MumTee Report post Posted May 21, 2006 Found a few bits in the News Review section of the Times today..... a piece about Alison and Ryan from an interview with her sisters: Alison and Ryan India Knight is starting a regular weekly column in the parenting section for parents of special needs children and wants people to email her with info, questions, tips, etc. All the info will also be posted in a new forum the Times are setting up New forum and column ....I wonder if so many of us complained after the article last week that the Editor is trying to balance things up! (Fat chance) Anyways, it seems a good thing - and certainly a way to get access to a broadsheet column..... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mel Report post Posted May 22, 2006 oh dear, im not having a good time with this pc lately lol. the links both took me to the microsoft website for some reason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pumpkinpie Report post Posted May 22, 2006 I tried the links and the page came up balnk and said done??????????????? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Brook Report post Posted May 22, 2006 I found the first link, but not the second: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,...2189509,00.html Also found an article on Lady Astor of Hever, if anyone wants a gander. http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,...2178058,00.html Brook Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
curra Report post Posted May 22, 2006 The articles in yesterday's Sundsay Times are not bad but I was disappointed not to find any of the letters sent commenting last week's horrible article about children with autism. India Knight's son has a heart disease and DiGeorge syndrome which is a condition that affects the immune system, so it's not about autism. The article about Alison focuses on her depression and says that her son had fragile X. I think the Sunday Times should at least publish one of the letters sent by the readers and provide scientific information about autism. Curra Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jill Report post Posted May 23, 2006 (edited) Curra There was a response to last Sunday's paper: (the journalist's response is first, scroll down to "it's not trendy excuse" byline for people's responses) http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,...2188147,00.html I found the original author's response extremely she's clearly completely ignored what everyone has said by hiding behind the banner of "Free Speech" when in reality it is "totally unresearched hogwash". I reckon she perhaps watched Rain Man twice and thought that made her an expert. Also, the first person's response (directly under the byline) has been severely edited (I saw the original submission) but they have at least given SOME room over to responses Edited May 23, 2006 by Jill Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DaisyProudfoot Report post Posted May 23, 2006 Some very valid responses there. It makes me so sad that she was allowed to have the first article published really. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheNeil Report post Posted May 23, 2006 My take on Katie Grant's 'new' article was that it was our fault for not understanding what she was on about and that she was right all along. She still seemed to peddle the same stereotypical, narrow view and simple tried to hide behind the 'open it up for debate' concept... <Insert rude word here>! She just can't accept that she's been spotted as a complete fraud who has about as much understanding of ASDs as your common or garden cushion and that she simply set out to write a 'sensational expose of dole scrounging free-loaders' to try to get her some professional brownie points Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jill Report post Posted May 23, 2006 Hear Hear The Neil. I totally agree with you. I think they should have just published people's responses - KG's response just clearly shows she will never be convinced she is anything other than right, even tho she clearly knows bog all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheNeil Report post Posted May 23, 2006 Hear Hear The Neil. I totally agree with you. I think they should have just published people's responses - KG's response just clearly shows she will never be convinced she is anything other than right, even tho she clearly knows bog all. I agree with you to a certain degree but I can't understand why they couldn't get another journalist to write an opposing view (i.e. less biased and hopefully more truthful). Maybe someone who could be bothered to check out some facts, interview some of the actual people affected by it etc. etc. etc. - outdated concepts I know, but... Katie Grant was never going to do an about face as she'd lose any credibility she might have once had - far better, from her point of view, to stick to her original stand point and just 'ride out the storm'. If (and that's a big 'if') she does genuinely believe that she's right, how can another article from her presenting another side to the issue be valid, level headed or even impartial? Yes if the original article had merely presented the facts and speculated on potential conclusions then it would have been one thing (and actually would have promoted debate) but instead we got a straightforward attack on ASD parents and children, and a bigotted and totally narrowminded article that only serves to annoy us and totally misinform the public at large. This misinforming of the public has only been re-inforced by this second article that gave the impression that us lot are can't understand what she was saying (or not saying in this case) and are a bunch of knee-jerk reactionaries I am pleased that The Times included letters voicing an opposite opinion and that they chose some pretty heavyweight names - far less easy to dismiss the views of experts in the field Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucas Report post Posted May 23, 2006 Her response is certainly a bit more objective than her article, but she has sorely missed the point and commited multiple strawman arguements in her defense. She was not shouted down, she simply had her critical piece subjected to more competent criticism. It has it's premises blown out of the water and she had to back-peddle and rely on the very MINOR point she made in her original article about opening up a debate on the actual incidence numbers of Autism. Most of her article actually consisted of offensive viterol directed at parents for jumping on an imaginary gravy train that existed only in her mind. In fact, the title of her article was not "Lets have a more open debate about Autism", it was "Some 'autistic' children aren't ill, they're just badly behaved." At no point did Katie Grant express dismay at what the editor(presumably it was the editor) decided to title the article with. In her defense she included lines of arguement stating that whilst Autism incidence has gone up, diagnoses of other 'behaviour-isms' as she called them have gone down, contradicting her earlier generalistic claim that once a parent has got their child labelled with an 'ism' it's an easy-ride. Does she mean to say that others with recognised behavioural problems are 'just naughty' ? It is far easier to get behavioural disorder diagnoses than it is to get an Autism diagnosis and I've seen NO PROOF that Autism in any way can resemble any kind of personality disorder. I've read of cases where Autistics have been misdiagnosed with personality disorders and each time my immediate thought is they should be struck off and never allowed to work with vulnerable people again. No one misunderstood or misread Katie Grant's article, she's simply trying to put a spin on it now. I've also noticed some chelation-promoters and snake-oil salesmen advertising quackery in the aftermath of this. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flora Report post Posted May 23, 2006 Lucas, for once I totally agree with you. Your response to what she wrote is spot on. Lauren Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Suze Report post Posted May 23, 2006 ............well said lucas...............I also got the impression she,d done alot of " googling " on the net and managed to dig up a couple of quotes and experts that fitted her argument , she has little knowledge in the area of autism thats obvious.....I had to laugh though she seemed a little miffed that her article had been met with such contempt............what did she think would happen. Oh, and the freedom of speach bit made me laugh too, what a joke........she can have it but those who disagree with her can,t??......... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
curra Report post Posted May 24, 2006 Was Kayie Grant's response in the Sunday Times newspaper? In what section? I can't find it, it seems it's only in the ST online. Her self-apologetic second article without providing any evidence but just her own emotional points of view don't add much to a debate. And why should there be a debate on autism in the first place? Isn't it a medical condition? Following her line of argument she could also debate whether asthma sufferers are "real" or pretend to be so. What freedom of speech is she talking about? She has a columm in the Sunday Times, for goodness' sake! I hope the readers also have freedom of speech! Curra Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
pumpkinpie Report post Posted May 29, 2006 I thought the article was good about Alison and ryan but I cant get to the link either! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MumTee Report post Posted May 30, 2006 I'll try the links again and see if they work..... I'm not sure if I'm doing them right or not? India Knight article and forum Alison and Ryan Hope it works - if not go to www.timesonline.co.uk - the search engine is very good. Good luck folks Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucas Report post Posted May 30, 2006 The title of that article 'a mother's leap of love' made me feel nautious. I need a lie down. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flora Report post Posted May 30, 2006 Lucas, why do you have a problem with mothers loving their children???? Lauren Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucas Report post Posted May 30, 2006 Please do not resort to strawman arguments(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strawman) when confronting me on percieved offenses. If you define 'love' as killing someone by drowning, then I have a problem with anyone who loves. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BusyLizzie100 Report post Posted May 30, 2006 Like so many of us, I have huge issues with most of Katie Grant's article, but one particular thing keeps leaping out at me: Why does she think autistic children are 'ill'? I believe that's a fundamental flaw in her argument, whatever other nonsense she spouts. It raises all sort of other issues, like if it's an illness can it be caught or passed on? Do people become autistic? I find that particularly distasteful. I try to explain to others that people with ASDs are OK, they're not infectious, and they're just different - in a minority, if you like, but with 'normal' rights just like the rest of us. A recent article in a celeb gossip magazine about Jordan and her son Harvey said they feared he would 'become autistic'. What kind of idea does that give the general public about autism? I can feel a campaign coming on!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Flora Report post Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) deleted by Lauren Edited May 30, 2006 by Lauren Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
oracle Report post Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) Deleted by Oracle Edited May 30, 2006 by oracle Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lila-Zen Report post Posted May 30, 2006 (edited) Good on you Edited May 31, 2006 by Lila-Zen Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
phasmid Report post Posted May 30, 2006 This thread is in danger of drifting away from the topic on which it was started. Can I please request that ALL those posting remain focused on the topic being discussed. Many Thanks PhasMOD Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lucas Report post Posted May 31, 2006 How does this forum thing work? I can't actually find any messageboards on the site so I guess this forum is in a different format. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
