Something not right

Idea. Should we try writing the words "Something not right" in autistic spectrum sites? In hope that folks searching on the idea of something not right will find autism info, which they would never have thought to search for. Try it out here.

This comes from a conversation with an aspie of my age, but of much more recent diagnosis even than me, and I found 35 an unjustly late age for it, and more accidentally discovered than me too. At least I have always known that my strongly felt anti-school cause led rationally to discovering aspieness, from its impact on school problems, at the tipping point of 2002-3 when there emerged a self-organised aspie scene no longer under the medical umbrella.

It is screamingly unjust frustrating and upsetting, that in unknown numbers there are unknown aspies out there, who have heard of autism, can't miss all media that mention it, but no connecting of it to themselves has occurred to tbem. Some of whom will eventually discover it by chance, e.g. from someone else's reaction to a problem, maddeningly late in life, and with all the baggage of relief and vindication and self-explanation. The implication of the chanciness all caring aspies will choke on. That some who would feel the relief and the liberation from unfair social challenges, who would welcome the aspie scene's support and join in it keenly, never will, because the chance will never come and they will live out their lives with social unfairness and withdrawal without ever knowing about aspieness. If we pass them in the library or on the train we can't know it.

We must do anything we can think of about it. It's a key reason why the hidden disabilities need maximum banging on about. Conditions you may not at a glance notice exist, or notice in yourself as a familiar condition you have heard of or that carries any bodily difference: just as society for long missed that they exist, you can miss having them. So you need prompting to contemplate whether any hidden disability matches with personal problems you are aware of. But not a mass screening of everyone by doctors, we can't want that because not everyone would accept it or answer the questions and it would be too connected to sinister mental health screening. Indeed it's important to have the aspie scene supportive of your grounds for diagnosis before you go to the doctor, in case they are too little autism aware and want to see it as mental health instead.

In his long life of missing it, tbe aspie I spoke to mentioned he had a feeling of "something not right". I realise I have often heard a sentiment like that - though I never felt that way, because it was so obvious that school and unthinking laddish characters were what was not right, not me. But social frustrations and difference to the cool kids can often make folks feel not right. It is clearly a sentiment in the lives of many undiscovered aspies at risk of remaining missed for life. So might some of them search on the concept of "not quite right", as part of exploring their feelings and trying to understand life and their feeling? It must surely be fair to try to make that search lead to learning about being aspie.

Maurice Frank

Open letter to NAS on accountability

www.autangel.org.uk/letter-to-nas-trustees.html

This link is an open letter to the NAS, about its standards towards us: "trying to adapt to what it thinks its audience of the moment may prefer" and "We are concerned that the NAS is a charity that is not listening to the very people – autistic people – it purports to support and address the needs of". Which has always been my feeling, and why we needed ANS to emerge instead.

It's a UK scale action, it's written by an aspie in London, David Mery,gizmonaut.net. He is gathering signatures, by emailing him if you want to sign it.

NAS reply of Sep 11 is just a businesslike holding acknowledgement, says nothing of substance.

where was the late Dr Wing for 20 years?

This Daily Telegraph obituary to the recently deceased inventor of the term Asperger Syndrome, Lorna Wing is staggering and baffling, quite angering. It quotes her claiming that her first use of the term in a scientific paper in 1981 opened a Pandora's Box. Over the next 20 years there were 900 published papers on it, including the first diagnostic criteria proposed in 1989 by Stephen Gillberg.

If Wing an academic voice with such effective impact as this, why couldn't she stop it taking 20 years for the condition to become widely known of? It is a too shattering thought to cope with. In the meantime, we were still living out lives not knowing of it, without the back-up and fellowship of an aspie scene, missing out utterly and tragically if we died during that time, and getting into avoidable life troubles including getting into poverty in the right wing neocon economy. Adolescent psychiatry was missing AS and still wrecking lives applying oppressive conformist agendas of personal change that AS proves wrong, and by it leading to neocon economy troubles too. The Enyclopaedia Britannica was still describing autism as Kanner autism with 80% of subjects learning disabled, I remember that from the period when I was beginning to notice the was attention on autism linked to childhood problems, in the years before I discovered modern aspie awareness in 2002.

Where were you left in the neocon world of 1989 if you heard nothing of what Gillberg was doing, and you would never cross the path of a fortuitously well informed and open minded psychiatrist after an adolescent service had already in 1983 acted totally obliviously to autism towards your school crisis?

Wing's experience in the world of academic papers does not match at all the experience of real society and real aspies outside it. She must rationally have realised there were many unreached all through those unbearable lost 20 years, when she made that comment. Why never give us the support of being more angry about that? An urgent social change should just progress with ever so slow effete composure through doctors and the cases that chance across their paths?

Maurice Frank

Dear Luise

wp.rxisk.org/written-on-water/

The story of an aspie girl in Denmark who was slightly too old to be diagnosed in childhood in the 80s, younger than most of us, who was medically murdered by an irresponsible self-perpetuating chain of ever intensifying mental health drugging. Written by her mother. Taken up by American publisher Jorvik, perhaps from e-book impact first.

trial by face.

Letter writers published in the Times yesterday and the Metro today are so important to protecting justice. Saying: a jury is supposed to decide guilt or innocence from evidence, to do it by looking at faces is like relying on witchcraft and is no guide at all to a court case's facts.

More than they may realise, there was a particular minority group put in danger by Kenneth Clarke's outburst about seeing body language in court, us. What can't aspies and all levels of autistics do? Communicate effectively and give normal social signals. That includes engaging visually, includes facial expression. Our instinct is remain stony faced and avoid eye contact because we don't have culturally learned ways to do anything else. We can neither see body language nor show it.

For courts to allow juries to look at body language in judging evidence of crime, as Kenneth Clarke describes, is to load the system unjustly against a section of society. No lawyer is responsible who still invites this to happen. He has spoken without any sign of minority awareness. Autistic people can not do body language, or eye contact. If we are judged on body language or face, we risk appearing guilty by reason of an inbuilt personal disadvantage.

Maurice Frank.

I've started so I'll finish.

A tip to autism workers throughout the entire scene. The type of tip that only an experience prompts you to realise is needed to give. Concerning us speaking in meetings, and "facilitation" or chairing.

A basic item you will have been trained is that anxiety affects our confidence and fluency to be able to speak up in a group, even at the moments when we have something to say. Now, one of anxiety's focusses is on successfully conveying what you want to say. By common sense, this means being allowed to complete saying it.

But aspies can become focussed on banging on at length on the topic that concerns them, losing all focus on the audience and the discussion's need to flow on. When we are saying something long, it is not necessarily the case that we are going to monologue endlessly until stopped, but of course, to any worker hearing it the possibility exists. The potential problem exists, and any worker or meeting facilitator does not know whether we are going to monologue or finish our point quickly, and the discussion might get disrupted. So what should they do?

Obviously, they should find out. They should ask us how much we have to say, to complete our point. That way they will find out if we are focussed enough that we are completing a single point at all. if we are, we are taking part in the discussion fairly. If there is a lot left to say it might need abbreviating - but having started, having been allowed to start making a point, which includes stating the facts that back it up, we must be allowed to finish. So that we are heard and construed correctly. So that our communication succeeds. SO THAT WE ARE CARED ABOUT as participants. Find out how much is left to say to complete the aspie's point, engage with them to fit that to the discussion's available timescale.

What then is obviously wrong and workers should not do? They should not assume "oh, aspie banging on, must cut the flow" without further thought. They should not cut across our flow without intent of letting us continue, to just assert that it will fit better to say at a possible later time and the meeting must now move on. If they do that, if they don't bother about letting us finish what we have started, that is uncaring towards the content of what the aspie has to say. It shows unconcern for it to be heard accurately, which means completely. It shows disregard of the potential for embarrassment when an unfinished half-said point is misconstrued.

Sometimes a monologuing aspie may be of a type who habitually has no awareness of how long they intend to go on speaking and who is regularly not offended by curtailing unfinished and gets to live with it habitually. The danger is this makes it a habit for the autism worker too, to apply the same standard towards every aspie, and towards the very different ones who are not regular monologuers and who are saying something a bit long because they need to, with every clear idea of its ending. The one case is no guide to the other. They are 2 very different circumstances of meeting participation fairness, and hence of impact on the person when it is got wrong.

• Just saying it's the wrong moment to bang on and cutting off our speech arbitrarily without regard to its content: wrong, bad, damaging, harmful.
• Asking us how much more to say and arranging that, even if rushed, we get to finish the point we have started: good practice, always the right thing to do, caring, need.

Maurice Frank

loyalty to the party

I would never have the confidence to throw a party, nor feel socially placed so to do. But I don't feel raging envy of the NTs who can do it, I feel concern, that it is quite perilous for them too and too easy to backfire in a world where social meannness exists.

Yesterday I was at a new home celebration, that only turned out to be described as a party when actually there. The hosts were churchy folks, whose company is far more sensible, so you would imagine nicer, than the laddish type of folks whose parties aspies would generally keep a wide radius away from. Yet they were still not totally lucky in avoiding receiving gratuitous meanness for their effort in holding the occasion.

As soon as one of the hosts' sister arrived, she said "Your party's really bombing." "Oh shut up." I thought to throw in "You can make it bomb some more."

I have seen it happen before. Instant flashback to a time when I was in an anti-fascist campaign who were supposed to be really into inclusion and obviously campaigning for it, yet one set of flatmates liked to keep throwing parties and one of their regular guests liked to keep saying "This party's flagging." Repeteadly and labouring the point.

Why does anyone ever hold parties in a world where that can happen? I never would. Is it just to look or feel stronger for doing it? Yet in order to suffer the least amount of visible hurt from it they have to treat the experience like a joke and outwardly just proceed as if it is not true. But how can they be sure it is not true, think of the anxiety whether it is true that could be sown? to hang oppressively over every conversational pause, making it more tense. Yes NTs do actually have conversational pauses, no topic is inexhaustible.

Maurice Frank

A milestone to prize

One of the childhood disasters that has quite commonly happened to aspies is to be involved with the gifted children movement. Isolated spikes of special ability in an aspie's focal interests may be overoptimistically misconstrued as meaning a high educational ability.

Some progress in an answer just received from the National Association for Gifted Children is of enough interest to need recording fron the reference of anyone who experienced the gifted movement being totally on the side of unchecked teacher authority. They now realise the term "gifted and talented" has impacted some lives badly and they want to call it "high learning potential", okay that could still be dangerous, and they state the objective of " personal success ie what they want to achieve." Now that is seriously progress. As recently as 1998 supporters of New Labour's high pressure policy were openly on radio 4 praising the prospect of "making" the kids work very hard.

And they have now said they are into "developing a children's Bill of Rights" "to help prevent issues of this nature." It is a milestone shift that has come 40 years overdue. Their whole scene needs holding to it.

Maurice Frank

stressing me

In the news today a compensation award for stress for a teacher who suffered a ridiculous workload. Resulting in a radio Scotland phone-in this morning on teachers' work conditions and stress. I failed to get mentioned on it that the media has regularly shown interest in overstressing of teachers and none at all in overstressing of their students. Never have I heard a phone-in on that.

It's now hitting 30 years since I was overwhelmed by a ridiculous workload at school, and I never got any chance to seek a compensation award through any industrial injury type of route. Employees get that, school students don't. The system assumes their abilities can be decided for them, and they are not free to walk out of the situation if it becomes impossible as it did for me. It is a lot harder and riskier a prospect for the mishandled school student who has left school with consequently no prospects, to simply sue, and besides, crises at school bring in the teenage mental health systems, who themselves can take sharply against you if you resist getting bossed around by them just as badly as by your school. The student becomes a mental health issue, with all that means for civil status, because of their teachers' actions which are not the student's fault. Then they are not going to be supportive witnesses for you, instead their attitude that you are mental unless you change yourself to fit in with all their ideals makes any suing impossible.

The emergence of aspies has been the life miracle I needed delivering into my hands proof that aspie skills at some limited types of fact retention had been the real explanation of the personal strengths that made my teachers recklessly greedy. Never was proving this point helped by the media recognising student stress as any sort of major issue. Now, we in the aspie scene know that student stress has been a recurring aspie experience from constant misreading of us by educators. The trusting public who believe reality is everything the tabloids and BBC say it is, still have no knowledge of this at all. They still only hear of the teachers suffering.

Maurice Frank

not the driver's fault

Usually when I post crossly about buses, it is because of what the driver has done. Of course, drivers are human and humans are usually bad but drivers are not always bad. This time the driver was very apologetic and friendly about the bureaucracy he had been subject to and it wasn't his fault at all.

Consider a bus, in a rural area where they can't easily put a replacement on, that suffers a big delay from a breakdown, but eventually manages to limp to its outer destination. It arrives there in time to turn round and operate a return service on time. But it doesn't. Why? the driver is not allowed to. The situation has caught up with the rules about his driving hours. he is forced to take a half hour break and sit twiddling his thumbs, even thought it means the bus will run half an hour late, and passengers will be half an hour late and miss connections event though the bus was physically there in time to run on time. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

This actually happened this week on the Carse of Stirling services by First bus.

This may be health and safety, from the point of view of regulating the driving. But what use is that if passengers' coping safety is affected by having their day's plan and connection knocked out. As encountered on meet-ups, some aspies do get bewildered in unfamiliar places. The power to run transport late and not to make passengers immune from the consequences for further transport, is still an issue of power and that's why no health and safety rules get made out of that. Like, having to employ more staff so that buses can't get trapped at the outer end of routes and forced to do a silly delay like this.

Maurice Frank

Don't let the council make it up as it goes along

From Local Government Finance Act 1992 section 81, which creates the power of council tax appeals in the Act's Scottish section:

(1) A person may appeal to a valuation appeal committee if he is aggrieved by -
(a) any decision of a local authority that a dwelling is a chargeable dwelling, or that he is liable to pay a council tax in respect of such a dwelling.
(b) any calculation made by a local authority of an amount which he is liable to pay to the authority in respect of council tax ....

From www.scotland.gov.uk/library3/localgov/ctha-00.asp "What are the grounds for appeal?"

• If you disagree with the levying authority's decision that your dwelling is chargeable,
• if you disagree with the levying authority's decision that you are liable to pay the council tax in respect of a particular dwelling, or,
• if you disagree with the calculation of your bill

You can check out the full act yourself. It states simply and clearly that if you want to appeal any disagreement you have with the calculation, any error that you personally perceive in it, you are absolutely entitled to do that. That power of appeal is written literally in the law. As aspies know, what is literally said is what is said. In the written law and the public info on it there is absolutely nothing, not a word, that says the council ever has any power to say that it refuses to recgonise your appeal's existence or to carry it out as a case, on grounds of its view of your appeal's merits. It has no power whatever to say, we don't think this is a "relevant" subject for an appeal so by our say-so you are not getting an appeal held.

It follows that it has no power or entitlement further to threaten to take you to court unless you acquiesce to this. You would then be under threat of legal penalties precisely for following exactly what the law says!! It would not be possible to rely on any law as literally meant, or to know that following it means less trouble than not following it. A system of law would not be operating, arbitrary terror would be operating instead, if a council was ever upheld in behaving this way. Over council tax appeals or over anything else ever.

The duty that public bodies have to communicate fully and effectively with us, especially with us because we come under disability equality, rules out the council inventing rules of its own that are not there in the rules issued to the public, of a nature as to let it conveniently suppress appeal cases lodged against its own actions - and for it to claim to enforce what it has invented while ignoring the actual position.

More info from within the scene:
Autism, as a recognised disability, implies a number of rights in court settings. Probably the relevant one to follow up here is to have an ‘appropriate adult’ to provide support. The courts will generally take a helpful and sympathetic view of how to help people who are vulnerable or have disabilities, so long as they are primed beforehand to understand the situation. Often what happens with autism is that there is insufficient prior knowledge provided regarding what the problems are, and the person may present superficially as not having any particular disability.

Statutory rights are conferred by the UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities, of which the UK Government is a signatory. These include a number of general principles and obligations in relation to equality and non-discrimination (Articles 3-5), and the requirement for States to take appropriate measures to provide access by persons with disabilities to the support they may require in exercising their legal capacity (Article 12), and to ensure effective access to justice for persons with disabilities on an equal basis with others (Article 13).

The principle is that to provide an ‘equal basis’ a person with a disability requires such measures as will provide a level playing field with people who do not have a disability.

Written straight after a meeting with the council, that had to be lobbied for before it could be held!! about a dispute of this nature.

Maurice Frank

now uniforms take life, preventably

Many papers today carry a child death story that challenges anyone willing to persist in believing there is any good at all in the physical world. In the Australian floods, a boy aged 13 was swept away and killed, along with his mum, when the floodwaters swamped their car, the reason why they narrowly missed rescue by a truck driver was because this boy made said rescuer save his younger brother first !

Now, there is more to this horror than accident. Here is the twist to make you angry, that adds to this story an element of human evil which our scene could have prevented: quoting from the Metro's story, "Ms Rice and her sons were returning from a trip to buy school uniforms when they were caught up in what police called an "inland instant tsunami."""

This is a child's life actually ended, entirely by reason of the prison badge of children's enslavement, and the obligation on families to actually buy with their own money the chains of their own oppression. To make this purchase mattered enough to go driving in the middle of a flood crisis for specifically this purpose, to buy a degrading slave costume whose communist purpose as openly declared by the nutty professor - see last post - is to airbrush away children's personal identity and give physical form to a state of possessed subjection.

For a century we have been told school uniforms do all these wonderful things. Anyone who defends them now is seen to defend costing lives and intentionally to be willing to cost more lives, and this is for a purpose of destroying liberty.

This includes any big autism organisation that continues not to speak out against them, and against all uniforms ever, as they owe to adult workers too. For years the big organisations have known this need exists. For years they have kept themselves on hobnobbing terms with employers and teachers. This boy most likely was not one of us, and there is no need for him to have been. Remember, acting on aspies' biological needs will get rid of uniforms, not just for aspies, but for everyone. If the big autism organisations had done this, then thanks to autism knowledge, uniforms could have been eradicated all over the democratic world years before now, for everyone. Then, by the reported facts, this family's fatal car journey would not have happened.

This be on the head of all limits to publishing of facts, all control and filtering of issues, that has existed in the autism scene. In the media too.

Meanwhile, yesterday, here, parliament threw out Hugh O'Donnell's bill for an autism strategy, at first stage, by 109 votes to 5. I watched them in the public gallery, all jumping on the momentum to say oh it's not proven what difference this would make oh we need less obligations for service users to run around trying to enforce and we need more time muddling along as we are. The way they seized on the committee report to criticise the bill for being too noncommittal! is an irony howling against the way all law is practised at present. All of them every day are in the political class's game of always being noncommittal, and now they have damned a bill for the same thing.

It is an indictment of the NAS for its insistence on legalese drafting of the bill. In the consultations last year, we put in for using ordinary language, and through it, for having some committality about what the bill would definitely make happen. The NAS have dominated this entire campaign, and their aversion to committal obligations to any issues that come from us to them, has delivered this rubbish outcome for them and us alike.

Maurice Frank

Local campaign on compulsory treatment

Aspies may have past experiences and/or future worries with the mental health system. We have contact with it for getting diagnoses, and some folks have ongoing contact with it over coping issues or anxiety or depression. We may have had aspie life problems grouped under the mental health label in the past, or be dealing with services where there is still an overlap.

So we are concerned with the safety of our civil liberties, and the fact that aspieness is not a mental illness and aspies are still ordinary citizens. We must be on guard against any reading of mental health issues into what are actually aspie items, and any impulse to turn them into grounds for authoritarian interventions by the mental health system.

Edinburgh Users' Forum, which is part of the local collective advocacy for mental health, is doing a local campaign on the problems arising in compulsory treatment or the threat of it. Whether interventions were unjust, the effect of being threatened with them or actually suffering them, the practicalities observed by the system when making an intervention, and whether it was avoidably frightening. They are looking for personal stories to draw info from.

So if the mental health system features as an issue in either your present or your past, please respond at the following link...

www.surveymonkey.com/s/7CTRGL2

... to speak out about it.

Even if you have not experienced anything to do with compulsory treatment, but just you have made or wanted to make an "Advance Statement", like a living will that will apply if it ever happens, you can still valuably respond. They want to know about this too. Advance Statements were introduced in 2005 but folks are still finding it difficult or confusing to get information about them.

Genetic selection against us

Genetic selection to prevent our existence is now demonstrably happening. See this page by Helen Keeler on fertility services rejecting eggs from women who have had aspie kids.

the-newrepublic.blogspot.com/2009/12/genetic-screening-for-as.html

Effort to contribute our issues to another good cause

Is the society around us seriously registering aspie issues? and the beneficial impact they make upon many other fairness issues too? Or are they just saying what the socially minded say too often: Oh dear, will we be understood if we say anything new, let's just keep saying what we find familiar? When a local project starts up for a good cause, does it do its own thing, oblivious to us?

On May 9 the No Borders campaign held a dayschool here, as part of a tour, on the oppression of asylum seekers. Part of its purpose was to assemble such folks as might want to take part in starting a local project for practical solidarity with asylum seekers, similar to one already functioning in Newcastle. There was a predictable way that the prevalence of local faces who are already regular in the left wing or anarchist scenes reduced the likelihood that anyone not of those scenes could be involved and feel comfortable or included. The rigidity of attitude those folks have about most topics, really thwarts the wider growth of projects they would like to see wider growth of.

Some of what they are about was sensible practical sharing of material goods with asylum seekers who can't obtain them, either who are paid in food vouchers of tightly limited usability instead of cash, or who have had all income cut off completely at the same time as not being allowed to get jobs. Solidarity in the face of the unviability of life the asylum system is intentionally designed to cause. Naturally also they are interested in raising public support for our guests, for making the true situation wider known about how folks already come out of desperately dangerous situations are getting treated, and if need arises, for having the means to create campaigns of the community's eagerness to keep someone, around blatantly corrupt refusals of asylum or attempts to deport. There has in fact already been a past campaign in Edinburgh preventing a spiteful deportation of a care worker whose life was totally established here and formed part of the care of learning disabled folks too. These campaigns are brilliant in their impact aginst racism, because they pinpoint how immigration barriers trample over the practical common sense of daily life.

Here is the problem. Folks doing these campaigns, if they seriously and genuinely care and want sheer reasoning decency to win against racsim, then they must want every possible contribution to victory for asylum seekers to be seized on and made maximum use of. This is an automatic duty. In the dayschool, in the session devoted to gathering ideas, I contributed an idea arising from autism. Think about this one:

Disability discrimination is now an established principle, itself owed to a history of struggle too. Among asylum seekers, just as among any other group, there are bound to be some aspies, some dyspraxics, and some attention deficits. To treat them in any way they will have a disadvantage with because of their conditions, is disability discrimination hence must be illegal. This is arguable by 2 separate routes, nationally on grounds of disability discrimination law, and internationally on human rights grounds applying to medically real minorities. But is there a screening system that is diagnosing all the autistic spectrumites among asylum seekers, and doing it straightaway without a wait, and being generous about diagnosing in uncertain cases? Of course not. As there is not even such a system for the ordinary settled population, even less possible is it for asylum seekers. This proves - the system handles asylum seekers completely blind to which ones are on our spectrum. Hence, any way that all asylum seekers are treated, that would be disadvantageous to the spectrumite ones, is a disability discrimination and is invalid to continue. Where there is an impairment of concentration or attention, there is a greater chance, innocently and without blame, of losing physical objects, especially small or flimsy ones. Like - identity papers and cards. It is visibly disability discrimination to make any autistic spectrumite verify their status by carrying documents. Because of not knowing which asylum seekers are spectrumites, disability discrimination is committed by making any asylum seekers at all depend on carrying documents, in any way at all !

This gets rid of the identity cards being introduced for asylum seekers, and it wipes out the validity of ever penalising them for lacking papers or passports on their arrival here.

So we wait to hear that No Borders or any other asylum solidarity project makes some use of an item of this whopping magnitude. How long will the wait be? At the dayschool, my point was just put in the list, with a murmur of uncertainty of how much gain it would be possible to make from it in practice. One more voice, speaking from lack of knowledge of disabilities, voiced the sense of unsure ground hence of need to pass this item on to any folks with more secure disabled knowledge who might pop up in the local project in future. This is all that happened. Indeed from experience this is about all I expected would happen. The item was not focussed on again in the ending. It's obvious what this means: no commitment that the item will be used at all. The project will start with local radicals just saying the familiar things they are already used to saying, that don't force any big shift in the system's nature.

We have never yet had an asylum seeker in Elas. In theory we could, if there was an aspie one living in Edinburgh. Then we would be involved at the real personal level of experiencing the oppression, the global apartheid, splitting friends and vandalising lives. We will all as a community, not only the asylum seeker, have been medically wronged and violated by any functioning local asylum solidarity project, if it claims to have even in theory a choice not to make use of the item I raised. Same goes for all the national projects. If the local project does get going, then any asylum seekers reading this will know whether the project honestly cares a damn and wants to win your cause, by whether it takes up my disability discrimination argument and cites it publicly against the identity rules in the asylum system. It is a simple clear argument.

How many other good causes are there, where the opportunity for autism to force positive advances in civil liberties gets received only with uncertainty and doing nothing, just because it is unfamiliar? This makes all the difference to whether aspies are marginalised, or campaigners for other causes are seen to care at all about the biological needs they raise. The issue about losable documents does not only affect asylum seekers, they are only the most extremely and urgently affected group. For all the settled population too, the issue has the potential to stop identity cards and to force the democratic world to abolish passports and tickets on public transport. Which brings a whole lot more issue campaigns under the same clear test:

EITHER to commit medical betrayal cheating the entire ordinary population out of a great gain, OR to have no psychological barriers ever to immediate takeup of new information heard for the first time.

Maurice Frank

Thoughtful culture

Popular culture at mob level has never exactly been famous for its civilised tolerance. So it can hardly be a priority of life to become a winner in a minefield of unreliable friendships and cliques. That is not the place to look for deep acceptance, it is the place where our survival advantage is the ability to go without deep acceptance and follow our own consciences. Above all, it's never worth being submissive in search of acceptance. How miserable is that? You won't know what directions it will push you in, which innocent folks the social leaders will force you to exclude and pick on, which bigotries they will force you to pretend to believe in? You could be alone in the world and still none of that will be worthwhile.

In family, in political or religious or hobby social life, at work, at volunteer days, basically at anywhere normal, there is no formula beyond personal chance that determines how much acceptance and fitting in is possible. Living within reach of as many options as possible, for the sake of adaptability, must be one sensible tip. Then it just becomes a question of trying to observe, in each person you associate with, whether they are just a closed mind, then it would be damaging to mention AS, or they have any spark of thoughtfulness and civility. If they have, I find, then a casual mention of AS, not a deep sermon about it, is good because it helps to secure that the person stays a nice way. It gives them a reason not to drift towards being on more dumbed-down and ribald terms with you just from thinking you want that normality, which is exactly what we don't want. From chances grabbed as they arise here and there, with the right folks, ground can be gained for awareness and acceptance on decent terms. Slowly it builds up, to all our benefit.

Thoughtful folks have always aspired to find or own congenial community outside the conformist horror world of the type of normal thickos who booze and gamble and iron and believe what the tabloids tell them about foreigners. That type of popular culture is a starkly treacherous place to get by in, even to win a place in at all. It does not operate rationally or thinkingly. So the point of describing it so grimly is not snobbery, it's to illustrate that culture's own choice of enmity towards us. How it is not designed for anyone guided more by reasoning and logic than by gang following, to survive or thrive in. Thoughtful folks of all types need to defend ourselves from having to belong in social conditions like those. We have always needed an alternative and been in search of one.

What better justification can there be, for needing our own scene, our own space, than an impairment to communication? But even in thoughtful activities, groups become ruined by the normal cultures' influence and the resulting fear of ribaldry and derision that comes to enslave the socially minded to take the rougher and more dumbed down life attitudes. I have watched an astronomy society die in this way. As the traumatic nature of science education has driven away from enjoyment of science the potential keen new blood the society could have kept attracting and formerly had, firstly the more practically minded strongman types came to stand out as the leaders. Then that meant all abstract chat about the subject's wonders petered out and stopped being expected or thought comfortable. Then that left the shrunken society's core life reduced wholly to happening among a few normal hard-edged cynical sneery impatient men, further alienating the non-core membership. To a comment on the virtues of serving ethical coffee the vice-president could say, "Don't let's bring ethics into it, this is the astronomical society not the ethical society, I'll get some more Nescafe." Any time you are thinking of joining an astronomy society, quote that and ask them if it could happen.

Casual evil like this, and like the pointless cliquiness we all know can pop up out of the blue in the personal boundaries of workplace social life when least expected even in health-conscious workplaces, are why the struggle for a secure thoughtful counterculture to belong to has repeatedly been defeated and savaged all through the history of semi-civilisation. Before AS was known, I had already seen, and been dismayed by, the failiure of such scenes to last permanently, in 2 settings: around children with unusually intellectual interests, and around folks going through emotionally intense problem youths.

Aspies are another grouping who could deliver a parallel culture for nice thoughtful non-ribald characters totally opted out of the majority hard soul-dead culture. We need each other's acceptance as a higher priority than to dream about finding it with any consitency outside the caring circles. Trouble is, aspies are no more immune from having nasty ways than any other grouping are. It's only as an overall tendency that our society is made nicer than average by our willingness to think critically. There are still some aspies who don't think much at all, who just want a quiet life, or who feel clever by having sarcastic uncaring characters. So the quest depends on willingness go be combative about the aspie scene's standards of personal fairness whenever they wobble, and never just passively take what the big organisations deign to give us. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.

The work the Scottish Autism Services Network is doing with us, putting our own voice into the info produced about us for all sorts of health or other service providers, is part of this vigilance. That won't be delivered to us by submissively trusting the big organisations who speak without consulting us, to "choose their priorities."

All organisations who don't speak out about how school homework destroys some aspies' chance to be child authors like the 2 well-known ones, commit a crime of child cruelty and endangerment. All organisations who ignore the case that because aspie clumsiness and gaps of attention give us a greater than equal likelihood to lose small objects, public transport can no longer require any passengers to carry losable tickets or passes, commit an endangerment of our safety. Yet one director of a lobby group for us just wrote to me, "I note what you say", a well-known bureaucrats' answer that says utterly nothing. If they lobby employers about us without mentioning the biological entitlement to dress freely, that is proved from our sensitivity and metabolism issues, they have lied about us while gambling with our life opportunities. Which all makes it important to keep local groups self-run, not provided by the big organisations, and independent of any urge to keep in their favour. There must be no divisive attitude of one generation against another, because that's not friendly, and there must be a declared automatic right for all members to count each other as equal in social worth and wantedness.

No group, big or small, local or national, is ethical unless it declares that in every conflict between personal fairness and the group's wider interests, personal fairness shall always automatically win. Our web communities too have good and bad among their number. It would be so much easier on emotionally stressed aspie reasoning if our scene was all good, it's not, but a dedication to keep the good parts of it going is our best strategy to belong and keep some part of society even half-reliably worthwhile.

Maurice Frank

endemic bus malpractices

Here is an action towards a public office, citing disability discrimination on our behalf, that consequently they have a duty to act on, and they are not doing. Now, what is the point of having a disability discrimination law if we are not supplied with the means to pin down any public office to give answers according to it???!!

These 2 emails were to the "Bus Passenger's Platform", the complaints department of an entity called Passenger View which advises the Scottish government on what bus passengers need without at all having to ask bus passengers what we want it to say! When you complain to BPP about malpractices by bus drivers, usually it is on the bus companies' side and completely in their pocket. BPP will scrape the gutter for any excuse to find that the bus company couldn't have taken an absolute line on preventing the malpractice.

BPP is one of those bodies that exists to make it look like something is being done. In reality, even if you have been blatantly bullied by a bus driver and the advertised bus sevice blatantly not honoured at all, as long as BPP's decisions are discretionary it is utterly pointless to lodge a complaint to BPP. The only thing there is any point in doing, is to extract from each bus malpractice any aspect you can of distinct ill-treatment of a minority needs group, and lobby BPP about it, telling BPP it is acting illegally concerning discrimination unless it admits that its duty to make findings in favour of the minority need is automatic, not discretionary. You need to ask BPP to confirm this to you before you file an actual case to them. This is what I sought to do in the following emails:

Mar 5: I belong to [mentioned Elas and Sasn].

The vulnerablilities caused by Asperger Syndrome include a reliance on literal information, and lack of facility to make contextual guesses that information is not meant literally. This would include, that we more than other passengers can't be expected to guess, by cultural norm, that some information given in a bus timetable is less true than other parts of the timetable and may routinely not be honoured by the bus operator. It would be illegal disability discrimination to expect any such thing of us.

A consequence of this, is that it would be illegal disability discrimination against us, ever not to find against the operator, in a case where a particular service frequently jumps one of the stops it is advertised to observe, and the operator has ignored or evaded all efforts to pin them down committally to do anything about it. A case where there is always a 50-50 chance that the bus you want will sweep past the stop in the central dual carriageway lanes that block it from observing the stop, instead of taking the side lanes to observe the stop, and this is on a long distance service so that total wreckage of a day's travel plan is inflicted by it.

In any case of this nature, it needs only be established that the company is allowing the offence to happen, by its lack of committal answers, and that makes it a simple 100% certainty that the complaint would be upheld. Hence, it would be illegal disability discrimination to a recognised medical group who have public speaking outlets, for you not to agree that this is the case, to this enquiry in advance of an actual case being brought, or to be noncommittal about it.

It would be disability discrimination to insist that the actual case is brought before you take any position, because by so insisting, you would be keeping in existence a visibly provenly illegal margin of discretion against the position being an automatic certainty. You would be forcing the case to be a gamble instead of a routine upholding of a literal principle. You would be saying that in a case where the factual finding was that yes the events concerned have happened, it could ever be at all possible even in theory to find against a complaint of the nature described and to allow a bus operator to behave in this way.

Past experience proves the need to put the case's committal medical principle to you before being forced into taking any gambles on which way you might go if it is left to arbitrary discretion.

Mar 12 BPP's answer: [first an unnecessary para explaining what BPP is]

Unfortunately you have not indicated whether or not the bus company has had an opportunity to address your complaint. I would be grateful if you would advise this office accordingly. If the operator has responded to your complaint and you are unhappy with the response, you must sens a copy of all relevant correspondence to this office.

If the complaint has not been taken up with the bus operator in the first instance, I regret that BPP is unable to consider your complaint at this stage.

Mar 14: Yes, we are talking about a case here the bus company has had this problem repeatedly put to it over a year and a half, and has only gone from explaining each incident as an isolated driver error, to not answering at all.

I know the rules about sending correspondence with an actual complaint - I have experienced the process before. But I have not made any actual complaint to you yet. I was enquiring about BPP's attitude to a principle: the committally automatic wrongness in every case ever, of a bus service being allowed to persist in often jumping one of the stops it is advertised to observe, by passing it in the wrong traffic lane for stopping.

I pointed out the disability discrimination to a whole population group, that would be done if BPP refuses to take a position on this principle that would be known in advance to apply to any specific case of it that is brought to you. So that cases are not forced to be brought to you with the discretionary possibility of BPP choosing not to uphold the principle even if the facts are found to be as described.

Thank you,

- To which there has been no further answer. You can see that BPP is meticulously evading making any comment at all on the question asked of it. Does a complaint of this particular malpractice by buses have to be upheld automatically if it is established the malpractice happened? BPP is blatantly committing disability discrimination and acting corruptly to the oppression of bus users, by ignoring this question and seeking to hold onto a discretionary power to reject such a complaint.

Let me tell you where this bus malpractice has been happening - it is on an important trunk route. It is on Citylink's M91 stopping service from Edinburgh to Perth, some coaches continuing to Inverness. One of the advertised stops on the more frequently stopping coaches is at the south side of the Forth Bridge, the former tolls, which is still stubbornly being called "tolls" in bus timetables long after the tolls have been abolished. Quite often these coaches just charge past in the central lane of the dual carriageway and ignore this stop. It can happen in both directions, but mostly in the northward direction where the stop is located on an entry sliplane, so that if the coach fails to take an exit from the main carriageway it is then barricaded into the central lanes and can't access the stop.

For a year and a half I have had repeated cause to make complaints to Citylink about this, and the only answer they ever give is a one-off apology for the driver error in forgetting the stop. The first time they said they would remind drivers about it, but this changed nothing. They will never say anything committal specifying how they will force all their staff to observe the stop. Twice I have enquired on behalf of both Elas and our equivalent in Fife, telling them that aspies have no instincts to guess in some cultural way that their service's published details should not be taken literally! and formally asking which coaches they will guarantee for certain will observe the stop, if we should organise some group travel starting at that point. CITYLINK HAS IGNORED AND NEVER ANSWERED THOSE ENQUIRIES. THIS ITSELF IS DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION, THAT THE BPP's ASSISTANCE IS NEEDED TO STOP, YET WE LIVE IN A STATE WHERE THE BPP ITSELF CAN GET AWAY WITH BEING EQUALLY CORRUPT. If you are a visitor in the Year of Homecoming, this is the state of the state here. If you are an aspie as well, and if you are trying to head north of the Forth, you have cause to complain that you are left in unclarity how the hell you are supposed to plan travel in a state where nobody enforces the honouring of published transport services in reality. If you tell Year of Homecoming about this, do you find them committal or noncommittal about caring? - for that will tell you whether it's just a con.

Some other bus malpractices that BPP's attitude also encourages to happen, are these.
* A driver on Stagecoach who drives away from the present diversionary stops in central Edinburgh, with their long queues, before passengers who were well back in the queue can reach him, and visibly laughs about it.
* First refusing to give any committal answer that their buses can be hailed from the wrong side of the road, even when they know this evasion is an offence against road safety because it meant you had to run in front of a very late bus that suddenly appeared in Galashiels' one way system, and which still drove past you anyway,
* or even when you are walking from East Linton to Haddington in the evening because 3 successive of their buses have not turned up, ("mechanical failure!") and then one passes you on the road some way short of Haddington just when it's starting to rain.
* Drivers on First who refuse to believe that the fare you want exists, in First's preposterously muddled zonal system.
* Who insist that a day ticket is just an ordinary return, or
* who take a £20 note from you then refuse to give it back or to sell you anything but the fare they think you should want instead of the fare you do want. NB - I got signed for a free bus pass as a direct result of that experience, actually on grounds of the burden of coping with communication with bus drivers! and this establishes every aspie should get one. But that is no get-out from the need to enforce proper trading standards upon First too, is it? including sacking that driver?

The Green Party, which always insults our intelligence by saying please use public transport and save carbon, never takes any position on any specific transport malpractice. I asked their council candidate in 2007, for a position against First because of the Sunday morning trains that had repeatedly been leaving early from Dalmeny station, that I had twice in 6 weeks seen ruin the travel plan of a mother trying to take 2 small infants to Glasgow visiting family. I got, "If you will forgive me, I can only respond to your general query about public transport and accountability, rather than your ongoing problems with First." DON'T FORGIVE THEM - this is the worst offence that democracy's entire effectiveness is still abused by, it is NONCOMMITTALITY. If the Greens keep this up in the coming Euro election, they are committing a specific minority uncaringness upon the autistic spectrum, because we can't be expected to communicate successfully with corrupt bus or train staff or to observe corrupt unstated principles of how to get by despite them.

Maurice Frank