The name Asperger is widely
known as a syndrome related to autism. The label honors Johann Friedrich Karl Asperger
(1906-1980), an Austrian pediatrician who studied mental disorders in children
in the 1930s and early 1940s. His diagnosis of “autistic psychopathy” related
to social detachment was eventually given professional approval in the “Diagnostic
and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders” (called DSM) in 1994 as Asperger
syndrome.
Asperger’s research focused
on children who had difficulty making social contact, as in classic autism, but
who were also highly intelligent and could lead extraordinarily productive
lives. Asperger lauded the later successes of these autistic children, whose “social
worth” he promoted. Because many doctors in Austria and Germany believed
that genetic abnormalities reduced the worth of a human life, Asperger’s
defense of his “Aspies” enabled him to cultivate a lifelong reputation as the
friend of the handicapped. He had a long and successful career, eventually
becoming chair of pediatrics at the University of Vienna Children’s Hospital
and director of children’s clinics.
Asperger’s work was not well
known until the 1980s, after he had died. Since then his 1944 discussion of
those particular cases of autism has become widely known. His birthday is
recognized as “International
Asperger’s Day”.
But Asperger had not been so
generous with children whose autism was more severe. Like many Nazi doctors, he
decided whether handicapped patients were worthy of life, and sent the “unworthy”
to
their deaths in special institutions of mass murder. In 1942, he was senior
pediatrician on a Viennese commission evaluating the status of 210 Austrian
children residing in mental hospitals. 35 were judged unfit and were sent to
die.
Asperger played a despicable
role in a despicable system, participating in murdering children whom he deemed
unworthy of life. He deserves no international honor. His name should not be
used without an understanding of his deeds.
Does that mean that the
condition now called Asperger’s syndrome should also not exist as a medical
diagnosis and research subject? The American Psychiatric Association made a
purely medical-scientific argument in 2010 that “Asperger’s disorder” no
longer be listed as a separate condition in the DSM, which it produces.
Arguments among health
professionals about how to diagnose and treat mental illness will probably
never end, because there is so much about how our brain works that is unknown.
Decisions about how autism functions should be made based on the best science
that we can produce today, not on our moral condemnation of Asperger. If he was
correct about the nature of his unusual cases, that disorder should have a
name, just not his.
His life illustrates how
scientific knowledge always has shortcomings: Einstein’s
mistakes are legendary, but do not detract from his achievements. The
international scientific establishment is designed to improve our understanding
of ourselves and our world, by correcting mistakes and oversights in our
current knowledge. That is the beauty of science.
But there are many for whom
objective scientific inquiry is threatening: producers of ineffective
medicines; polluters of air and water; contributors to global warming. Those
who do not want to believe the best science use the existence of scientific
disagreement to reject science itself. The deniers of evolution and of global
warming seek out such disagreements to argue that science itself is wrong and
their beliefs are right, despite the evidence.
Right now, the Trump
administration is engaged in an unprecedented political attack on science. Scott
Pruitt at the Environmental Protection Agency discounts scientists whose
findings he doesn’t like. Most scientific research is funded by government grants. Pruitt
claims that scientists who receive funding from the government are biased and should
be replaced on scientific advisory committees by scientists who are funded
by the industries that pollute the environment. He wants the EPA to ignore
all research where participants were guaranteed that their personal health
data would be kept confidential. That means ignoring virtually all large
studies of public health, which show the effects of environmental pollution.
Worse than bad science is no
science. There is still
no director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, the
longest that job has ever been vacant. Without a director, leadership about
science in the White House falls to the deputy assistant, Michael Kratsios, a 31-year-old
with a bachelor’s
in political science, who has studied voting
in Greece and has never done scientific work.
Trump’s new budget request
included severe
cuts to science in disease control, mental health, environment, oil spills,
geology, and, of course, climate.
It is hard for most Americans
to judge scientific arguments, especially when people of ill will use clever
techniques and obscure jargon to call into question good science. But one doesn’t
need specialized knowledge to know that private industry pays for science that
supports its private interests, that political ideology distorts scientific
reasoning, that we need good science to stay healthy and to keep our society
functioning.
Asperger let politics rule
his science with tragic results. In Washington, politics again threatens to
subvert science. That will have tragic consequences for us and our children.
Steve Hochstadt
Jacksonville IL
Published in the Jacksonville
Journal-Courier, April 10, 2018
No comments:
Post a Comment