Advocating for Those with Autism: It’s Time To Be Politically Incorrect
A Father's View - Adding Insult to Injury.

Dachel Media Review: DSM V May Rob Services

Online newsBy Anne Dachel

Read Anne's commentary and view the links after the jump.

Jan 27, 2014, New York Times: Schumer Proposes 'Avonte's Law' to Protect Children With Autism

Jan 26, 2014, St. Cloud (MN) Times: Increased rates of autism means rise in cost for St. Cloud schools

Jan 26, 2014, Providence (RI) Journal: Top 5 fears about vaccines (and how to ease them)

Jan 25, 2014, WHEC TV: Roundtable discussion focuses on helping families dealing with autism

Jan 25, 2014, Newsday: Autism diagnoses may decrease with new criteria

Jan 24, 2014, Boston Globe: Harvard professor and researcher Christopher McDougle featured in autism documentary

Jan 24, 2014, PBS: Inoculation Ethics

Jan 24, 2014, Jackson (MS) Clarion Ledger: Mississippi Parents for Vaccine Rights Calls for Choice



New York Times

The day after the funeral of Avonte Oquendo, the boy with autism whose remains were found this month after he disappeared at age 14 from his school in October, his mother and grandmother stood with Senator Charles E. Schumer as he announced a proposal for a new law. Called "Avonte's law," it would finance a program to provide optional electronic tracking devices to be worn by children with autism.

"Avonte's running away was not an isolated incident," Mr. Schumer, Democrat of New York, said at a news conference on Sunday morning in his office on the East Side of Manhattan. "This is a high-tech solution to an age-old problem."

Citing research that suggests nearly 50 percent of children with autism wander off, often to escape the overstimulation of sounds and noise, Mr. Schumer said the new legislation would expand an existing Department of Justice program that grants money to law enforcement agencies and other groups to provide trackers for people who have Alzheimer's disease.

The tragic death that again puts autism into the headlines. We're forced to change how we deal with children because of the epidemic of disabled children in our midst that officials refuse to recognize as a crisis. Sensitive Santa, autism-friendly movies and story times, ABA and everything.

I would ask Charles Schumer to explain this remark.

"This is a high-tech solution to an age-old problem."

Prove that autism wandering has always been around.

St. Cloud (MN) Times

Special education spending on autism spectrum disorders in the St. Cloud school district has nearly doubled in the last seven years.

During that time the student body has grown roughly 2 percent, and a significant part of the 10 percent increase in special education expenses has fallen under autism spectrum disorders.

All of that is not surprising given a nationwide increase in the prevalence of autism among children. But early intervention could not only help children with such a diagnosis mainstream earlier on, it could help curb rising costs for the district in the long run as well, experts say.

The head of spec ed is sure the number "has definitely increased." How nice. No one is ever worried!  (And no one bothers to explain why it's happening..)

What a wonderful world.

Providence (RI) Journal

Dr. Michael T. Brady debunks fears about dangerous side effects, autism, the schedule itself and the ingredients.

According to the Centers of Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), side effects from immunizations are almost always mild and go away within a few days, and serious reactions are very rare.

And of course he forgets to mention that no one can sue the doctor or the vaccine maker.  I posted comments.


"The good news is children today are graduating with honors from high school and getting into college with the autism spectrum, but need to make sure the additional services are being provided,” said Sen. Mike Nozzolio, 54th District.

This is a 29 second sound bite. How wonderful. According to a state official, autism isn't a problem. So are we expected to believe that this room full of parents was busy talking about which colleges their kids are applying to?

This is a horrible insult to parents dealing everyday with seriously disabled children and desperately worried about the future.


The number of children diagnosed with autism will likely decline in the coming years, according to researchers who have reassessed population data and found a slight drop in prevalence based on new diagnostic criteria.

Definitions of autism changed last May in a key volume published by the American Psychiatric Association.

Often called the bible of psychiatry, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fifth Edition, is best known by its abbreviated title, the DSM-5. Before its appearance, fiery debates had arisen over the loss of certain subcategories of autism. . . .

Deb Thivierge, founder of the Elija School in Levittown, wonders whether children are being well-served under DSM-5 guidelines.

"I was just at a presentation by Catherine Lord," Thivierge said of the director of the Institute for Brain Development at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital in Manhattan and member of the DSM-5 committee. "Her review of the new . . . criteria seemed to make sense. Most of it had to do with the gray area between Asperger syndrome, autism and PDD, and that clinicians were not consistent in their diagnoses.

"From my perspective, as a professional and as a parent, it will definitely mean that those children and adults who are more mildly symptomatic might not get a diagnosis, which means they will not receive appropriate services," Thivierge said.


AUTISM: the disorder with no official cause or cure is now being relabeled so that schools and insurance providers won't have to provide for these children.

One in 88 or one in 50 U.S. children (depending on which CDC statistic you care to believe) has an autism diagnosis. No official can tell us why.

The rate is always based on studies of children. No one has ever been able to show us a comparable rate among adults--especially adults with severe autism.

For years, the people at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention have been scratching their heads over autism, unable to determine if the dramatic increases in the rate meant that there were actually more children with the disorder. No one at the CDC has ever called autism a crisis. Now it seems, by changing the definition, they'll be able to make it seem like autism is going away.

Boston Globe

Autism researcher Dr. Christopher McDougle made his film debut last week in a documentary called "Sounding the Alarm," which premiered at Massachusetts General Hospital ahead of other screenings nationwide and an online release. The film takes an in-depth look at 12 families and focuses on problems people with autism face, including the transition into adulthood. McDougle, a professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School and director of Mass General's Lurie Center for Autism, started his career when autism was a very rare diagnosis. Now, at least 1 in 88 American schoolchildren fits the diagnosis.


Any thinking person would expect someone to explain WHY THIS IS A PROBLEM. Dr. Christopher McDougle is worried about what's going to happen when all these young adults age out of school with nowhere to go.

(And that isn't just true for people on the severe end of the spectrum, as McDougle claims.)

McDougle states that autism was "a very rare diagnosis" when he started practicing medicine. Really? Why is the current rate one in 88?

McDougle warns that these disabled adults are going to have problems finding jobs. WHY? Why can't they do what autistic adults have always done?

Why are we always hearing about the problems of young adults with autism? Why isn't anyone looking out for the one in 88 middle aged and elderly people with autism? Why can't anyone show us where they are in numbers even approaching what we see in our children?


The undeniable truth is that this is a new problem and no one can explain where all these disabled people are coming from. If McDougle thinks there are problems now, just wait a few more years when autism does effect adults as well as children.

Notice that McDougle talks about reducing inflammation and reducing the symptoms of autism. He doesn't explain what causes the inflammation. If this is a factor in autism, why doesn't mainstream medicine ever talk about it?

For an autism researcher, Dr. McDougle can't tell us much we don't already know.


In most states, parents can choose not to vaccinate their children based on a personal or religious objection. It's a choice that has begun raising concerns about the ethics of refusal and the rising risk of outbreaks. 

What about the ethics of indemnifying doctors and vaccine makers?

Typical coverage.  They blame the Lancet study, without naming Wakefield or the Lancet, saying only, "The autism concern stems mainly from a report published 15 years ago in a British medical journal that has since been withdrawn and labeled a fraud."

I posted nine comments. Check them out.  The links to the vaccine schedule and Greater Good have visuals!

Jackson (MS) Clarion Ledger

Mississippi Parents for Vaccine Rights says it's time for the state to allow parents to have the legal right to select, delay or opt out of vaccines.

About 30 members of the group rallied Wednesday at the state Capitol in an effort to push for a bill this year to allow exceptions to the state's immunization law. Mississippi doesn't allow philosophical or religious exemptions from immunizations.

"There are 48 states that allow that right," said Mary Jo Perry of Pelahatchie, co-director of Parents for Vaccine Rights.


"Mississippi only offers a very difficult to obtain medical exemption and children pretty much have to be injured before they can get exempted. We're vaccinating our children up to 49 times for 15 diseases for kindergarten and there are a lot of families that definitely want to vaccinate but they're a little intimidated by that schedule and they would like to slow it down a little."

"Perry said her son suffered a grand mal seizure, which she said she believes it was due to a vaccination since it occurred within hours of her son getting the shot."

I just posted on this........great comments from lots of people.



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Looking past any thin, spotty layer of sugar coating, what is underneath is pure venom.

John Stone

I think perhaps Reiss is the pharmaceutical industy's answer to the usual rabble they have out there defending it in the social media. Taken individually none of them give a good account of themselves, so to have what sounds like a decent professional voice who posts as much as the rest put together fills a serious gap. But as I have also pointed out, such is the weakness of vaccine science, that she is highly dependent on th rabble to get by, not only with them to protect her flank but to provide her with sources.


Dorit Reiss has blogged impossible number of times on a lot of articles.
She seems resonable and compassionate on purpose.
She is not there to change the mind of those who have witnessed vaccines damage children. She is there to protect the vaccine program and keep young parents or other people reading the article -calm, and mis-informed.

Lilady was not doing that for them. She was coming in like an troll going to eat the sheep coming over the bridge.

People did not like Lilady; so in steps Doret -- she is suppose to act like she is kind, reasonable, and thus likable by readers passing by.


It doesn't matter what her motivation is. It's easy to spot a predator when they are coarse and appear frightening. The ones you have to guard most against are the ones in sheep's clothing. Ted Bundy's victims thought he was a very nice guy, intelligent, clean cut, and kind.

She is after your children. She is actively campaigning to take away your right to refuse medical treatment for you and your children. She is outright stating that your children belong to the state and not to you. For Heaven's sake, she is not in any way, shape, or form, benign.

Diane W Farr

I would disagree that DR is a monster. I have read some of her comments, blogs, and articles and she does seem to have some compassion. I think she is misguided. I see she is often open for debate where others in her camp are not. I would like to wish she was on our side (pro-vaccine safety) but that would be wishing she was like us and had a loved one that suffered from a vaccine injury. As much as I despise the arrogance of PO, even I would have to object if he wanted to roll his sleeve up for a 1,000 vaccines at once.

I think vaccines have encouraged parents from shunning their parental responsibility. Parents have a false sense of security that if they vaccinate their children they will be healthy and will not get a disease that their children has been vaccinated for. Measles, for example, if a vaccinated child gets the measles. The symptoms will not be recognized and likely the child will get antibiotics and Tylenol. Vaccination has become a religion. Pediatricians preach vaccines and parents put their faith in vaccines. Parents of vaccinated children feel like they can be slack and not provide a healthy diet, probiotics, vitamin D from supplements or sunshine to nurture a robust immune system.

I would love to see a vac/unvac study. We know what the outcome would be and that is why it has not been done. I suppose it will happen some day and the CDC will be able to discredit the study because they could honestly say that the unvaccinated children were already healthier because parents took extra precaution to nurture their immune systems.


From Dorit Reiss on the PBS Innoculation story:

"When a parent makes a choice for a child, the state has all the rights to step in and protect the child against a parent's decision to leave that child exposed to preventable diseases, to risks to her health and life. Especially if the parent's decision is based on misinformation, like claiming - against the evidence - that vaccines cause asthma, peanut allergy, autism, and seizure disorder - none of which is true. The child has a right to health"

What other rights does "the state" have, in Reiss view? I wonder. If "the state" wants to conscript a child to fight a war, would Reiss argue against or for "the state?"

Does "the state" have the right to take away a child that is being fed McDonald's? That could be construed as harmful to a child.

Does "the state" have the right to take a way a child that skate boards? The child could crash into another person and cause injury.

Does "the state" have the right to force a medical procedure on anyone? Depends on the state. In fascist countries it is a given that the individual is subordinated to the state.

Dorit Reiss has exposed herself as an individual who is aligned with fascist policies. I think it is past time for "the state" to monitor her very, very closely to make sure she is not exposing her child to something that might cause harm. "The state" has determined that HPV shots can harm her child. Since Reiss has admitted she intends to expose her child to that potentially harmful situation, it is only consistent with her view that "the state" should take away her child, today.

Dorit Reiss should pack her bags and get the hell out of America. She will be more comfortable in totalitarian countries where she can dictate who gets a needle shoved in their arm who doesn't. Her advocacy for pharma has crossed a moral line. When they come for her, let them have her. She would do the same to us.



I saw that too.

I'm going to get into trouble for this...but to me, her position is even more shocking coming from a woman whose people were nearly wiped off the face of the earth by a government who had no respect for human rights or dignity, and who took children away from their parents while imposing a murderous ideology for the supposed good of mankind.

Dorit Reiss is a MONSTER.

Roger Kulp

Bob Moffit,the way I understand it is the DSM-V will mean the decrease in the number of children at the higher functioning end of the spectrum,not the lower end.Everything I have read suggests the increase in autism has been a double edged sword,with more children being diagnosed at both the higher and lower functioning ends of the spectrum.Those at the lower functioning end will still be diagnosed.Those at the higher functioning end will get diagnosed with something other than autism,shifting the spectrum more towards the lower functioning end,while under the DSM-IV some might argue it had been more biased towards the higher functioning end.A diagnostic imbalance is still wrong though.

That said,I do agree that the dramatic increase in autism with intellectual disability in the last couple of decades is the real issue.One few are addressing.Autism with intellectual disability continues to increase,in spite of the removal of thimerosal from vaccines.

If the DSM-V means we will not be seeing many more future Ari Ne'emans,and the evil of neurodiversity will eventually go away,then clearly some good will come out of it in the long run.

I was wandering just like Avonte was fifty years ago...

Diane W Farr

I was reading the blogs on the MS article. DR said this

"Children aren't their parents' property. The state should protect them against parental errors that could be fatal, including the decision not to vaccinate."

Bob Moffitt


"The number of children diagnosed with autism will likely decline in the coming years, according to researchers who have reassessed population data and found a slight drop in prevalence based on new diagnostic criteria."

Please correct me if I am wrong .. but .. in my humble opinion .. the "likely decline in the coming years" will be the result of FINALLY counting the children .. such as .. my own grandson who is now fourteen .. who were among the LAST innocents to receive ...


As I said .. correct me if I am wrong .. but .. as far as I know .. the numbers of children who received those last doses of thimerosal have yet to be counted among the 1 in 88 already identified?

And so .. yes .. I suspect autism will .. indeed decrease in some measure because .. "Definitions of autism changed last May in a key volume published by the American Psychiatric Association."

However, ANY real decrease in the lower end of the autism spectrum will be primarily due to the REMOVAL OF THIMEROSAL FROM MOST VACCINES .. providing critical "EVIDENCE OF HARM" .. which will be "conveniently lost through the passage of time"



I see Dorit Reiss is on the Mississippi comments; Like a big at tick on a coon hound.

I wonder where can I get one of those T shirts. I have a Sister-in-law living in that state - she needs one?

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)