Michael Savage and Austism comments

I am going to read some more on this subject tomorrow, but it just kills me from what I have read so far how incredibly crazy people can be in America. I was reading on the iVillage Beehive an entry about the current buzz this week about Michael Savage's recent comments about Austism. It reminds me of the recent Imus comments that were taken out of context a few weeks ago, people back again accusing him of being racist.

But this time, Michael Savage is being accused of saying that children who are diagnosed as autisic, is not really autistic, they are just "brats". Contrary, what I have gathered is that he is saying the disorder is overdiagnosed, and there are kids out there with the dx that is not truly autistic. I am going to do some more reading on this, but you can do some footwork yourself and listen to the snippets from his show here.

As for what I thought about the iVillage article, I posted my comments but iVillage blogs has a habit of not showing mine, maybe they're anti conservative commenters? ;o) I mean they did source the Huffington Post for this entry- I'd think they could find a more balanced source than the Huffington Post people!!

So for my comments:

I believe celebrities are elevated to levels by the public they should not be. Just because someone is famous, doesn't mean they are required to know everything about everything. Though, I do have a problem with the article that is referenced in this entry. Their only sentence in the whole article that gives room for context is "...Savage offered no apology in a message posted Monday on his Web site. He said greedy doctors and drug companies were creating a "national panic" by overdiagnosing autism,..."

Why should he apologize for saying he believes autism is overdiagnosed? In this article they crucify him completely through, but we have to ake a mopment and realize this is a liberal blog, talking about an appaently conservative person, so there is not going to be a *fair balance* of reporting and wording of the article.

iVillage, I challenge you you to find better balanced sources for your articles.
From this page -http://michaelsavage.wnd.com/?pageId=1156
It says:

"Dr. Savage has clarified that his July 16th statements concerning autism
were not directed at those who are in fact challenged by this horrible
affliction, but were instead addressing efforts to broaden the concept of autism
beyond those who truly are autistic to a broader "autistic spectrum" of
behavioral symptoms which are also manifested by persons who do not suffer from
autism, and his concern that many children are being misdiagnosed as autistic
due to the subjective nature of autism diagnosis (due to the lack of known
biomedical indicators, such as blood tests, to definitively confirm or deny the
actual existence of autism).

Dr. Savage has also explained his belief that there have been efforts by
certain professionals and professional organizations to expand diagnoses of
autism more broadly, for various reasons, and his concern that this victimizes
and stigmatizes children who are misdiagnosed as autistic.

On multiple other occasions Dr. Savage has expressed his concerns that
other conditions, such as ADD and ADHD, are overdiagnosed and result in improper
medication of young children, which Dr. Savage regards as abusive.

In the context of his broader concerns, it is clear that Dr. Savage's
comments were intended to suggest his opinion that, in the vast majority of
cases, most children throwing tantrums, or refusing to communicate, are not
autistic. Unfortunately, by condensing his multifaceted concerns into 84 seconds
of commentary, the necessary context for his remarks was not apparent, and the
few words he used to express his concerns were, in this instance, inartfully
phrased."

Straight from the results of the investigation by the network its self.

Now, I find it *crazy* that people think that one should be fired for exercising their right to freedom of speech! (Imus was not fired, btw) The people in San Franscisco who are going to protest outside of the station would do them selves well in showing grace to others as it is shown to them.

I had a child that fit every single "check" of the ADHD "list" beginning at three years old, and he got worse at four, then five, into his sixth birthday. A friend of mine with an autistic son even went through their diagnostic scales with me, and my son scored HIGHER on the autistic scale than her dx'd son did, yet my son was NOT.

I was told by EVERYONE including parents of children with ADHD I needed to find a doctor that WOULD dx him so we could get him medicated to "calm down". My ped REFUSED to dx him, because in her 30+ years of experience, she did not believe he was.

He does NOT have ADHD and shortly after his sixth birthday he changed dramatically. BY seven, those behaviors that everyone felt needed to be medicated and therapies for, were gone.
I DO believe there are children who are diagnosed with disorders they do not really have. I also have a family member who has aggressively persued a dx of ADHD for her child, (like she was telling me to do with my own), and after having her child with me for a period of time I can TELL you he doesn't have it, he needs consistency in his life, which his mother does NOT provide!

So I'm erring on the side of giving Mr Savage some grace and believing his follow up statements, and believing that he was saying publically what I already believed- there are parents out there that are not parenting as responsibly as they have the courage or strength to do, refuse to get support and *would rather blame their child* for their child's inapprorpiate behavior, and seek a medical label, than accept responsibility for their own parenting shortcomings.

Lets quit acting like this does not happen in own country!!

Do you have any thoughts on this?