Talk:Ethical challenges to autism treatment
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Neutrality of "Historic prognosis for permanently institutionalized autistic children"
I created the "Ethical challenges to autism treatment" article because the autism rights movement article was getting too big. The section on "Historic prognosis ..." I did not write but I do have some concerns about neutrality of that section. I was able to prefix some opinions in that section with things like "it is the opinion of autism rights activists ..." but I don't know enough about the topic to edit it more than that. I'd like for someone else who knows more about that topic to check that section and make sure it is neutral. Q0 03:28, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Weasel terms
The section historic prognosis for permanently institutionalized autistic children was flagged as having weasel terms. Please try to improve as necessary. -Frazzydee|✍ 04:14, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Neuroleptics
Medical professionals I have talked to, as well as an instruction for Swedish healthcare personell which I don't have anymore, stated that neuroleptics should never be administered to people with pervasive developmental disorders (I believe it mentioned ADHD and Asperger explicitly, though I assume the same goes for autism), unless it is the only way to prevent immediate risk of significant harm to the patient or others. The reason for this was, as I recall, that these people are more sensitive to long-term effects than neurotypicals. Anecdotally, I have PDD/NOS with features of ADD and Asperger, and got severe long-term effects from a single 5mg dose of Nozinan, including but not limited to severe cognitive, personality, motor and hormonal changes. Some of these have slowly started to reverse after 3 years, starting after a prolonged course of treatment with dopaminergic drugs. Of course, that can't be in the article, but it bears searching for further information about the topic. Zuiram 06:45, 15 December 2006 (UTC)