale child cruelty to tar their names, and they have not even been able to deny that it is not a libel to tell the public so.

    The question was posed in March in the future tense. You check the evidence to see if they have done the right and ethical thing yet, and draw your own conclusion. Only if the date of a seminar passes and they never do it, will the accusation stand against their names, and this will not become clear in all cases until the seminar season is over, but the question can't responsibly be left until then. So at this date no one is being named as committing this mass cruelty, but all are being named as concerningly not having undertaken not to do it.It is necessary to speak out and make sure that if you are attending or have attended any of these seminars you should have been told about wronged child authors. This question applies to the following:
    Organisers

    • autism cymru
    • Centre for the Development of Autism Practice

    Venues

    • Teacher Building, St Enoch Square, Glasgow.
    • The Source Conference Centre, Meadowhall, Sheffield
    • Clarion Hotel, Lapps Quay, Cork, Ireland
    • Millennium Stadium, Cardiff
    • Newi Institute, Wrexham, Wales

    Speakers

    • Chris and Gisela Slater Walker (authors of ‘An Asperger Marriage’)
    • Dr Glenys Jones (University of Birmingham),
    • Enid Moore (Darland School),
    • Claire Fennell (Autism West Midlands),
    • Andrea Macleod (University of Birmingham),
    • Ray Dickson (Flintshire YOT),
    • Jan Rogers (Stoke Heath Young Offenders Institution)
    • Professor Pat Howlin (Professor of Clinical Psychology- St George’s Hospital Medical School)
    • Peter Koop (Pembrokeshire School),
    • Professor Michael Fitzgerald (Henry Marsh Professor Child & Adolescent Psychiatry, Trinity College Dublin)
    • Dr Tony Attwood, Clinical Psychologist (Australia)

    18 March 2005

    Kenny Glanaan, a film director who it has been announced, intends to make a film about the Jacksons with Helena Bonham-Carter, is notified of the same concern.

    11 July 2005

  • The "I Don't Understand" Trick

    There is 1 particular silencing trick that plays such a big role in keeping society oblivious of allmarginalised types of suffering, including school sufferings, that I see no civil liberty objection to wanting it banned. It's the "I don't understand" trick. This is when you say a thing whose meaning is clear enough, but because it's at odds with the range of ideas the hearers are already familiar with, they say "I don't understand". Being up against this like a brick wall unless you only say what they want to hear, you are silenced. There's no honesty in folk saying they don't understand. You get to notice that, after you see a few examples where as soon as 1 character starts it, 6 more rush to join in like apes and say they don't understand either. You can see they are doing it to keep in with the group, shut out your point of view. Of course a person can have genuine failings at following language and must be entitled to ask for explanations, but that's the point: they would ask you to explain it, point by point, willing to understand. Players of the "I don't understand" trick never do that. They won't listen any more, the "I don't understand" posture is always impatient and rejecting of any further explanation you have. That's above all what proves it is a trick. Do they itemise what they haven't followed and ask you to explain? That's how you tell the difference.so no one ever actually needs to say "I don't understand".

    The "I don't understand" trick is the greatest weapon of bigots and unfair obstacle to getting anything heard that's not what popular culture already wants to believe. This is clearly out of order if the mob refuse to want to understand things to do with personal safety or schools endangering children. It's not real life, think about it, that the public will gladly recognise the truth of a fact outside the group consensus as soon as 1 voice speaks out, like the boy in The Emperor's New Clothes. In that fable as Hans Christian Andersen wrote it, the crowd's minds were open to the discovery that their emperor was a nudist: they were disaffected with politicians, like today. The other side of the equation is the will to believe. If the crowd had been emotionally committed to believe in the emperor's clothes, they would have ignored the boy, wouldn't they? Silly sods still take comfort in being racist even though they know racism has no scientific basis. The real reason for saying "I don't understand" is that you don't want to believe a fact. Whether you get called articulate or hard to understand is determined by whether the reader wants to believe what you say.

    I've written an extension of the Emperor's New Clothes story, a vision exploring what would happen if the crowd were not keen to believe the embarrassing new fact they heard. The boy not being named in the original, I call him Archimedes, to make him sound like a frustrated scientist. The original fable was accepted into popular culture without its references to nudity being thought wrong, so the same must be hoped for this addition to it. It's written to make a serious point about social behaviour.

    A continuation of The Emperor's New Clothes:

    "But he isn't wearing anything." "Hush", said his father. "you can't say things like that in front of people. They won't understand you."

    All the passers by looked at each other, then at the emperor. To look at him, it seemed Archimedes might be right, just for a moment. Each person weighed the dilemma. Could the lone voice of this boy possibly be right, when everyone else had been admiring the emperor's clothes? It was risky to think so, it might mean disagreeing with all the people, with all your friends. Would you sound sensible, saying they had all been wrong? What if you were wrong, for everyone had seen the clothes, hadn't they? Surely they would agree with each other about that, so it was easier to think the same as them and keep your friends.

    So all the people thought how puzzling it was that Archimedes didn't see the same as all the people. They didn't like thinking about it, because they had decided to see things their friends' way, to see the emperor's clothes. So, if they weren't going to see what Archimedes saw, how could they understand why he saw it? They realised that it solved every problem to say they didn't understand him. Whatever he said, they wouldn't have to listen to him.

    "I don't understand", all the crowd started telling Archimedes. "No, I don't understand either", and "I've not got a clue what he's on about", people agreed with each other with relief. They felt so good to belong to the mature body of majority opinion and not to have to change anything. Poor Archimedes was bewildered. He had said something perfectly simple. How on earth could it not be understood? "It's a simple sentence," he yelled. "The emperor is not wearing anything". The folk around him kept saying the same thing: "I'm not understanding you. You'll have to tone down your excitement, we can't decipher it."

    Archimedes tore his hair. This was quite frightening. "Decipher! What do you mean, decipher? The emperor, right? The - emperor. Got that? He is not: got that? The emperor is not. Wearing: you know what wearing clothes means?" "Stop being such a rude little boy. We know how to put a sentence together, we are intelligent people, but we can't decipher what you are saying. We are all here admiring the emperor's clothes, and you make out he hasn't got any - we don't understand you. Look, the emperor is right there." Archimedes could see the emperor was right there, in the nuddy. "I'm glad I'm not the only one wondering about that boy", the crowd told each other. "Incomprehensible rants: just ignore him."

    Archimedes burst into tears and his father sent him home. It was an uncomfortable walk, with folk pointing at him. "Look, there's that nut who said the emperor's naked! Ha ha!" Even his father was on the crowd's side. "People are just going to think you are strange. Talking about the emperor being naked. You might care about your ideas. Be a bit tactful, don't stick out like a sore thumb, they won't understand it."

    Archimedes felt angrier and angrier listening to this. he was hearing all his choices taken away. His father was telling him he couldn't articulate his thoughts, as plainly as "The emperor is starkers", and have it register in anyone's head unless they wanted to hear it. This wasn't fair: how could he know what the crowd would want to hear, and why should he have to lie and pretend to believe the emperor had clothes, to stop people reciting this nonsense "I don't understand" every time he spoke? Then he thought "Eureka! I have it - I'll write it all on a website, all about the emperor's nudity. I'll find someone who will understand it then. So Archimedes wrote all the details he could think of, about how you could see the emperor was uncovered. he waited a day or 2 for comments. When he read them he was left crying again. they said: "Am I alone in not understanding what this is about?" and "This is a lot of legalese. What is this fool on about? Expecting us to understand this rubbish". "No, I don't understand either."

    Archimedes was really sore now. he was seeing a side to people that the grown ups never talked about in polite company. he was seeing that it only took 1 to start the bandwagon of not understanding, and 6 more people would rush to join in and say the same thing, like apes. They were doing it just to belong to the crowd, to follow the leader. They couldn't give a damn that he had written a simple sensible statement, "the emperor wears no clothes", and had backed it up with reasoned argument. Didn't the truth matter? How would he ever make anyone hear it?

    There were religious evangelists, a group of them who listened to what Archimedes had to say, but then they said: "I mean, I don't understand that, but what we are here to tell you about is God." Archimedes was livid. People who were so sure it was worth listening to them, while they put reasoned arguments, wouldn't listen to him. They were so sure his reasoned argument wasn't worth bothering with. they said "I don't understand that", and it put up an idiotic barrier to getting through to them. That was just a sneaky trick to shut him up. What sense did it make, not to expect him to be hurt, taken as not worth listening to while the same people expected him to listen to them? But at least talking to them had given Archimedes an idea.

    Archimedes tried giving out leaflets about the emperor's clothes. The responses he got were: "My IQ is not up to your ideas", "This is not having the effect you want, they don't understand", "Oh that's all too deep for me. The emperor having nothing on: what an unusual thing to say, it's deep, but I'm having trouble understanding it."

    Then Archimedes thought he'd had such a brainy idea, that he would have leapt out of the bath, except he didn't have baths. He would phone one of those helplines for children and tell them how everyone was being mean to him. He wouldn't tell them about not having baths, just about the emperor. So that's what Archimedes did. There should have been a nice man on the phone to tell how mean everyone was, saying they didn't understand. But the man was mean, he told Archimedes he didn't understand. He kept crossly interrupting everything poor old Archimedes said, stopping him completing a sentence. Every time Archimedes tried to explain, the cross man cut him off, snapping: "No, I have to say to you, I DON'T understand it." he accused Archimedes of being incoherent, which was amazingly unfair when his own interruptions were stopping Archimedes complete anything he said. Finally the man said, "And in my opinion you are receiving mental health support."

    When Archimedes was a raging teenager, the emperor was still wearing the same set of clothes, if they existed. Archimedes had not changed his mind about the truth, but when he joined web groups to tell them about the emperor, they just said; "I'm sorry Archimedes, most of your posts are very hard to understand."

    "It's no good trying to tell people your ideas about the emperor", his mother chided him, "they are too way out. They won't understand." Archimedes exploded like a volcano. "It's so simple. The emperor is not wearing anything. That's 6 words. An infants class can understand it. The emperor is - right? Not wearing anything - right?" His mother was maddeningly unaffected. "It's no good. It's not the point, being simple. It's too way out for ordinary people. You can't say the emperor is not wearing anything, the idea is beyond them, they just won't UNDERSTAND."

    In at least one thing Archimedes' old mum was clearly wrong. She would never make him forget the truth about the emperor and only have the thoughts that idiots with no thoughts would agree to understand. She would never persuade him that life was so much more relaxing that way. But for Archimedes there was no living happily ever after. he grew into an embittered old man who no normal folk listened to any more, the crank who clung to his wild eyed theory that the emperor who used to reign back in his youth had been lacking in the wardrobe department. No historian of the period ever considered the idea, not even the sensationalist populists put it in their books, and no publisher would accept Archimedes. All these good folk couldn't be wrong if there really had been any evidence for the no clothes theory, so of course Archimedes was just nuts. Readers of history books forced themselves to see the emperor's clothes, and even showed Archimedes the pictures of the emperor's physique and told him to see the clothes or they would socially reject him for his pigheadedness.

    Archimedes spent his years of despair moping up and down on the beach, where the tides washing the sand smooth every day consoled him that all his mindless enemies were as impermanent as he was and would soon be gone. Before he died he would leave a hope for the future: his story of the emperor's new clothes, that a child living in an unknown future time might possibly understand and convince other folk to as well. So Archimedes passed on, in the dignity of that hope, but rejected by the world that had listened so eagerly to the emperor's tailors.

    300 years later, his story did impress another small boy, who was a bit of a loner, not a follower of the crowd. He ran to tell his family what a clever man Archimedes was, for showing the scale of harm people do when they spuriously claim not to understand things, and how the crowd psychology of it can erase any truth and prevent a whole society being aware of things. This boy thought it was really important that caring people should learn from the unfair hostility Archimedes had tragically fought all his life, and learn that any fair democracy must ban people from ever using the cynical trick of "We don't understand". So, girls and androgynes and Martians covered in little blue lights, what do you think the grown ups said?

    They said "We don't understand".

    Maurice Frank

Footer:

The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.