I'm Autistic. The Government's "New" Rhetoric Feels Eerily Familiar. The Chilling Historical Parallel to the Nazi Aktion T4 Program Today's Anti-Autistic Rhetoric.
We Are Not an Epidemic. The Dangerous Lie About Autism That's Coming Back.
I’m Autistic, and (because I know history, and can see us repeating dangerous patterns) I am worried about the future of Autistic People (and our families and caregivers) in the United States (and beyond).
Recent harmful and stigmatizing rhetoric from the U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. (and other so-called professionals associated with the U.S. government) have repeatedly used language that frames Autistic People as a burden on society.
In recent months, Kennedy and his team of quacks have repeatedly described Autism as “an epidemic“ and a “preventable disease,” language that frames the Autistic NeuroType as “a rapidly spreading illness“.
Kennedy, Trump, and the regime have made sweeping claims that “Autism destroys families,“ describing Autistic People in ways that denies our humanity, stating long lists of things he believes Autistics will never be able to do (in a way that suggests people who need more support or can’t work are innately less valuable than those who can), and declaring that Autistic People are “a lifelong burden“ on those around us.
This rhetoric focuses on eradication, with Kennedy promising to find “the causes“ of and “eliminate Autism“ (which you can’t do without eliminating Autistic People).
This language promotes a stigma that Autistic People are a tragedy that needs to be stopped, eliminated, or prevented.
These ideas (of Autistic erasure from humanity) have real-world consequences, fueling fear and distracting from the actual needs of Autistic People (such as support services, inclusion, and civil rights).
Furthermore, proposals like a national “Autism registry“ are deeply concerning due to their potential for misuse, especially when we look at how historically tracking disabled populations has been used for the purposes of elimination (like with the Aktion T4 program in Nazi Germany).
What was the Aktion T4 Program?
The Aktion T4 program was a systematic, state-sponsored effort by Nazi Germany to murder people with physical and mental disabilities and serves as a dark historical example of where discrimination and devaluing disabled lives can lead us.
This program was based on the false and cruel belief that some lives were “unworthy of life“ and that disabled individuals were “a burden to society “(and should be eliminated).
Through this horrendous program, people in institutions were killed by starvation, lethal injection, or in gas chambers, with their deaths described as “mercy.”
The T4 program primarily targeted people living in institutions and included the systematic murder of disabled people to “cleanse“ the gene pool.
While the term “Autism“ was around (but not as widely used in those days), the program targeted people with the same neurological and behavioral characteristics. This means many Autistic children and adults were among the tens of thousands killed (because they were seen as a burden to the state).
Under this program, individuals were transferred to specific killing centers where they were murdered (most often by poison gas or lethal overdose).
It is estimated that over 70,000 people were killed in this initial phase, which served as a chilling precursor to the Holocaust.
The Aktion T4 program used deceptive language, calling the murders “euthanasia“ or “mercy deaths,” to justify the harm done to vulnerable populations (and to disguise the program’s cruel inhuman nature).
Via the Aktion T4 Program, the murders of targeted individuals were justified using the following language:
“Life Unworthy of Life“: This was the core phrase. It labeled disabled people of the time as having less value, framing their lives as not worth living.
“Burdens“ and “Useless Eaters“: People with disabilities were called these names to present them as a financial drain on society and the state.
“Inferior Hereditary Material“: This language falsely claimed disabled people would weaken the country’s genetic health, justifying their removal.
“Mercy Death“ or “Euthanasia“: These terms were used to disguise murder, making it seem like a compassionate act to end suffering.
This dehumanizing vocabulary (designed to dehumanize the victims) was a key tool to make the extermination of disabled people seem acceptable to the public (and those carrying out the orders) as a way to paint this extermination as a necessary, even merciful, policy.
Language in Aktion T4 that is Similar to Recent U.S. Rhetoric
Years later, as an Autistic Person, I am unnerved to see similar themes and dehumanizing rhetoric being used to spread fear and hate for Autism (and by extension Autistic People).
There Aren’t More Autistic People Now than in the Past
In recent months, our government has described Autism as “a growing epidemic“ that the nation must “confront,” framing Autistic People’s existence as a threat to national health (that needs to be eradicated).
In reality, the rising diagnosis rates are a result of increased awareness and understanding of Autism, plus a widening criterion used to label people as Autistic.
A significant part of this increase in rates of Autism identification is that the diagnostic criterion was significantly expanded in 2013 with the release of the DSM-5 (to include many people who wouldn’t have previously qualified for an Autism diagnosis).
Additionally, Autistic Adults have become much more vocal about Autism and the Autistic experience online over the past 10 years (taking over the conversation about Autism that used to be dominated by non-autistic parents of Autistic children who were “at war“ with their child’s Autism), leading to more positive conversations about Autism and to more people becoming aware of the many ways Autism and Autistic People can present.
People are now seeking out Autism specialists and asking for Autism diagnosis by name due to this increased awareness, when previously Autism was less widely understood and known or thought to be rarer (or to only include those who need round-the-clock care and supervision).
More about this in my previous post The “Autism Epidemic” Is a Lie: Trump’s “Historic” Autism Announcement Is a Declaration of War on Autistic People.
Framing this increase in Autism diagnoses as an “epidemic“ is disingenuous and misleading, fueling fear.
Those in power have also described Autistic People as “a tragedy“ that “ruins lives and families,” as well as a “financial drain on the country“ (similar to the “burdens” and “useless eaters“ rhetoric used in Nazi Germany’s T4 program).
While not using the same exact words (useless eaters), official statements emphasize the “economic productivity“ they say is “lost“ to Autism and frame Autistic People as a cost to society (devaluing anyone who is unable to produce capital or needs support to live).
Additionally, the focus is on “treatment pathways,” “eliminating Autism,” and “safeguarding families“ (from Autism), dehumanizes Autistic People, by framing us as “a medical tragedy to be solved“ (rather than people who need support). This is similar to the “Inferior Hereditary Material” rhetoric seen in the historic T4 program, and could easily lead in the direction of “elimination of Autism“ (something that can’t be done unless you eliminate Autistic People).
As an Autistic Person, I find the goal of preventing the existence of Autistic People deeply frightening. This rhetoric can induce guilt in parents and create stigma, making Autistic People feel as if our government sees our very existence as a problem to be solved (or prevented).
Blaming Parents Hurts Autistic People (and our loved ones)
Additionally, the regime has repeatedly pushed out harmful and stigmatizing rhetoric that blames our parents and guardians for “causing“ Autism (by making false claims that Autism is caused by vaccines and or Tylenol) - even though Autistic People were here long before the use of Tylenol or the MMR vaccine was available to the public.
Autistic People were here before Tylenol (or the MMR vaccine).
For example, in 1911, the term “Autism“ was first coined by Swiss psychiatrist Eugen Bleuler.
Bleuler used the word “Autism“ to describe a symptom of withdrawal in patients with schizophrenia, from the Greek word autos, meaning “self.” However, Bleuler believed “Autism“ was not a standalone condition but rather a feature of what he thought was a fragmented psyche.
The understanding of Autism shifted dramatically in the 1940s when psychiatrists Leo Kanner and Hans Asperger both identified Autism as its own distinct neuro-developmental difference.
While still far from perfect (for example, Asperger, working under the Nazi regime, participated in their eugenics program by helping decide which children were “worthy of life“ and which were to be sent to clinics where they would be killed), both Kanner and Asperger’s work showed that the social and communication differences in the children they studied were innate and represented a fundamental difference in neurology (and were not a symptom of psychosis or a withdrawn state from schizophrenia). This was in the 1940s (years before Tylenol or the MMR vaccine were popularized).
Tylenol was not popularized until the mid-1950s.
Tylenol was first introduced in the United States in 1955 as a prescription pain reliever for children and a liquid alternative to aspirin.
It became a widely used over-the-counter medication in the 1960s and 1970s.
By the 1980s, Tylenol had become one of the most popular pain relievers in the U.S., many years after Autism had been formally labeled.
The MMR vaccine came about even later.
The MMR vaccine was built upon existing single vaccines.
Standalone vaccines for measles, mumps, and rubella were first licensed in 1963, 1967, and 1969, respectively. The combination of these three into one single MMR shot made vaccination more efficient and less painful for children.
The push for a second dose in 1989 was a direct response to measles outbreaks among school-aged children who had already received the first dose of the vaccine. This two-dose strategy was highly successful, resulting in a significant decline in cases and ultimately contributing to measles being declared eliminated from the United States in 2000.
Measles is back.
Measles has made a comeback in the United States after being declared eliminated in 2000 (due to the decline of our once highly effective vaccination program). The resurgence has been driven mainly by a decline in measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccination rates (which have created pockets of susceptible individuals in many communities).
Persistent, long-debunked claims linking the MMR vaccine to Autism continue to undermine people’s confidence in the vaccine and perpetuate stigma against Autistic People. This hesitancy has been amplified by broader political and social discourse around all vaccines.
Measles Can Be Serious
Complications occur in about 3 out of 10 people and can include pneumonia, encephalitis (swelling of the brain), and even death.
For every 1,000 children who get measles, 1 to 3 will die from it.
Additionally, measles infections can wipe out a person’s immune system’s memory of previous diseases, leaving them vulnerable to other infections for months or even years after the infection.
Is being Autistic really a “fate worse than death“?
As an Autistic Person, when people say they want to avoid vaccines or Tylenol because they “don’t want Autistic children“, it feels (to me) like people are saying they “would rather have a dead child than an Autistic one.“
It’s hard not to feel insulted and devalued by such sentiments.
I also worry about the potential harm that could come if parents start to be assigned blame for “creating“ Autistic offspring.
What if our government decides to punish parents for “creating“ Autistic Children?
If a government were to punish parents for a scientifically unproven cause of Autism, it would be a severe abuse of power (because it could lead to families being wrongly investigated by child services, having their children removed, or being criminalized for “causing their child to be Autistic” - something that is nobody’s fault).
This narrative frames Autism as a tragedy (or a crime that happened to the child), rather than a natural form of human diversity. This stigma makes Autistic People feel like we are damaged or unwanted burdens (which is profoundly harmful to our self-esteem and mental health).
This Blame Causes Deep Emotional Harm
Blaming parents for their child’s Autism induces immense guilt, shame, and heartache, distracting from the vital work of accepting and supporting their child. This can damage the parent-child bond (and family well-being).
The game of blame and shame helps no one (while distracting from the real needs of Autistic People and our families).
The Autistic Community and Autistic People (and those who care about us) deserve better.
I completely understand the targeting of specific NeuroDivergent individuals including those with Autism diagnosis, in the UK those with physical and psychological impairments have been broadly targeted, by the UK Government. The political parties used to have a specific demograph that they targeted to represent, but now most political parties focus on their own agenda and they might as well all be one right wing party.
I’m now more than ever aware that we cannot rely on world governments, it’s the civil society and people uniting and coming together that can and will make the biggest impact on this planet. Especially, with grassroots organisations and movements I know that Amnesty International and the United Nations are the two biggest organisations that are known worldwide. They are also the biggest advocates for disabled people.
I know that here in Britain that Amnesty UK has just setup Disabled People's Human Rights Network. Over the weekend, I attended an hybrid even, that discussed the issues of far-right policies that the Labour government are planning to bring in. There are about six including ID cards, surveillance on banks and a euthanasia bill (so horrendous stuff). There was a panel and on it was a guy who works within Amnesty US. He was live stream in from New York sharing his knowledge and research happening in the US. There was also a workshop that discussed ways organisations can work together and provide best practice in tackling these issues at a national level in the UK, but could also benefit the rest of the world. A lady had mentioned to consider what the global south is doing well, as I am aware the global north can be arrogant in believing there way is best.
I am unsure if Amnesty US are planning to set up Disabled People's Human Rights Network, but if not there might be a way to encourage to set something up. Depending on if there a way to get enough people to set one up… Just an idea, but I thought I just let you know what Amnesty UK are doing.