If information surfaces subsequent to their presentation that calls the diagnosis into question do these presenters have a duty to correct, confirm or qualify their presentation of the individual as being an "autistic"? If that individual's views on autism are likely to affect public perception of the nature of autism disorders and public policy on provision of autism services should there not be a follow up from those that have presented her views as representing an autistic perspective?
The author of the ABC blog is anonymous. The blog does provide links and references, including to on line discussion groups in which Ms Baggs has apparently participated over the years . If the entries were in fact made by her, they show that she has presented herself as suffering from many mental health disorders, other than autism spectrum disorders, over the course of her life. The disorders from which Ms Baggs has allegedly claimed to be suffering from over the years include Dissociative Identity Disorder (Multiple Personality Disorder), Schizophrenia, Schizoaffective Disorder, Bipolar Disorder, Post Traumatic Stress Disorder and Depression.
In her presentation to the Canadian Senate anti-ABA activist and autism researcher Michelle Dawson quoted Ms Baggs from one of the latter's videos:
"I am a non-speaking autistic woman. While I do not agree with functioning labels, I have been labelled low-functioning"
The Amanda Baggs Controversy site references a number of personal testimonials purporting to contradict those statements and indicate that Ms Baggs was in fact a very capable speaker. Internet writings purportedly authored by Ms Baggs are provided in which she talks about discussions she has had in the past, and an admission by her that it is her voice heard in one of the videos. There are several testimonials referring to earlier periods of her life and her very high functioning abilities demonstrated during those years.
Amanda Baggs, in her video productions posted to the Internet, on her blog site and in the quotes of her comments made by Michelle Dawson to the Canadian Senate committee, often uses the "Royal We" in describing autistics, purporting to speak about how "autistics" think, feel, exist in the world. I have been a long time critic of CNN and CBC for featuring her as representative of autistic persons who offers the insights of an autistic person. With the many people who suffer from Autisic Disorders in the world CNN felt it appropriate to present Ms Baggs and her views of autism on multiple occasions. Her rehearsed Internet videos do not resemble autistic behavior that I have seen as the father of a severely autistic 13 year old boy or as an autism advocate who has had interaction with a number of persons with Autism and Aspergers including some autistic persons living in institutional care but I acknowledge that I am not qualified to challenge her ASD diagnosis.
CNN and CBC have told us that Amanda Baggs is autistic and we should listen to her views about autism, autism treatment and services and public understanding of autism. If their characterization of her as being a person with an autism disorder, or the facts of her personal narrative, are found to be incorrect ... or if they are confirmed ... those results should be presented to the public and public policy makers for consideration.
Sphere: Related Content








