Archive | Orgs RSS feed for this section

Small groups band together to attempt to derail autism research funding

21 May

The law that sets in place the structure to steer autism research is up for renewal this year. Public Law 109-406 was introduced as The Combating Autism Act in 2006. It was reauthorized in 2011. And it is up for reauthorization again this year.

The law authorizes congress to appropriate $190,000,000 per year for autism research. But there are those who would like to scuttle this effort.

A number of groups have banded together to form the “Autism Policy Reform Coalition” to oppose continuing with the law funding autism research. From The Hill:

But an upstart group known as the Autism Policy Reform Coalition (APRC) is against the bill, arguing a drastic overhaul is needed in order for the money to be used effectively.

Who are the “Autism Policy Reform Coalition”? Readers to Left Brain/Right Brain will likely recognize many of these groups. And quickly put together the link that ties them together. In case you haven’t already guess it, yes, it’s vaccines. With science against them on vaccines, they are trying to legislate their views into existence.

Many of these groups are very small. Well funded, but small. None has a truly large membership. Most if not all do not allow for their leadership to be selected by a vote of membership. In fact, for most it seems one can not join them as a member, so it’s difficult to understand how they claim to represent a large part of the autism communities. As far as I know, none have an autistic in any prominent position, much less as a leader. And yet they purport to represent the “autism community”.

While many of these groups have toned down their public statements on vaccines over the years, they are still heavily invested in the idea. One marker of their support for the idea and their lack of scientific rigor is their support for Andrew Wakefield. Mr. Wakefield is the disgraced former academic surgeon who lost his medical license for unethical behavior and whose work attempting to link the MMR vaccine with autism was declared one of the great science frauds by Time Magazine. Much more, his work has been shown to be wrong (for one example, here).

Here are the groups in the Autism Policy Coalition:

Autism is Medical

Appears to be involved with Andrew Wakefield and the failed vaccine-causation notion. They are relatively new having just received 501(c)(3) status this year.

Defending Academic Integrity and Research Foundation
Again, a new group. They appear to be in place in large part to give financial assistance to Andrew Wakefield’s lawsuit against Brian Deer and the BMJ (replacing the “Doctor Wakefield Justice Fund”).

Here’s a recent Facebook page post

D.A.I.R. Foundation is committed to integrity in academics and research and exists to support scientists, doctors, and researchers working in the best interest of the public health whose efforts have come under intense and unfair scrutiny.

At the heart of this is Dr. Andy Wakefield whose work challenged special interest groups who responded with opposition and injustice. The Weston A Price Foundation awarded Dr. Wakefield the prestigious Integrity in Science award at the 2013 Wise Traditions Conference where he was also keynote speaker at the banquet. The DAIR Foundation Fundraiser seeks to provide legal support for Dr Wakefield and others in similar situations. We welcome your support. Tickets are tax deductible and attendees receive cocktails, dinner from a Paleo-style buffet, and a copy of Dr Wakefield’s latest book. Dr. Wakefield will speak to dinner guests about his research and his documentary movie.

To purchase tickets visit the DAIR Foundation website and click on the envelope icon next to the text Orlando Fundraiser Event

It is unclear how one would become a member, voting or not, of DAIR, nor how their leadership is selected.

Generation Rescue

Generation Rescue is currently run by Jenny McCarthy, who has been very vocal in her support of the vaccine/autism link. When Andrew Wakefield lost his job at Thoughtful House, Generation Rescue stepped up with a $100,000 donation to his “Strategic Autism Initiative”.

Generation Rescue’s founder wrote:

With less than a half-dozen full-time activists, annual budgets of six figures or less, and umpteen thousand courageous, undaunted, and selfless volunteer parents, our community, held together with duct tape and bailing wire, is in the early to middle stages of bringing the U.S. vaccine program to its knees.

I can not find from their website whether one can join as a member (voting or not) or how their leadership is selected.

National Autism Association

Recently ran into controversy over a fundraiser for their stance on vaccines. Supporter of Andrew Wakefield. They state on their website:

The National Autism Association believes:
Vaccinations can trigger or exacerbate autism in some, if not many, children, especially those who are genetically predisposed to immune, autoimmune or inflammatory conditions.

One can become a dues-paying member of the NAA. Their most recent IRS form 990 shows that they took in $4,775 in dues. That would be fewer than 150 dues paying members at their $35 tier.

I can not see how leadership is selected; whether the membership is allowed to vote in open elections.

SafeMinds

One of the first organizations formed around the idea that vaccines cause autism. In specific, SafeMinds is focused on thimerosal in vaccines. The leadership has many of the same people over the past decade and I can’t see where one could join and whether if members are allowed, if they are allowed to vote for leadership.

Talk About Curing Autism

Another org that is strongly behind the vaccine-autism link.
(and here). It’s unclear if or how one would become a voting member. The leadership has been largely unchanged since founding.

The Thinking Mom’s Revolution

While I’m very fond of blogs, I don’t see them as organizations. Again, where does one join or vote for leadership? How does this blog count membership? Facebook likes?

I believe every one of the above groups considers Andrew Wakefield to be a hero, ignoring his proved ethical lapses (he was stripped of his medical license and the fact that his ideas on vaccines and autism have been shown to be wrong (e.g. Lack of Association between Measles Virus Vaccine and Autism with Enteropathy: A Case-Control Study to select one of many)

I am a public member to the IACC, which was set up by the reathorization in 2011. All views above (and anywhere) are my own. While there are certainly things I would hope could be done differently in the way the U.S. manages autism research, handing control over to a few small groups so they can push a failed agenda on vaccines is not the direction we should go. Scuttling the reauthorization because support is not going into further research on this failed idea is also not the direction we need to take. Not at all.

It’s very telling that these groups for the most part hide or downplay their position on vaccines. The NAA, for example, recently ran into controversy about their stance and lost a fundraising opportunity with the national restaurant chain Chilis. The NAA leadership paid lip service to effect that the statements on their website are old views, but those statements remain. They know this position is a liability in public. But rather than accept that the view is a liability for good reason, they chose to downplay their views.

I don’t know if many in the legislature are giving them a serious listen, but I hope not. These groups do not represent the autism communities. They certainly are not showing an effective leadership, working to scuttle a law and lose hundreds of millions of dollars in funding if their own failed ideas are not supported.


By Matt Carey

ASAN Letter Expressing Concern re: House Subcommittee Hearing on Autism

18 May

A hearing has been scheduled for next week with the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform for it’s Subcommittee on Government Operations.

The hearing, Examining the Federal Response to Autism Spectrum Disorders, is scheduled for Tuesday, May 20, 2014.

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) has issued a letter expressing concern over the apparent lack of autistic input to the hearing. That letter is quoted below.

ASAN Letter Expressing Concern re: House Subcommittee Hearing on Autism

May 17, 2014
Dear Chairman Mica and Ranking Member Connolly:

On behalf of the Autistic Self Advocacy Network, the nation’s leading advocacy organization run by and for autistic people, I write to express concern about the upcoming May 20th, 2014 Subcommittee on Government Operations hearing entitled “Examining the Federal Response to Autism Spectrum Disorders.” To our knowledge, no autistic witnesses or representatives from organizations run by Autistic people have been invited to testify. ASAN is profoundly concerned by the apparent absence of representatives from organizations run by autistic people and urges that the hearing not go forward without representation by those most directly impacted by federal autism policy.

Autistic individuals are uniquely suited to testify about which federal activities are most needed in order to improve our own lives. Accordingly, when the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform proposed a hearing on autism in November 2012, ASAN and other disability rights organizations voiced strong opposition to the planned absence of witnesses from organizations run by autistic people at that hearing and was pleased when the organizers of that hearing responded by inviting two autistic witnesses representing organizations run by autistic people to testify. The presence of autistic voices at the November 2012 hearing helped to enrich the conversation about the federal government’s response to autism.

We are disappointed by the prospect that, to our knowledge, the Committee has not invited Autistic witnesses from organizations run by autistic people to the upcoming hearing. It would truly be unfortunate if the progress Congress made in 2012 were reversed in 2014. ASAN appreciates the Subcommittee’s interest in federal autism policy and urges it to ensure the inclusion of witnesses from organizations run by and for autistic adults in its witness list. We stand ready to assist the Subcommittee in its efforts. If we can be of any assistance, please feel free to contact us via ASAN’s Director of Public Policy, Samantha Crane, at scrane@autisticadvocacy.org.

Sincerely,

Ari Ne’eman
President
Autistic Self Advocacy Network

cc: Chairman Darrell E. Issa
cc: Ranking Member Elijah Cummings

ASAN Statement Opposing House CAA Re-authorization Legislation H.R. 4631

15 May

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network (ASAN) has issued a statement on the re-authorization of the Combating Autism Act:

ASAN Statement Opposing House CAA Re-authorization Legislation H.R. 4631

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network is deeply concerned by the recently introduced Combating Autism Re-authorization Act of 2014 (H.R. 4631). H.R. 4631 fails to address many of the longstanding problems in the CAA, including the lack of funding and attention to research on services and the needs of adults, failure to include adequate self-advocate representation on the Interagency Autism Coordinating Committee (IACC) and the use of language offensive to and stigmatizing of Autistic Americans. Currently, only a small fraction of federal research funding focuses on effective delivery of services or on the needs of autistic adults, both of which are issues of pressing concern to autistic people and their families. Of NIH’s $217 million investment in autism research, only 2.4% has gone towards improving services and only 1.5% toward research on the needs of adults.

H.R. 4631 would exacerbate these problems by extending the existing structure of CAA to 2019. In addition, the legislation would create four IACC members appointed by Congress, risking the further politicization of federal autism policy. The addition of four IACC membership positions to be awarded by politicians is particularly troubling in light of H.R. 4631’s continued neglect of a critical group that is currently dramatically underrepresented on the IACC: autistic people themselves. The IACC is only currently required to have one of its members be an individual with an autism spectrum diagnosis, a status quo that H.R. 4631 would perpetrate. Finally, CAA’s use of the language of “combating autism” shows a profound disrespect and lack of concern for the preferences of autistic people and our families who find such language offensive and hurtful. H.R. 4631 maintains that language.

Last month, ASAN was joined by eighteen other disability rights organizations calling for reforms to CAA to address these problems. Regrettably, H.R. 4631 has undertaken no such changes, preferring to deepen commitment in a status quo that actively works against the interests of autistic people and our families. Support for legislation that perpetrates dangerous and hurtful trends in the lives of Autistic Americans is incompatible with friendship with the self-advocate community. Until such time as these issues are addressed, ASAN strongly urges opposition to H.R. 4631.

What Can I Do?

1) Contact Your Member of Congress and Urge Them To Oppose H.R. 4631. You can reach your Representative by calling the Capitol Switchboard at (202) 224-3121 or by using this phone tool from the Arc of Maryland.

2) Tweet to your Representative why you oppose H.R. 4631 – use the hashtag #StopCombatingMe to help build momentum for our campaign.

3) If you belong to an advocacy organization, contact ASAN about signing on to our joint letter opposing H.R. 4631 by e-mailing Samantha Crane, ASAN’s Director of Public Policy, at scrane@autisticadvocacy.org

The largest autism science conference, IMFAR, starts this week

12 May

IMFAR, the International Meeting For Autism Research, is being held this week in Atlanta, Georgia. The schedule for the meeting is up, as is the list of talks (program). Abstracts are embargoed until Wednesday at 10am EST.

Here is a list of general topics for the conference:

Adult Outcome: Medical, Cognitive, Behavioral
Animal Models
Brain Function (fMRI, fcMRI, MRS, EEG, ERP, MEG)
Brain Structure (MRI, neuropathology)
Cognition: Attention, Learning, Memory
Communication and Language
Early Development (< 48 months)
Epidemiology
Genetics
Intellectual and Behavioral Assessment and Measurement
Invited, Keynote Speakers, Awards
Medical and Psychiatric Co-morbidity
Molecular and Cellular Biology
Other
Repetitive Behaviors and Interests
Services
Social Cognition and Social Behavior
Special Interest Groups (SIGs)
Specific Interventions – Non-pharmacologic
Specific Interventions – Pharmacologic
Technology Demonstration

I, for one, am very glad to see a focus on adults (<a href=”https://imfar.confex.com/imfar/2014/webprogram/Session3075.html“>three sessions) and on services (three sessions).

There is a session on Autism in Africa. There is very little information on this area.

There is a dearth of autism research on the African continent; this scientific panel session aims to highlight recent research progress addressing this gap. The panel includes scientific presentations from two sub-Saharan African countries, using a combination of qualitative and quantitative methodologies and reporting on both urban and rural African populations. Altogether, the findings from these studies highlight the major barriers to appropriate support for families of children with autism in Africa (including the severe shortage of diagnostic and educational services, lack of awareness about autism and its causes, and high levels of stigma), and report on a promising scalable model that can help tackle these problems by training frontline community-based health extension workers. The challenges and opportunities discussed in these presentations apply not just to the countries under study, but have relevance for the entire African continent and low/middle income countries elsewhere. During the panel discussion these common themes will be reviewed and priority areas for future research and opportunities for intervention will be highlighted, in order to facilitate future autism research, advocacy and capacity building efforts.

I was able to attend IMFAR in San Diego a few years ago with the aid of an Autism Science Foundation grant. It was a great experience and I wish I could attend this year. There is nothing like it for concentrated autism science.


By Matt Carey

Jenny McCarthy tries to position herself as in the “grey area” on vaccines

16 Apr

Jenny McCarthy seems a bit angry at bloggers. She’s written an op-ed for the Chicago Sun Times Jenny McCarthy: The gray area on vaccines. She’s not antivaccine, she wants us to know.

Well, Jenny, I don’t call you antivaccine. I call you irresponsible. And I stand by that. Mostly for your promotion of autism “therapies” which range from useless to abusive. Will you be speaking at the AutismOne conference this year? If so, will you speak out on forcing disabled children to drink diluted bleach solutions or undergo repeated diluted bleach solution enemas? Really, it’s time to grow a spine and stop lending your name to nonsense.

Back to vaccines, here’s what you say now:

For my child, I asked for a schedule that would allow one shot per visit instead of the multiple shots they were and still are giving infants.

But only a few short years ago you told us you wouldn’t vaccinate if you had another child. A very different statement. What are young parents supposed to listen to? “I’m pro vaccine” or “I wouldn’t vaccinate my child”.

Irresponsible.

You hide behind straw-man arguments, even now:

I believe in the importance of a vaccine program and I believe parents have the right to choose one poke per visit. I’ve never told anyone to not vaccinate. Should a child with the flu receive six vaccines in one doctor visit? Should a child with a compromised immune system be treated the same way as a robust, healthy child? Shouldn’t a child with a family history of vaccine reactions have a different plan? Or at least the right to ask questions?

Parents have the right to pick their schedule. You know that. You said that in your “Green Our Vaccines” rally (3:20). The schedule is “recommended”. Children need to be vaccinated to attend school, but no one checks when they got their vaccines. Why do children need to be vaccinated? Well, for one thing, those children with compromised immune systems you talk about. They are at high risk for infectious diseases. They are not treated the same as other children, either by their pediatricians (yes, I’m calling you out on a straw man there) nor in school, where we are expected to help protect them.

Here’s what I call irresponsible: scaring people about vaccines with your ill founded opinions. Telling people that you wouldn’t vaccinate your baby, but claiming to be “pro vaccine”.

KING: Jenny, will you agree that some cases have nothing to do with vaccines, which makes it more puzzling?

MCCARTHY: Absolutely. You know, environmental toxins play a role. Viruses play a role. Those are all triggers. But vaccines play the largest role right now and something needs to be done. You know, testing these kids for immune issues, you know, that would help so much, changing the schedule. You know, I don’t understand — as a precautionary measure, why don’t they do this?

So, vaccines play the largest role right now? Based on what data? I’ve seen your “studies” and they are junk. Do you still believe that “vaccines play the largest role”? The evidence is even more against you now. You had a chance to clarify your position on autism and vaccines in your op-ed and you avoided it.

Here are more scary statements, without evidence:

But I believe that’s — it’s an infection and/or toxins and/or funguses on top of vaccines that push children into this neurological downslide which we call autism.

Here you are with Mr. Carrey:

MCCARTHY: Go back to 1989 schedule when shots were only 10 and the MMR was on that list. I don’t know what happened in 1990, there was no plague that was killing children that we had to triple the amount of vaccines.

CARREY: What happened back in 1989 that warranted 26 more vaccines?

MCCARTHY: Greed.

CARREY: Are all of them absolutely necessary?

KING: Because they want to make money?

MCCARTHY: Of course.

Vaccines are only necessary because people want to make money. That’s “pro vaccine”? More to the point, that’s responsible? Sure, let’s go back to the time when Hib infections caused lasting harm or even death. Let’s go back to the 1980’s. The vaccine is just there to feed greed, right?

Irresponsible.

I can go on and on with various irresponsible quotes of yours. Again, your statement that you would not vaccinate if you had another child is probably the most irresponsible when it comes to vaccines. Here’s what the founder of your autism organization had to say about his team’s efforts:

With less than a half-dozen full-time activists, annual budgets of six figures or less, and umpteen thousand courageous, undaunted, and selfless volunteer parents, our community, held together with duct tape and bailing wire, is in the early to middle stages of bringing the U.S. vaccine program to its knees.

You once shouted down someone saying that vaccines were beneficial, shouting “bullshit” on Larry King live. When you have the guts to distance yourself from the above statement, perhaps I’ll agree that you have guts. That you mean what you say. For now, it’s just Jenny McCarthy, putting her name in the press, yet again. Jenny McCarthy, selectively quoting herself to make herself seem responsible.


By Matt Carey

More Canary Party financial documents

2 Mar

The Canary Party grew out of the “vaccines caused an autism epidemic” movement. It’s a small group based in Minnesota. They bill themselves as:

The Canary Party is a movement created to stand up for the victims of medical injury, environmental toxins and industrial foods by restoring balance to our free and civil society and empowering consumers to make health and nutrition decisions that promote wellness.

Last July I wrote about their financial documents in Financial documents for the Canary Party. In that article I made the incorrect statement: “The Canary Party is not a charity, so they do not file form 990′s with the IRS.”

It turns out that they do file form 990. I can’t find them on Guidestar (perhaps because they are new?), but I found this one online. It’s for 2011, when the party formed.

When I wrote last July about the Canary Party, I noted that the financial statements on the Minnesota State Websites indicated that in their founding year (2011) they were largely funded by donations from Canary Party members/officers/founders Jennifer Larson ($40,665) and Mark Blaxill ($15,000).

The form 990 linked to above was an amended form, filed in July of 2013. Coincidentally, filed 10 days after my article about their financials. Per that amended IRS tax form for 2011, those amounts were not donations but loans.

The description of the organization’s mission is given as:

The time has come for a change. The mounting crisis in the health of children and other vulnerable groups has not only been ignored by medical authorities, it has been suppressed. As parents, citizens and advocates for the health of future generations, we must rise up to call attention to this crisis and take action to end it. In nominally democratic societies, which sadly are increasingly corrupted by the power of entrenched interests and economy of influence that surrounds the medical industrial complex, we can most effectively effect change by mobilizing for political action in order to take action against these corrupt forces. It is time to come together to form the Canary Party.

There’s another description as well, but you get the point. It’s a bit much, in my view, but not really out of line with their statements since.

At the time I wrote my previous article, it looked like the revenue to the Canary Party was decreasing. I wrote, “The Canary Party pulled in $72,000 in 2011 and $49,000 in 2012.” (at the time I didn’t know that a large part of the 2011 cash might be from loans). I noted that in 2012 a large fraction of their revenue came from a single donor, one Barry Segal, who apparently has since become disaffected with the Canary Party. I noted:

Per another comment posted to Respectful Insolence, the association between the Canary Party and Mr. Barry Segal appears to be strained. As Mr. Segal accounted for $30,000 of the party’s $49,000 revenue in 2012, one does wonder what 2013 revenue will look like.

Well, from the State of Minnesota site, here is the 2013 financial report on the Canary Party.

The Canary Party took in $17,245 in 2013. Of that, $15,000 was from Mr. Segal on January 2nd. The Canary Party started the year with $15,562.14 and, after $32,300.02 in expenses, ended the year with $687.12 in the bank.

To recap revenue in the last three years:

2011: $72,000 (of which $55,665 may have been in the form of loans)
2012: $49,000
2013: $17,245

Year-end assets

2011: $9,259.07
2012: $15,694.19
2013: $687.12

In other words: revenues and assets are way down. One does wonder how long the Canary Party will last, given these trends.

I find redefining the initial donations as loans to be very interesting. I don’t see evidence that the Canary Party paid back any portion of the loans in 2013. And, given their financial status, I don’t see the possibility of paying back the loans as highly likely. I do have a speculation as to why they might redefine the donations as loans, but I’ll hold off on that for now.

edit to add: here’s the part of the form 990 where they state that they are correcting the original to classify the contributions from the board members as loans.

CP Form 990


By Matt Carey

Jenny’s McCarthy’s vaccine narrative called into question

16 Jan

Jenny McCarthy is the face of vaccine rejectionism in America. The story she tells of how her son, Evan, became autistic after his MMR shot is arguably the origin myth for the anti-vaccine movement, and the legions of  “Warrior Mothers” who follow her. Now, a competing narrative from someone else close to Evan calls the myth into question.

“I have such tremendous guilt for not speaking up when I knew something wasn’t right,” says Joyce Bulifant, Evan’s paternal grandmother. “But I was afraid of Jenny, and didn’t want to be the interfering mother-in-law. I was more concerned about me than taking care of Evan.” She agreed to speak with AutismNewsBeat.

McCarthy’s many critics have pointed to her numerous contradictions. She told Oprah Winfrey, for example, and there is “no doubt in my mind” that the MMR vaccine caused her son Evan’s autism. But she has also written that Evan showed signs of delay by six months – one year before the shot.

“I don’t think she’s very fond of me, but I love her because she is Evan’s mother. It makes me sad that we don’t have a true relationship,” says Bulifant. “That makes me very sad.”

The elf on the shelf

Bulifant is no stranger to Hollywood. The Virginia native has been acting for more than 50 years, and is well known for playing Murray Slaughter’s wife, Marie, on the Mary Tyler Moore Show. She was also a regular on The Match Game, and appeared in Airplane! (1980). She lives in Palm Springs with her fourth husband, actor and composer Roger Perry. Joyce has 15 grandchildren, and they all call her LaLa. When she speaks of Evan, who was born in May, 2002, it’s easy to imagine he is the favorite.

“Evan was here for Thanksgiving, and he left a note on my fridge that I just can’t take down. It reads ‘Dear LaLa, I hope that you love me so much. Thanks, Evan. I love you to the moon and back.

P.S., the Elf is in the freezer with turkey.”

The elf is a small, felt doll that sits on a shelf.

“He used to be afraid of the Elf on the Shelf, but last year he started moving it around the house, hiding it in different places and making it reappear. He said it had magical powers,” says Bulifant. “I love playing magic with him. He’s so very dear. It’s like he has a sixth sense that I don’t have.”

That sixth sense sparks her sense of wonder. “I am dyslexic and so is my son (Evan’s father, John),” she says. “We do compensate when we don’t have all the typical skills. The compensation part fascinates me. T

o me Evan is magical and wonderful and I love him to death.”

Bulifant’s conversation is sprinkled with sweet and simple stories about the boy she loves.  One time at L.A.’s Getty Museum, she said, Bulifant and Evan were throwing quarters into a fountain to make a wish

“I wish you would always love me,” said Evan.

“I wish you would always love me,” she said.

“LaLa, that’s my wish!”

Bulifant said she was concerned about Evan’s months before his first birthday.

“I remember Christmas, 2002 (age seven months). I was bathing him in the sink, and trying to get him to giggle and respond to me, but he seemed detached. My family was a little concerned but I didn’t say anything to Jenny because I know children develop at different times. But I was concerned.”

And then there was the incident in the park, another example of how difficult it is to see autism in a loved one.

“We took him to the park, and he started running away from us. We called, but he didn’t even turn around. We wondered if his hearing was impaired,” sh

e says. “That didn’t seem right. So I was testing him in the car seat on the way home. ‘Where is your nose? Where are your ears?’ I asked Evan. He didn’t respond, and I wondered what was going on. Then, when we pulled up in the driveway, Evan suddenly pointed

to h

is mouth and said ‘mouth’, and then he pointed to his ears and said ‘ears.’ It was like he was saying ‘Silly gramma, I know where my mouth and my ears are!’”

Joyce has been active in dyslexia education and advocacy for years, and she called on her research contacts for help. “By the time Evan was 18 months old, I was convinced he had autism,” she says.

Bulifant was wary of approaching McCarthy, who had written two books by that time that made it clear she didn’t appreciate parenting advice from others.

“She wrote ‘I don’t want anyone telling me what to do as a mother,’” says Bulifant. “I was trying to be a good mother-in-law and a good grandmother at the same time. I don’t think I even said anything to John. Everything I read pointed to autism.”

One day, while John was off directing in North Carolina, and Bulifant was staying at Jenny’s Los Angeles home, the “Good Grandmother” spoke up, and asked the nanny about Evan’s development. The nanny reacted defensively.

“I want to ask you something. Have you noticed that Evan doesn’t always connect with me?“ asked Bulifant.

“Jenny is a wonderful mother and he always connects with me.”

“He does watch a lot of television, ” said Bulifant, “and I’m wondering if that means he’s not used to interacting.”

“Evan is fine and always interacts with me. “

Bulifant retreated. “I thought maybe I was just me being a silly grandmother.”

She and her husband left the house for a few hours, and when they came back nobody was home.

“I was terrified that something had happened to Evan.” Then John called, and said that Jenny was “very upset “about the conversation with the nanny.

“You just can’t say anything about Evan,” John continued. “She gets very upset.” He said McCarthy would not come back home until Bulifant and her husband left the house.

Which they did.

Back home, Bulifant wrote a letter of apology to McCarthy. “Jenny wrote back saying ‘You shouldn’t have said anything to the nanny. You should have said it to me.’ And she was right, I should have. I was just afraid. I didn’t want to be the interfering mother-in-law.

“It was very wrong, and that is something I have to live with,” says Bulifant.

McCarthy has told a similar story:

Others had noticed something different about Evan, too. “My mother-in-law said, ‘He doesn’t really show affection,’ and I threw her out of the house,” Jenny says. “I went to a play gym, and the woman [there] said, ‘Does your son have a brain problem?’ … [I said], ‘How dare you say something about my child? I love him. He’s perfect. You can’t say that about a child.’ I just had no idea.”

Bulifant says that after being “thrown out of the house,” she and McCarthy have only spoken a few times, and for the last two years have communicated only through occasional texts.

Seizures and celebrity

Evan’s autism, and Bulifant’s collision with McCarthy’s “strong personality” created another issue. It’s what she calls her “moral problem” for not speaking up sooner about McCarthy’s well-publicized anti-vaccine views. “I know enough about Evan that if I spoke up sooner, more kids would be vaccinated, and fewer would have died or gotten very sick. We’ve seen cases of measles in Texas, and whooping cough killed ten children in California. It breaks my heart. That’s the biggest moral issue in my whole life,” she says.

Vaccines are at the center of McCarthy’s shifting narrative. In one version she says “the soul was gone from Evan’s eyes” shortly after the boy’s MMR vaccine. Here is what she told Oprah in September, 2007:

“Right before his MMR shot, I said to the doctor, ‘I have a very bad feeling about this shot. This is the autism shot, isn’t it?’ And he said, ‘No, that is ridiculous. It is a mother’s desperate attempt to blame something,’ and he swore at me, and then the nurse gave [Evan] the shot,” she says. “And I remember going, ‘Oh, God, I hope he’s right.’ And soon thereafter—boom—the soul’s gone from his eyes.”

McCarthy’s narrative also includes two seizure episodes suffered by Evan, leading to an autism diagnosis. In Belly Laughs, she wrote Evan was diagnosed with a febrile seizure at 2 ½, and three weeks later, he suffered seizures which led to a cardiac arrest, and a diagnosis of epilepsy. By this telling, stereotypical autistic behaviors followed.

Bulifant says the first seizure came in the spring of 2004. Oddly, the news triggered in her a sense of relief.

“I knew that seizures are associated with autism, and that Evan would finally get the diagnosis he needed and finally get help. I wasn’t alarmed.”

The second seizure occurred the evening before Easter Sunday, in Bulifant’s home. “I had an Easter basket for Evan,” she says.

“It was the night before Easter. Evan was so tired that he fell into my arms. I laid him on his bed and took off his shoes and when I looked at him I saw his little eyes rolled into the back of his head. I yelled for John to come quickly. We called 911. John held Evan’s hand and said ‘Don’t worry, you are in a safe place.”

Paramedics arrived. “Jenny was a mess. I now know what ‘wringing you hands mean’, because that’s what I was doing.” The EMTs “bagged” the boy because his breathing was shallow, says Bulifant, then took him to the local emergency room. Jenny rode in the ambulance. Anxious hours followed in the waiting room while doctors stabilized Evan and then allowed family to visit.

Evan’s first words were “Look at that air conditioning vent.”

Jenny and John left Palm Springs with Evan and drove straight to Cedars Sinai Hospital in LA, where he was diagnosed with epilepsy. Joyce felt like screaming – “No, it’s autism!” She had had enough.

“I said to John ‘I now insist that you go to UCLA to see a neurologist.’” By McCarthy’s telling, it took the neurologist 20 minutes to arrive at a diagnosis.

A September, 2007 People Magazine article is typical of how McCarthy tells the story:

This was another seizure, she thought, “but this one is different. He’s not convulsing.” Instead, “foam was coming out of his mouth, (and) and after a few minutes, I felt his heart stop,” she said.

When the paramedics arrived, she told them about Evan’s heart. “They looked at me like I was crazy. I don’t know why,” she said. Only, as they discovered for themselves, the child’s heart was no longer beating, so they administered CPR.

“Why, God? Why me … Why? Why? Why?” McCarthy recalled thinking in those desperate moments, but then, she said, an inner voice came over her. “Everything’s going to come out okay.”

Because there was no pediatric hospital near her parents’ home, Evan and McCarthy drove three hours back to Los Angeles, during which time Evan suffered several more seizures.

Dramatic effect

Another unfortunate dimension to McCarthy’s assault on children’s health is her endorsement of unproven, costly, and potentially harmful alternative therapies for autism. She is front and center at the annual AutismOne conference, where speakers have recommended bleach enemas and chemical castration. Her charitable foundation, Generation Rescue, actively promotes  “a wealth of biomedical therapies that treat the underlying issues of autism inside the body.” These include chelation, hyperbaric oxygen, anti-fungals, anti-virals, and cannabis.

When asked what she thinks of the autism cure industry that Jenny has captained, Bulifant demurs. “I think there is value in eating right and exercise for all children,” she says, her voice trailing off.

But what about telling autistic children they are vaccine injured, or that the soul has been sucked from their eyes? Jenny and her angry mob, as she has called her followers, regularly describe their children as train wrecks, zombies, and worse.

“Jenny says things for dramatic effect,” says Bulifant “I don’t understand that type of thinking. Evan is incredible. One of our favorite things to do is to go looking for lizards. He spots them where I can never see them. I ask him ‘How did you even begin to see that?’”

Still, Bulifant doesn’t hesitate to describe McCarthy as “a very good mother, very caring and trying to do the best for Evan,” adding “I don’t know why she says those things.” She describes her son as good father, and regrets how John has been portrayed as distant and uncaring.

“John never spoke up when Jenny said unkind things about him. I asked him why, and he said it would turn into another ‘Hollywood he said – she said’, and that he wanted to be a gentleman about it, and didn’t want to hurt Evan.”

Does she worry that Evan may one day think he lost his soul to autism?

“I hope that Evan never realizes the things have been said about him. I just don’t want him to ever be hurt. I don’t know if he will ever realize what has been said about him. I hope not.”

Bulifant tries to expose her magical grandson to the arts whenever possible. “I took him to see Billy Elliot, and he loved that. His little mind is working all the time. ”But those bonding opportunities have dwindled since McCarthy moved to the Chicago suburb of Geneva last year. Now, Bulifant watches The View to see new pictures of Evan, and to hear the latest stories.

She says Jenny is doing well on The View.

_____________________

Update from Joyce Bulifant:
I understand and have great empathy for parents of autistic children who want to know the reason for their children’s autism. They understandably latch onto anything they can find as a reason. That might be what Jenny did when Dr. Wakefield gave incorrect information about vaccines. I don’t think she did this maliciously. She just needed a reason.
If people know Evan showed signs of autism before his MMR vaccine, parents wouldn’t be afraid to vaccinate their children, thereby saving lives and much suffering.

Celebrities and seizures: Evan’s grandmother speaks out

12 Jan

Jenny McCarthy is the face of vaccine rejectionism in America. The story she tells of how her son, Evan, became autistic after his MMR shot is arguably the origin myth for the anti-vaccine movement, and the legions of “Warrior
Mothers
” who follow her. Now, a competing narrative from someone else close to Evan calls the myth into question. “I have such tremendous guilt for not speaking up when I knew something wasn’t right,” says Joyce Bulifant, Evan’s paternal grandmother.

“But I was afraid of Jenny, and didn’t want to be the interfering mother-in-law. I was more concerned about me than taking care of Evan.” She agreed to speak with AutismNewsBeat.

McCarthy’s many critics have pointed to her numerous contradictions. She told Oprah Winfrey, for example, and there is “no doubt in my mind” that the MMR vaccine caused her son Evan’s autism. But she has also written that Evan showed signs of delay by six months – one year before the shot. “I don’t think she’s very fond of me, but I love her because she is Evan’s mother. It makes me sad that we don’t have a true relationship,” says Bulifant. “That makes me very sad.”

– more at
autismnewsbeat.com

Embryo screening to reduce autism risk: it’s not in the future. It’s now

28 Dec

A news article on screening of embryos came out last week and it was picked up under various titles by various news outlets.

From Australia and New Zealand

Why IVF parents are choosing girls over boys, which google news also listed under Parents call for embryo screening to cut risks.

IVF parents choosing girls over boys

And a different take

Parents Worldwide Prefer Girls To Boys: Will India And China Learn?

From India

Why girls are preferred over boys by IVF parents

Here’s a quote from one of the stories:

Figures from one of Sydney’s top IVF clinics show about one in 20 parents seeking embryo screening are looking to have a female baby to reduce their risk of autism.

Australia does not allow for gender selection of embryos. One can’t tell the IVF team to pick male or female embryos. But one can ask for genetic screening.

University of Sydney senior lecturer in bioethics Chris Jordens said autism had a strong genetic basis, so it was within the guidelines.

And the trend towards genetic screening is strong and building in the US.

At a recent conference in Chicago, he saw a number of United States IVF providers offering parents without the conditions tests for between 180 and 600 common gene mutations, such as the BRCA ”breast cancer” genes.

Gender selection to reduce autism risk is about the most basic, the most crude, genetic screening one could imagine. But it’s real and it’s happening.

The concept of autism prevention through genetic screening, either in IVF or in selective abortions, has been a major ethical question with the push for genetics research in autism in the past decade.

The first step in guiding our societies towards an ethical approach to genetic testing is to present autism accurately. This is one reason why I and others speak out when groups such as Autism Speaks or some parent “advocates” present autism with phrases such as as “These families are not living” or “Life is lived…in despair”. Is life harder, more challenging for my kid? Absolutely. But what message are we sending to prospective parents when we tell them that their lives will be lived in despair or they will no longer be living if they have an autistic child? We are telling them to do whatever they can to avoid having an autistic child. We are telling them to pick and chose their embryos. We are telling them to selectively abort. We are telling the autistics of today that the perfect world (in the view of the majority) is one without them.

My kid and other autistics, children and adults, deserve life. They deserve the right to pursue happiness. Disabled does not equate to despair.

This is why, Autism Speaks, when you portray my kid as less, my life as not lived, I and others will speak out. Autism Speaks, it’s time you started listening.

By Matt Carey

My response to Mrs. Wright of Autism Speaks

20 Dec

As I recently wrote, Autism Speaks has once again shown it’s lack of respect for autistics and their parents with an opinion piece by Mrs. Suzanne Wright, co-founder of Autism Speaks.

I left the message below in response to Mrs. Wright’s piece.

I can not resign any position with Autism Speaks, as John Robison has done. I have been a member of one autism organization–a group which later became the local chapter for Autism Speaks. I resigned that group when they showed that they would waste their efforts lobbying against legislation that had nothing to do with autism. I’m glad I quit then.

One thing autism has taught me is that so many things we take for granted are gifts. It is a gift to have average or above intelligence. We don’t earn intelligence. It is our responsibility to use our gifts well.

Mrs. Wright, you aren’t using your gifts. After years with the autism community, you continue to speak for us as without understanding us. You aren’t using your gifts. My kid will never have the ability to understand the world like you can. Your gifts are squandered and that is a terrible shame.

I am doing more than “existing”. I am living. Is it harder with a disabled kid? Sure. It’s harder for him.

Use your gifts. Much more–use the gifts of those working for you. Learn how to frame the situation as being difficult, for that is what it is. But not as a life without hope. A life of despair.

I live. I love. I have joy. My son lives. Loves. Has joy. I have not lost touch with him. He has not lost touch with me.

It will be harder for him to enjoy life if the world sees him as less than a full person. It will be harder for him if we don’t put his needs first rather than mine. Please learn to put first the needs of the people we represent and advocate for.

If we in the autism community can’t put forth this message, how can we expect the rest of the world to do so?

Before we can craft a national plan we in the autism community must have a plan of our own. It must start with respect. Respect for autistics. Respect for families. And you are not showing that.

I saw the response Autism Speaks put forth in your home town newspaper in Florida. Please stop dodging this important question by framing it as “high functioning” adults vs. parents of “low functioning” children. Many of us who are parents of children with great challenges disagree with your stances. We’ve been telling you this for years. It’s time to listen.


By Matt Carey