Monday, June 5, 2017

carry 2 baskets of European currency

While social media bonds folks in different countries far more intimately together than leaves Brexit and the political popularity of borders making any sense, and Facebook creator Mark Zuckerberg recently spoke in favour of a Basic Income system and progressive tax! travel is still oppressively user unfriendly in all the process it makes you get right and the lack of back-up if it goes wrong.

In ANS's autism strategy document An Ordinary Life Too (PDF book link) we touched on the pressure from the worrying losability of travel documents - tickets, passports, air boarding passes, money cards. It is an impracticality, that endangers everyone, to have no clear and committal answers on what to do when such things go missing - as they obviously can, as human error and crime both exist. An unjust society motivates suicides in vulnerable groups and a just society will never penalise in any way human error or being a victim of crime. The unfair story that a couple burgled during their wedding could not go on their honeymoon to Iceland because their passports were stolen, as well as proving the sheer evil of everyone who wants passports to exist, gave me a fear of telling anyone socially about an intended foreign holiday before it happens and I know I have arrived successfully. Which means using experience to juggle whose sympathetic contact numbers to carry.

Losable travel documents are a barbarity, continuing to be accepted because they exist: a dangerous anomaly left to continue, and us all left to navigate the dangers of, because sone politics of money is stirred up when you devise ways to abolish tickets. Passports are the offensive passbooks of a global apartheid. There is a disability discrimination in losable travel documents, for dyspraxia and motor clumsiness in handling small objects is linked to the autistic spectrum, and increases the chance of losing things. It is an equalities claim against losable travel documents being allowed to exist.

The pressure of losability creates a dilemma with money cards. If you have managed your life well enough to have more than one, is it safer to carry only one, leaving the others at home not to get lost, or to carry them all in case you need the funds in any of them, especially if one gets lost? For anyone in the typical position of having one bank debit card, this question is pressed, made a dilemma, now that the new Post Office Travel Card has blossomed into existence and replaced travellers' cheques. Travel insurance presses even more acutely, enough to quite reasonably just put you off travelling at all, whether you have made the safest choice with your cards so that they can't turn round and say you did not.

Experience travelling with ELAS indicates the answer. The answer is yes do carry them both. I venture to share this to help all aspies be confident towards your travel insurers, that yes that is the right choice, and establish clearly that it is. Something shows so from experience. You might overlook a spend, or find an extra spend present as needed, and that is not good if you only carried one card and the spend concerned could be covered by the other card, or using the other card for it makes the difference to whether you are left short of money for the rest of your holiday. As soon as you have another card in use than your main debit card, that pitfall exists. You might want the main debit card funds. A particular danger is with the bad system of online booking sites for hotels that book you but expect you to pay on arrival and don't let you more sensibly pay on booking - even if the site uses your debit card to confirm the booking. Anything could happen to the traveller to upset their carrying of everything they need, before they reach the hotel and need it to be an already safely paid for refuge. Hotels can actually have the wrong setting shown on a booking site, re whether a prepayment will be taken: that comes from an ELAS member actually asking an hotel that does not prepay, after making a card backed booking on Or, after the transaction of securing a booking uses your card, it is easy for your mind to file that as dealt with, then missing that you still need to take that card in order to pay with it, to decide it would be a good safety idea not to take it because you are taking another card, the POTC.

So take them both.

It's complicated enough that you need 3 different types of password for the card! That is not explained when you buy it, either. You get an "access code" number that you need to quote any time you phone them about the card, and when you create an online account to work the card especially for checking your balance in each currency and topping up. Then of course this online account itself requires a password. Then separately to either of these, the card itself has a PIN number!

You will benefit from knowing another problem with the POTC that its marketing does not explain, and should, as part of explaining all details of things clearly to spectrumites. To use any other card to top up your POTC, you have to register the card's details onto the online account for your POTC, it does not let you use Paypal, I think it should, and the first top-up transaction may set off your bank security system as perceiving an "unusual activity" and disabling the card and making you phone it, clearly at big coping inconvenience if you are abroad. It is suggestive of the banks deliberately wanting to make the POTC harder to use and put folks off it, because it is a rival for them.

Wednesday, May 17, 2017

hate crime protection for autistics


It is needed against derisive conformist thugs who in several cases have been capable of serious violence. A really great thing it could do is ban macho aggression over eye contact! You know, the irrational thug culture of "Are you looking at me?" which comes from animal instincts to find eye contact a threat. But mishandling eye contact is part of autism.

Discrimination and hate law is now an overlapping power of both governments. The Equalities Act 2010, the overall British-wide law on mimority groups and an aggravated hate status for attacks on them, was done at Brirish level and so this petition, which after all originates in England too, is naturally going to British level. But it's worth knowing that steps at Scottish level are possible too under the recently increased powers.

Friday, May 12, 2017

voicing into the autism strategy, so we must stay visibly organised

Facebook link for it coming soon. Already linked from the autism strategy's site by this link, because it is a document attached to the autism strategy. A grassroots sourced guide of what real life situations for aspies it has to address, for effectiveness of all services. Thus is the Autism Network Scotland's compilation An Ordinary Life Too. From many aspies in Scotland as contributors, and the editing team's membership overlapped ELAS.

That is what ANS has been about: grassroots input into the policy system for us. Scotland seems to be where this model is best developed in the world. In the 10 years it has run, it has succeeded as an experiment and a principle: proud to be part of that.

What a contrast with the failure rate, throughout Britain, for independently organised aspie local societies. Their number in Scotland is declining. According to an ELAS member who has observed the trend, "all over Britain AS support groups had started, and folded when their members were tired of one another." To get tired of the countrywide mass and scene of your fellow aspies is a really nasty thing to do and increases vulnerability. You don't get fellow aspies' empathy and understanding in NT society, dammit. Aspie Village keeps a national aspie scene in existence, but a successful networked scene of UNCORRUPT local societies, with constitutions tying them to standards of personal fairness and no instant or arbitrary rejections, and the standard protections of minorities, is what we need to stand up for ourselves at a practical level everywhere, and not be reliant on the arrogant self-interested NAS.

ELAS has just crossed a line of failure as a self-reliant independent group, as a dispute over honouring of ethics and fairness has made it cease to be possible to have an impartial and ethically spotless chair from within the group, and need to have Autism Initiatives workers take the chair. It is a milestone of scene contraction, that underlines the need for conscientious group fairness ethics at all times, to underpin all aspie societies. No excuse for anyone ever to assert toughly spoken brute views of reality and limits to willingness to adhere to fairness, or to claim there ever exists any reason for anyone's personal fainess to be sacrificed for a group's expediency - those are violations of vulnerability. When local societies are proper tied down ethically safe spaces, where all know that nobody, officeholders included, can get away with doing a dirty on you, then there is less motive for anyone to get tired of it. For the aspie scene and nationally networked community to be sustained, much less grown, it needs to be worthwhile, means reliably nice and caring, for the folks taking part in it. That's a no-brainer.

Fibromyalgia can co-occur with autism or in the same families at it, though curiously the gender balance of its prevalence is the reverse of autism's. Liaison with a friend with it has confirmed that its recognition as a disability is accurate and wanted, and brings really practical benefits and helps with establishing practical disability entitlements. So that this petition to class fibromyalgia as a disability picked up from another aspie contact, is worth your support. To share it is an example of practical good from a sustained aspie scene, from us caring not to tire of it !!

Sunday, February 12, 2017

gettng away with inaccurate pro-homework spin

Did you hear Good Morning Scotland mention anything about this today? I didn't. If they mentioned it at any other time, then it missed reaching the regular Sunday audience.

Re their review of the papers, covering a Sunday Herald front page on an initiative of increasing school time for kids from poorer backgrounds. Complaining that: the radio reviewers were convinced that this plan when used in America had had only good results, and there was no balance because there was no asking if a more intense regime would be a pressure and harmful, and the actual article had not mentioned homework.

Dear Mr Frank
Reference CAS-4202564-ZBGB9X
Thank you for getting in touch about Good Morning Scotland broadcast on 29 January 2017.
The paper reviewer on the programme mentioned ‘more homework’ as being a feature of this proposal, and that was not backed up by the newspaper piece under discussion. This was however a single fleeting reference and the substance of the discussion focused on the two issues of longer school days and shorter holidays.
The newspaper review is an informed and opinionated take on a range of stories across the Sunday newspapers and is driven by the opinions of the reviewers. That should be tempered and challenged by the presenters, and on this occasion that didn’t happen.
We’ve shared your feedback with the production team. Furthermore, all your comments have been fully registered on our daily audience log. This internal document is made available to all our production teams and senior BBC management.

Monday, January 16, 2017

Parent of adult needs support fighting mental health act

Parent Leo Andrade in London is having an unjust hard time against rigid Mental Health Act ways of thinking, still being applied wrongly to autistic son Stephen into adulthood, now aged 22.

Support this family's petition and keep hearing listening to and linking to their testimony. Injustice stories always need telling. That is always the first basic about them. Shine a light into truth. Always makes less bad stuff possible to happen than if it goes unnoticed.

Maurice Frank

Tuesday, November 29, 2016

Fairness: the vulnerability law, What to expect

The law of vulnerable adult groups covers us ethically, it establishes that we must not be taken advantage of, financially, or emotionally, by anyone engaging in any type of support relation with us. Any support relation, that could be a formally employed or charity placed support or aspies showing each other support in the self organised scene.

Oh so nothing bad or hurtful ever happens in an autism service? ... obviously not so, but all bad happenings are breaches of vulnerability, the protection against them is there notionally and conceptually. Its enforceability in practice is what needs building stronger. The defined duty to vulnerability includes to prevent corruption, and what prevents corruption is transparency and accountability. So all losses of direct voice and accountability for aspies about service issues are breaches of the vulnerability law capable of contributing to suicidal feelings in persons made more vulnerable. Hence structures like ANS and regular participation in the autism local plans can never be taken away. ANS's imminent issue of a book compiled from a spread of ordinary aspie life experience, An Ordinary Life Too, will greatly strengthen the body of facts that establishes this. It will advance the accountability over uncorrupt protection of vulnerabilities, that comes from strengthening the claim of permanence upon these participative structures.

What does this mean you can expect in Elas, and any Asperger society self-organised independently from the problematic big charities?
  • You are among folks who know it would be liably against the vulnerability law ever to turn socially corrupt and backstabbing to escape from answering a fairness issue, like the former Phad charity in Fife did which led very quickly to its break-up and demise in 2011 a bad outcome for all.
  • Fairness is never an obsession. Fairness is never called an obsession, because fairness is a red line ethic, and red line ethics are never obsessions.
  • For any fairness issue in your life that affects your relationship with any other members, e.g, something which their own invitation involved you in and resulted in an unfairness.Your pursuit of it, time unlimited, will automatically have the reliable solidarity and backing of the rest if the group. No one will ever dismiss it as an autistic rigid thought pattern or obsessive.
  • You will never accidentally catch any member doing that when they think you are out of hearing. You will never be let down by a friend with a long back period of discovering this way that they were never real.
  • You will never find the group dug in to stay noncommittal about your fairness issue.
  • You will never see this include a member refusing to reverse a serious mistake that had worsened the wrong, such as the mistake of apologising to the party that wronged you after being lied to by them.
  • You will never see the group suspend a normal routine of going for a drink after meetings, and instead all hasten home uncomfortably, by reason of wanting to avoid the issue.
  • You will never hear anyone express in blunt words and a cutting tone of wordly-wise macho boredom the emotionally abusive view that you may have to live with a social injustice unsolved.
  • You will never hear anyone argue that fairness to you should fall in the greater interest of the group.
  • You will never find that the group get sick of the subject and start to sanction or socially reject hearing about it, when that leaves you with them expecting you to live in acceptance of it.
  • You will never hear anyone use the word "unfortunately" as a weapon for any of these maltreatments of you.
  • You will never see another member continue to belong to, and hear him keep mentioning its place in his social life, anything which has wronged or unjustly excluded you, if he has said nothing about efforts on your behalf to change that. Particularly if his own invitation had led to the wrong happening in the first place.
  • You will never have anyone believe that you should live in acceptance of, and stop fighting, a wrong which has not happened to them.
These are not points that any autism group, any group in any support scene, can discuss and decide not to accept. You will not suffer these things because the group will ensure conscientiously that each other know, that it would break the vulnerability law, with many potential lines of liability, for any of them to exploit anyone's vulnerability by doing any of these unfair unsupportive things to them. They are all acts of emotional abuse, for they betray and kick away wellbeing and result in exclusion experience. Hence they all risk, as is well established illegal, well-motivating suicides by it. They are all actions whose breach of the vulnerability law is serious enough that they risk life. The members of every aspie group have a duty to ensure each other's awareness of this, to be vulnerability compliant.

You do not have to be a suicide risk to have this protection, e.g, you may be articulate enough with writing to fight back, but the group will know that if they wrong you they cause suicidal ideation in a less articulate person who sees it happen and encounters any similar wrong, now or later. So, because the group dares never wrong that person, they dare never wrong you either. Backing for total literalist fairness is your claim of right.

Maurice Frank

Saturday, September 24, 2016

NAS slaps aspie grassroots in the face again

The multiple signed letter to the NAS's trustees, just last year, on ordinary aspies' dissatisfaction with NAS's lack of accountability and responsiveness towards us, us on whose behalf NAS supposedly exists, might never have happened. NAS's Scottish director Jenny Paterson has shown, openly in her emailed reply to an enquiry from ELAS, that the big charity culture continues as determined as ever to seek to get away with arrogance.

This is a one-off answer, which an ELAS enquiry on their general standard of responding to contacts extracted. It followed 7 months of total silence from her towards the personal contact previously made. Hence it does not follow a spurt of correspondence. Yet she is rude enough to write a bureaucrats’ closure, a proclamation of final answer:
"this is my final position on our campaigning plans and priorities, and I am unable to offer any further assistance regarding child authorship."

Even nasty bureaucrats usually only do that after a spurt of correspondence when they have run out of evasions. She does it in her one-off late answer to something she had simply sat silent on for 7 months. See how aggressive that is? Hostile to an issue of maltreated aspie kids, an agenda the whole time against them and doing anything for them. Also she does this deviously so as never to actually answer what she was asked! For she was asked simply to mention that wronged child authors exist, in every literature that mentions or advertises successful child authors. That is not campaigning that needs any resources or time priorities allocated to it. She answers only to the practicality of big extra campaigning then rudely shuts down all contact with her on child authors at all, KNOWINGLY LEAVING NEVER ANSWERED THE SIMPLE NO-EFFORT ACTION THEY CAN TAKE!

Even her timing is sneaky: she sent this email on Sep 20, just 2 days AFTER the Autism Europe conference here in Edinburgh, which had NAS involvement, had ended. Avoiding this being out as an issue at conference time.

All autism workers and projects: you can’t ethically afford any connection with NAS, with an organisation that behaves like this.