Mrs. Imus's Misconceptions · Jan 5, 11:30 AM

The following is a response to Deirdre Imus’ letter, Another Take on Autism, published in the December 18, 2006 edition of Newsweek.

To the Editors of Newsweek,

Deirdre Imus mistakenly assumes that “parents and the autistic community” overwhelmingly share her suspicion of vaccines, her disdain for genetic and sociological explanations for increases in the incidence of autism diagnoses, and her opinion that parents who attribute autism to vaccine injury are the “real experts” on autism causation. Her remarks occur in the context of an escalating public relations campaign designed to cultivate popular support for the concept of autism-as-tort and for vaccine-injury plaintiffs’ scientific arguments. In 2001, when the first thimerosal-autism cases were filed, law firms began soliciting parents of autistic children with overreaching assurances that a link between autism and the vaccine preservative thimerosal had been proven. All a parent must do to file suit is present evidence that an autistic child was diagnosed after being vaccinated, and pay a small filing fee. With such minimalist criteria for accepting clients, with Internet support groups providing a convenient venue for proselytization, and with supporters like Mrs. Imus helping to ensure that the controversy remains front and center in the popular media, it’s no wonder that thousands of families have been persuaded to climb onto the litigation bandwagon. However, not all parents are inclined to play the blame game — especially those who have personal experience of the genetic transmission of autistic cognitive characteristics, and who recognize that the scientific evidence supporting a link between vaccines and autism is a threadbare patchwork of speculation and inference.

Neither do all “parents and the autistic community” appreciate the use of grotesque, catastrophic terms such as “epidemic” and “human tidal wave” to characterize autism. Autistic people and their families face significant challenges that should be publicly recognized and addressed; however, it should not be necessary to dehumanize autistic people in order to call attention to their needs.

Sincerely,

Kathleen Seidel
neurodiversity.com | honoring the variety of human wiring
http://www.neurodiversity.com

Comments


  1. Eloquent and to the point.

    — kristina    Jan 5, 12:55 PM    #

  2. And I suspect she wanted to say “autism community” instead of “autistic community”. Big difference. But she’d still be wrong by a long shot.

    — Joseph    Jan 5, 12:58 PM    #

  3. Thanks, Kristina. No doubt Mrs. Imus means well, but it seems that her exposure to “parents and the autistic community” is fairly limited.

    — Kathleen Seidel    Jan 5, 01:11 PM    #

  4. I think it’s a common problem that many of us fall into – we form an opinion and get carried away with it. The opinion nests, works it’s way in somewhere deep and we don’t choose to re-examine it again. It becomes part of who we are. It therefore takes superhuman strength to take a step back and re-evaluate things.
    Cheers

    — mcewen    Jan 5, 05:19 PM    #

  5. “No doubt Mrs. Imus means well”

    you give her too much credit.

    — Bartholomew Cubbins    Jan 5, 05:34 PM    #

  6. Nice letter Kathleen. Thanks

    — Not Mercury    Jan 5, 05:55 PM    #

  7. A lovely letter. I doubt Deirdre Imus would be able to parse it.

    — brockton    Jan 5, 11:40 PM    #

  8. brockton wrote:
    “A lovely letter. I doubt Deirdre Imus would be able to parse it.”

    But she could always take it to her husband to get his … uhm….
    never mind.

    I agree, it is a lovely letter. I suppose Newsweek didn’t print it?

    — Ms. Clark    Jan 6, 12:31 AM    #

  9. After I sent the letter to Newsweek, I called and was informed that their general policy is to not publish letters in response to other letters. I pointed out that this could be considered an exceptional situation, since Mrs. Imus has extraordinary access to mass media already — far more than the average citizen, and far more than anyone who has expressed the sort of concerns that I have expressed. Giving her over 300 words of letter space in Newsweek (after citing her in the article to which she was responding) without providing a contrasting response only increases the disparity and imbalance in the coverage of this issue. A week or so passed, and it became clear that the letters department staff person was right, they’re not publishing it, so I went ahead and published it here. (Newspapers and magazines will generally not publish a letter if it’s been published previously, including on a blog; this is why I generally wait a week or two before blogging a letter to the editor.)

    BTW, the woman I spoke to at Newsweek said that they receive about 1,000 letters every week, and they read every one.

    — Kathleen Seidel    Jan 6, 12:09 PM    #

  10. Meh. I bet the real reason is Newsweek doesn't want to deal with the dread wrath of Imus and all the NBC conglomerate crosses eyes. Heaven forbid anyone in the ACTUAL autistic community be given a voice.

    — Kassiane    Jan 6, 06:14 PM    #

  11. Knowing what I know about NBC, Kassiane is right on the money.

    The Neurodiverse Movement needs a spokesperson.

    — TheProbe    Jan 8, 07:12 PM    #

  12. Let me skip the advice from the wife of a drug-addled radio talk show host. What’s next? Getting chelation tips from Sean Hannity’s mistress?

    — anonimouse    Jan 10, 11:16 AM    #

  13. Didn’t she re-marry? To a guy called Illisodd?

    Mrs Imus-Illisodd…..

    I’ll get me coat….

    — David N. Andrews MEd    Jan 10, 07:14 PM    #