Autism Moms Weigh In on the Campaign

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the role of the autism issue, along with broader concerns about disability, in presidential campaigns

At The Huffington Post, Hannah Brown writes:

It’s pretty frightening to think that if Trump is elected, he will be able to appoint the head of the National Institutes of Health. And the Surgeon General and the Secretary of Health and Human Services.

Who knows to whom President Trump would hand those jobs? Who can imagine the billions of dollars in research grants that would go to beating the dead horse of the vaccine-autism connection (about as plausible as saying that atheism causes cancer) rather than significant research, research that could potentially bring real change to the lives of people with autism?

I can’t help thinking back to when Trump mocked Pulitzer-Prize winning New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski, who happens to have a physical disability, at a rally last November. It was appalling then, but not worrisome — no one thought then that Trump would get the nomination. It didn’t really surprise me that Trump would act like a lowlife bully and it wasn’t keeping me up at night.

It is now.

I have a 20-year-old son with autism, and the fact that we may be days away from electing a president who thinks vaccines cause the condition and that disabled people are losers to be laughed at is terrifying.

Also at The Huffington Post, Liane Kupferberg Carter writes:

Whether it’s dismissing vets with PTSD, mocking a deaf actressor a New York Times reporter with arthrogryposis, vengefully withholding health care coverage for his nephew’s disabled infant, or making fun of Senator Harry Reid’s blinding eye injury, Trump treats people with disabilities as a punch line.

My son’s future is nothing to joke about.

It’s clear who will advocate for him. Hillary Clinton’s concern for the rights of the disabled has bracketed her entire career. Her first job out of law school was to go door to door for the Children’s Defense Fund to find out why so many children were missing school. She discovered that schools weren’t accommodating kids with disabilities. The documentation she compiled was pivotal in pushing forward the special education law that eventually became the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (I.D.E.A.), the most important piece of civil rights legislation for children with disabilities ever passed in this country.

Disability and the 2016 Election

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the role of the autism issue, along with broader concerns about disability, in presidential campaigns

Sarah Blahovec writes at The Huffington Post:

Everybody should have a clear understanding of their voting rights. However, voting is one of those civic duties that we sometimes neglect to educate ourselves on until close to Election Day. Have no fear! There are a number of resources available to you in simple, clear language that can help you understand the laws surrounding voting and answer questions you have on issues ranging from voter identification laws and requirements, to who can assist you with casting your ballot, to challenges of voter competence.

The U.S. Election Assistance Commission has a “Your Federal Voting Rights” braille brochure and card in large-print PDF that provides a very simple overview of your rights as a voter with a disability. You can access other EAC voting accessibility resources here.

The Autistic Self-Advocacy Network has published a plain-language voting rights guide entitled “VOTE. It’s Your Right: A Know-Your-Rights Guide for Voters with Mental Disabilities and Advocates.” This free guide provides a plain-language overview of the applicable voting laws and your rights and provides guidance on responding to voting challenges, getting or getting back your voting rights, and asking for assistance with voting. You can access the guide here.

Jacqueline Alemany writes at CBS:

Trump has not mentioned a plan for research or improved care for the disabled, and there is nothing on his website on this issue. Hillary Clinton, meanwhile, has a history of relationships with people with disabilities; she has incorporated people with disabilities into her campaign and given them featured speaking spots during her nominating convention. Clinton also has a detailed plan to help families struggling with autism. Her campaign also points out that there are ASL (American Sign Language) signers at every event, and it has even made its campaign buttons in Braille.

Overall, though, there has been little actual discussion on the campaign trail, or in the press, about what either of the candidates would actually do to help disabled Americans.

 What issues matter in the election? David Perry writes at Pacific Standard:

Without financial means, too many people with disabilities waver between institutionalization and homelessness, trapped in shelters, hospitals, prisons, or on the streets. Those institutions play a crucial role in seeing that fewer people starve, but they siphon away resources that could go toward integrated, community-based living options that offer better long-term outcomes.

One tool for integration is the Olmstead decision, a 1999 Supreme Court ruling that strengthened the requirement for public agencies to provide the “most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of qualified individuals with disabilities.” After Olmstead, agencies legally must make “reasonable modifications” to avoid discrimination.

“Olmstead helps people with disabilities advocate for their rights to be able to live in the community with the supports they need,” says Tia Nelis, president of Self Advocates Becoming Empowered, a disability-rights organization. Under the law, “states need to come up with a plan to help make this possible,” Nelis says, but those plans are not consistent across the country. In fact, eight states have been forced to sign agreements with the federal government to start complying with the law. This is just the start of a new battle for disability rights.

Trump and Employment for Autistic Adults: He Lied

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.   In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism.  He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally.

On January 11, Justin Chappell reported at The Respectability Report:

Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said he’ll be working on a plan to provide more opportunities for autistic adults to work.

Jane, a self-described autistic woman, asked Trump for a plan to help “autistic adults like myself get employed.”

“We’re going to work on it,” he replied on Saturday in Clear Lake, Iowa. “You’ll be happy. Just watch.”

As of November 5,he has no such plan.

At the same site on November 2, Jennifer Bohlman reported:

As part of the #PwDsVote Disability Questionnaire, the nonpartisan, nonprofit disability organization RespectAbility asked candidates running for president, senate or governor about their plans for promoting employment among people with disabilities. Every candidate was given an equal opportunity to respond and if they are not listed, it is because they declined to answer.

Clinton responded in detail.  But as for Trump....

 NOTE: Donald Trump declined to respond to the survey.

On Trump's website, the issues page has nothing about autism.  At PBS, Judy Woodruff reports: "Trump doesn’t address disability issues in detail on his Web site. He discusses the issue mostly through the lens of military veterans and PTSD." ( And he has suggested that vets with PTSD are not "strong.")

Autism Parents on Trump

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.   In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism.  He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally.

Nicole Jankowsky writes at Upworthy:

If Donald Trump becomes president, I believe my family has so much to lose. And I’m scared.

Now, as a family, we have made peace with autism. My son is part of autism, and autism is a part of him. I do not think we would change it — it’s been part of us so long.

But I'm worried because you can tell a lot about a person by how they treat those who need help: the temporarily infirm, the disabled and the elderly, the sick and the poor.

Those who have a path harder to walk than most. It’s an idea that goes beyond Republican and Democrat and floats in the soft space of humanity: taking care of those people in our country that cannot, through no fault of their own, care for themselves.
As Trump laughs at disabled reporters, mocks a deaf actress, and questions essential foundations of national health, I worry about the future — my future, my son’s future, your future. Trump's lack of empathy is what truly makes me afraid.

I worry that if Trump is our president, there will be a dangerous shift in tolerance toward children and adults like my son.

If the president of the United States makes fun of disabled persons, who will stop the children on the playground? Will my son be the victim of taunts and harassment from kids or even grown adults who are just modeling the behavior of the most powerful man in the country?

I can’t vote for the school-yard bully. So, world, I have a simple request: Think about your own children. And if you can, think about mine.

Electing Donald Trump will speak dangerous loud volumes — far more than a parent’s words could ever say. That kind of president is not one I want.

WTVD-TV in Raleigh-Durham, NC reports:

North Carolina voters are divided nearly down the middle this presidential election and we asked you why you were supporting your candidate. Here's what viewers had to say about their support of Hillary Clinton.

Burnette Brown's response on our Facebook page was the most liked out of nearly 600 comments. Her response read in part:

"Hillary is the lesser of the two evils sometimes bad experience is better than no experience, this is one of those cases."

Amy Hodges, had the second most liked response, and her reasons for voting Clinton were very personal.

"I'm voting for Hillary because I have twin 7 year olds with Autism: I don't think that they have a place in Donald Trump's America," she said. "I need a president that will stand up for their rights and show the world that they are different, not less. Not a president who will mock and bully them."

Disability and the 2016 Election

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns. As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue. In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism. He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally.

Steve Flamisch reports at Rutgers:

On Nov. 8, 35.4 million people with disabilities will be eligible to vote, representing about one-sixth of the electorate.

When Donald Trump mocked a disabled New York Times reporter last year, he ignited a firestorm in the disability community. Hillary Clinton responded with a television ad featuring a well-known disability rights advocate, and she recently introduced a plan to increase job opportunities for people with disabilities. Rutgers Today asked Rutgers School of Management and Labor Relations Professors Douglas Kruse and Lisa Schur about their latest research on the political participation of people with disabilities and how the candidates' actions could influence voter turnout.

Have you ever seen a presidential election with so much focus on the disability community?

Schur: People with disabilities are definitely receiving more attention in this election. Disability has long been a bipartisan issue in the U.S., as shown by the strong support from both Republicans and Democrats for the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act and the 2008 ADA Amendments Act, which expanded the definition of disability to cover more people. So disability has not been a significant partisan issue in past elections, but that changed this year with the controversy created by Trump's behavior and the focus by Clinton on policies to expand employment for people with disabilities.
You've analyzed mountains of federal data to project the total number of eligible voters with disabilities, nationwide and on a state-by-state basis. What are your significant findings?

Kruse: Based on Census data, we project that 35.4 million people with disabilities will be eligible to vote on Nov. 8, representing about one-sixth of the electorate. Perhaps more importantly, we project 62.7 million eligible voters who either have disabilities or household members with disabilities, representing over one-fourth of the electorate. This is important because family members of people with disabilities are often very motivated to take action on disability issues, so disability can motivate the whole family. We find large numbers of people with disabilities in every age, racial, and ethnic group. In addition, there are large numbers of people with disabilities in every state, ranging from 12.7 percent of the electorate in Nebraska to 24.1 percent in West Virginia.

What kinds of disabilities are taken into account?

Schur: We use the Census Bureau's six questions that identify mobility impairments, cognitive impairments, hearing impairments, visual impairments, and general activity limitations inside and outside the home.

What kinds of obstacles do people with disabilities encounter when they go to vote and how does that affect turnout?

Kruse: Our 2012 national post-election survey found that 30 percent of voters with disabilities reported some type of difficulty in voting at a polling place, compared to 8 percent of voters without disabilities. The most common problems reported were difficulty in reading or seeing the ballot, or understanding how to vote or use voting equipment. Some of these problems can be avoided by voting by mail, and people with disabilities are more likely than those without disabilities to vote by mail, but a majority of voters both with and without disabilities say they prefer to vote at a polling place.
Do you believe turnout among people with disabilities will be higher this year because of the candidates' actions?

Schur: Probably yes, because of the way disability has become an issue in this campaign, along with the strong efforts by the disability community to increase turnout.

Clinton Anti-Trump Ad Centers on Autism

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.   In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism.  He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally.

John Wagner reports at The Washington Post:

With Donald Trump bleeding support from high-profile Republicans, Hillary Clinton’s campaign launched a series of television ads Monday seeking to persuade rank-and-file GOP voters to side with the Democratic nominee in November.

The four ads, airing in battlegrounds states, seek to highlight different concerns about Trump, with testimonials from Republican voters as to why they believe he is unqualified to be president.

The ads feature a former Reagan administration official, a Republican mother of a child with autism, a Republican Army veteran and a former local Republican party official.

Clinton's Speech on Disability

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue,

John Wagner and Abby Phillip write at The Washington Post:

Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton is pushing intensively to win over a group of voters who don’t typically get much attention during elections but who have become an increasingly potent political force: disabled people and their families.

With the race tighter than it was a month ago and Clinton struggling to generate enthusiasm within the Democratic base, her appeal to disabled people and their families comes amid a broader effort to win over voters. After weeks of mostly attacking Republican Donald Trump, she is highlighting specific policy prescriptions while trying to show a more compassionate side and present an affirmative vision for the country.

Also see a radio report from Tamara Keith.

In Orlando yesterday, Hillary Clinton spoke about her disability policy:

First, we’re going to focus on jobs and incomes. I’m going to fight to give more Americans with disabilities the chance to work alongside those without disabilities and do the same jobs for the same pay and benefits. People with disabilities shouldn’t be isolated. They should be given the chance to work with everyone else. And we’re going to eliminate the subminimum wage, which is a vestige from an ugly, ignorant past. Good work deserves fair pay, no matter who you are.

Second, we’re going to work with our colleges and universities to make them more accessible to students with disabilities. To have a truly inclusive economy, we need a truly inclusive education system. So let’s raise our standards. For too long, accessibility has been an afterthought. Let’s make it a priority in our curriculums, our classrooms, and the technology our students use. It’s like what Anastasia said about her sister. She can communicate through a computer. Then let’s make sure kids who can communicate that way have the opportunity to do so.

Third, we’re going to partner with businesses and other stakeholders to ensure those living with a disability can get hired and stay hired. As part of that, we’ll launch a new effort we’re calling Autism Works to help people with autism succeed in the workplace.

Fourth, let’s build on the success of the Americans with Disabilities Act by finally ratifying the United Nations Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. It has the strong backing of leaders across the political spectrum, and it’s a chance to show American values and American leadership. And I have to tell you ever since I was first lady, I have had the great privilege of traveling the world on behalf of our country. When I was secretary of state, I went to 112 countries. And one of the things that I have noticed is how far behind many countries are in how they treat people with disabilities. Very often people with disabilities from the time they are babies and toddlers are locked away, basically forgotten. I want us since we have been the leader in this area to get that ratified and then to demonstrate to other countries what we have done and are doing to give dignity and opportunity to people with disabilities.

At The Atlantic, David Graham notes that disability politics used to be bipartisan.

 In 2012, the Senate failed to ratify a United Nations treaty called the Convention on the Rights of Persons With Disabilities. Democrats supported the treaty, but Republicans were split. On the pro side were George H.W. Bush and Bob Dole, the former Senate GOP leader and presidential candidate who was injured during World War II. On the con side were a bloc who warned on extremely dubious grounds that the treaty would allow the UN to meddle in U.S. courts. In the end, the treaty failed, despite Dole himself appearing on the Senate floor to lobby. It needed two-thirds of votes to pass, but was only able to garner 61.

The Trump campaign has only exacerbated any such splits. The most egregious moment came when he mocked New York Times reporter Serge Kovaleski. Trump falsely claimed he’d seen Muslims celebrating 9/11 in the streets in New Jersey, and pointed to reporting Kovaleski, who was then a reporter for The Washington Post. When Kovaleski, who has a congenital condition affecting his joints, contradicted Trump, Trump mocked him, doing a physical impression of Kovaleski

(Note, however, that passage of the ABLE Act was bipartisan, indeed almost unanimous.)

The Candidates on Vaccines and Autism

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.    Previous posts excerpted the Republican platform and the Democratic platform.  Posts have also discussed Green Party candidate Jill Stein's equivocation on vaccines.

Anna Almendrala writes at The Huffington Post:

In a video interview with The Washington Post last Friday, [Stein] said that while vaccines have played an important role in keeping us healthy and safe, there are legitimate concerns about how those vaccines are approved and regulated.

...
The comments mirror statements she made during a Reddit “Ask Me Anything” forum in May, when she described corporate influence over U.S. vaccine regulation as “foxes... guarding the chicken coop,” claiming regulatory boards are “routinely packed with corporate lobbyists and CEOs.” (Stein also seemed to suggest that in an “unheard of” situation, the U.S. doesn’t allow medical exemptions to its vaccination program; in fact, all states offer medical exemptions.)

While Stein is not strictly “anti-vaccine,” she is promoting a narrative that the vaccine regulation process in the U.S. is corrupt and untrustworthy ― a common refrain from actual anti-vaxxers. In fact, the U.S. vaccine regulatory process is a global model for how any drug should be tested and approved before hitting the market, several vaccine experts told The Huffington Post.

Robinson Meyer writes at The Atlantic:

But Stein is not the only candidate to address vaccines this election cycle. As first pointed out by the Twitter user @mcclure11, three of the four media-receiving presidential candidates have appeared to pander to anti-vaccine advocates. Libertarian Party nominee Gary Johnson has tweeted “No to mandatory vaccines.” And Donald Trump linked vaccines to autism in a GOP primary debate last fall, before being corrected on-stage by the surgeon Ben Carson.

Hillary Clinton tweeted in support of vaccines in February of this year. “The science is clear: The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork. Let’s protect all our kids,” she said.

This round of equivocation from candidates may seem ominous—but, if anything, questions from party leaders over the safety of vaccinations have lately decreased. Comments like these were more common eight years ago. In 2008, Clinton, Barack Obama, and John McCain seemed to question the safety of vaccines. “We’ve seen just a skyrocketing autism rate,” said Obama said at a campaign stop in Pennsylvania. “Some people are suspicious that it’s connected to the vaccines.”

The Sacramento Bee editorializes:

It's] time to stop pandering to this element just to get a couple of votes on the margin. This election has been clouded enough with dog-whistle science denial. The Republican primary featured Donald Trump peddling discredited claims linking vaccines and autism, and Rand Paul and Ben Carson, who are physicians, repeating fringe assertions that delaying immunization was safer than the CDC’s standard schedule. It isn’t.

\Stein may be a third-party candidate, but she has a high profile now, and she’s a doctor. It’s disingenuous for her to play fast and loose with public health.

She knows the right answer to the immunization question. Hillary Clinton shouldn’t look like a rogue genius just for saying the obvious, as she did last year, when she tweeted: “The earth is round, the sky is blue, and #vaccineswork.”

Read more here: http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/editorials/article93320387.html#storylink=cpy

Trump, Clinton, Disability, Public Health

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.   In this campaign, a number of posts have discussed Trump's support for the discredited notion that vaccines cause autism.  He also has a bad record on disability issues more generally.

PolitiFact examines the ad showing Trump mocking a disabled journalist.

Trump tweeted about the ad on Sunday: "Clinton made a false ad about me where I was imitating a reporter GROVELING after he changed his story. I would NEVER mock disabled. Shame!" The Trump campaign did not respond to PolitiFact’s request for comment.
...
In an ad from Priorities USA Action, parents of a disabled child said Trump "mocked" a disabled reporter at a campaign rally. Trump did mimic the man’s oddly angled right hand while flailing his arms and shouting in a strange voice. Disabled people and advocates said the candidate clearly was mocking him.

Trump’s excuses for his comments are at odds with the evidence. Trump said he didn’t remember the man so he couldn’t know he was handicapped. But Kovaleski said he and Trump knew each other well because the reporter regularly covered the New York businessman for years. Archived reports support that.

Trump also talked about the reporter with familiarity as a "nice reporter" and a "poor guy" who "you gotta see."

Trump’s denials that he did not mock -- or even know -- the disabled reporter don’t add up. We rate the ad’s claim True.

David Nather reports at Stat:

Clinton “really knows what’s going on and is a policy wonk on medical research as well as health care,” said Mary Woolley, president of Research!America, a coalition of groups that promote medical research. Trump, however, has such an “in the moment” approach to medical research — almost never raising the issue unless someone asks him about it — that it will be impossible to know what he’d do until people ask him more questions, she said.

Paul Offit, the chief of the division of infectious diseases at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, puts the choice in more stark terms.

“I think it is fair to say that Donald Trump is a black box. He says one thing one day and the opposite the next,” Offit said. “So he certainly scares me far more than Hillary Clinton, who has generally supported public health.”

...
[Clinton] has laid out plans to boost Alzheimer’s research, increase treatment and support for people with autism, advance the fight against HIV and AIDS, andreduce opioid addiction and substance abuse.

...
Trump has also bought into theories that aren’t grounded in medical science. He has talked and tweeted, many times, about the now-disproven link between vaccines and autism. “If I were President I would push for proper vaccinations but would not allow one time massive shots that a small child cannot take — AUTISM,” he tweeted in March 2014.

...
And, of course, there was Trump’s vitamin network, a network marketing company that sold supplements on the basis of bad science.

Autism, Alzheimer's, and Clinton

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue, and has issued an autism policy statement for the 2016 campaign.

At The Huffington Post, Craig Snyder writes of the Clinton autism plan:

This language signifies a necessary and significant policy direction change on autism research, away from the genetic and psychiatric approaches that have consumed nearly all federal dollars on autism causation research so far.

It seems to us, however, that Secretary Clinton's previously-announced platform to address Alzheimer's would be equally appropriate for addressing autism, if not more so, given the chronic, virtually lifelong nature of autism, autism's higher annual cost ($268 billion vs $200 billion for Alzheimer's), and autism's increased mortality rate. The Clinton Alzheimer's Plan, found here: https://www.hillaryclinton.com/briefing/factsheets/2015/12/22/an-end-to-alzheimers-disease commits $2 billion dollars each year for research "preventing and effectively treating Alzheimer's by 2025" and "invests the needed resources, organizes a broad national effort, and inspires leaders in the public, nonprofit, and private sectors to develop effective interventions to prevent and effectively treat Alzheimer's and related dementias".

 In The Politics of Autism, I write:

Two demographic trends will influence autism politics in the coming decades. First, the identified autistic population will get bigger, particularly in the adult range. Service providers refer to this coming change as a “tsunami,” after a large ocean wave that is barely visible when it moves over deep water but packs great power when it hits land. Second, the general population will be getting older just as the autism tsunami arrives, complicating the policy response.

Autistic Adults and the Tsunami

In The Politics of Autism, I write:

Two demographic trends will influence autism politics in the coming decades. First, the identified autistic population will get bigger, particularly in the adult range. Service providers refer to this coming change as a “tsunami,” after a large ocean wave that is barely visible when it moves over deep water but packs great power when it hits land. Second, the general population will be getting older just as the autism tsunami arrives, complicating the policy response.

Cindy Godwin writes at USA Today:

As the number of autistic children grows, so does the number of autistic adults. Their needs remain much the same as they age, yet the support they once received fades. Though families like mine are feeling it most acutely, this is an issue for everyone to consider. The tsunami of adults with autism is coming.

Programs for autistic adults vary from state to state and community to community, depending on when they were diagnosed and whether they are “high” or “low” functioning. But there is widespread agreement that there simply are not enough providers and options. The needs of adults with autism “far exceed the available resources, leaving a generation of individuals with autism and their families in programmatic, financial and personal limbo,” researchers Peter Gerhardt and Ilene Lainer wrote in 2010, and that remains the case.

Just this month in Iowa, Hillary Clinton announced her plan to support people with autism across their lifespans, bringing needed attention to this problem. One of our biggest challenges is finding affordable, supportive housing. A quality residential program costs more per year than sending your child to Stanford. Imagine paying $50,000 or more annually for the rest of your son’s or daughter’s life, with no graduation ceremony in sight.

Update on Reactions to Clinton's Autism Plan

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue, and has issued an autism policy statement for the 2016 campaign. Previous posts noted some reactions to the plan, and here is an update.

At Spectrum, Jessica Wright has reactions:

• Julia Bascom: As an autistic self-advocate, there’s a lot to like about Clinton’s autism plan. The focus on substantive policy issues is great to see. You can tell the campaign did a deep dive here. The plan focuses primarily on the concrete needs of autistic people and our families, which is a refreshing change of pace from much of the national conversation about autism, which is still focused on ideas about cure and tragedy. Clinton isn’t scared of autism: She recognizes autistic people and our families as constituents with very real needs and priorities, and she’s got a plan to start meeting those needs...

Amy S. F. Lutz at The Jewish Week:

Some parents of severely autistic kids have opposed the plan because it fails to include any mention of autism prevention. And its language certainly reflects the position of autistic self-advocates that autism isn’t a disease that needs to be cured but a different skillset that just needs more societal support. Still, there are components that will doubtlessly help those with more profound impairments, including increased insurance coverage of therapies, support for caregivers and accessibility of communication devices. And Clinton’s call for the “first-ever adult autism prevalence and needs study” reveals an interest in data that I can’t help but hope will drive policy in the future.

Alyson Klein at Education Week:

On Clinton's wish list: enacting the "Keeping All Students Safe Act," which was championed in previous Congresses by Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., and Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, both now retired. The bill would limit seclusion and restraint as means of controlling students in special education, particularly if there is a risk of injury, and would prevent these practices from being included in students' Individualized Education Programs, or IEPs.

So far, the bill hasn't gotten much traction in the GOP-controlled Congress, but similar measures have gained in popularity in state legislatures.

That doesn't mean everyone is a fan of such policies. Back in 2012, AASA, the School Superintendents' Association, came out against the measure. AASA is still concerned about any legislation that would prohibit local districts from considering the use of seclusion and restraint, after other interventions (like Positive Behavioral Intervention and Supports) have failed.

And Rep. John Kline, R-Minn., the chairman of the House education committee, expressed concerns back in 2012 that the bill could hinder state efforts to deal with the issue. (Kline will soon be out of office, but other lawmakers may take a similar view.) What's more, the newly enacted Every Student Succeeds Act includes language cracking down on discipline practices that remove kids from the classroom, including seclusion and restraint.

Jennifer Martinez Belt at The Arkansas Democrat-Gazette:

So I was delighted by Hillary's plan--but I can't say I was surprised. As a native Arkansan, I saw her advocating for the children of this state from the moment she arrived in Little Rock.

As first lady, Hillary fought for more awareness and funding for autism research. In the Senate, she introduced the bipartisan Expanding the Promise for Individuals with Autism Act. Throughout her career, she's proven to be a champion for families by digging into the finer points of issues like autism to identify and prevent the specific fears that really keep parents up at night.

For the families of the 3.5 million Americans with autism spectrum disorder, these issues are deeply personal to us. Hillary has always understood that.

And my hope is that if more people show her kind of leadership, kids like Thomas will finally be able to grow up to become anything they can imagine.

Still More Reactions to Clinton's Autism Plan

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue, and has issued an autism policy statement for the 2016 campaign. Previous posts noted some reactions to the plan, and here is an update.

David M. Perry writes at CNN:

Last week, Lauren Appelbaum, RespectAbility's communications director, wrote, "What is most remarkable is that Clinton is just one of numerous presidential candidates to be discussing disability issues. In comparison, during the 2012 cycle, the word "disability" was very rarely even uttered. Former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush has been talking about autism since his announcement video. Ohio Gov. John Kasich often gets emotional when talking about the subject."

She's right about the emotion, but I want see more documents like Clinton's plan.

Heartwarming stories and general statements of support for the rights of disabled people to have jobs, for example, are nice. Policy is what changes the realities. Obama had a disability policy advisory committee in 2008. No candidate, to my knowledge, including Clinton, has a similar group in 2016.

There are around 57 million Americans with disabilities. There are tens of millions of people like me, who are not disabled but are directly connected to disability in some way. My 9-year-old son has Down syndrome. Research shows that disability issues strongly inform our voting decisions. Clinton has now made a major play for our votes.

Whether you like the details of Clinton's plan or not, she has now set a new floor for what a presidential candidate can be expected to do. The others need to step up. If, that is, they want to win.

Autistic Self-Advocacy Network:

The Autistic Self Advocacy Network applauds Secretary Clinton for issuing the 2016 Presidential Campaign’s first robust, comprehensive autism policy statement, including clear references to expanding services to autistic adults, investing new funds in rights protection and endorsing specific policy proposals on ending restraint and seclusion in public schools and expanding integrated employment opportunities for people with disabilities. We call upon other Presidential campaigns to follow suit to match or exceed Secretary Clinton’s commitments to the autistic community.

Susan Allen posts:

 

See roster here.

More Reax to Clinton's Autism Plan

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue, and has issued an autism policy statement for the 2016 campaign.  A previous post noted some reactions to the plan, and here is an update.

Dylan Matthews at Vox:

It's helpful to contrast Clinton's agenda with that of the Combating Autism Act, which George W. Bush signed into law in 2006. The first problem with the act was its name, which implied that the goal of public policy should be to stamp out autism, rather than helping autists.

This is troublesome both because it does nothing for autistic people alive today, and because many on the autism spectrum (myself included) don't view autism as wholly negative and argue that society could benefit from acknowledging and  celebrating neurodiversity. We don't want autism to be "combated"; we want autistic people to be supported. That means government policy that provides services that enable people on every point in the autism spectrum to learn, work, and find acceptance in their communities.

But the law was also troubling because of how some $945 million in federal spending authorized by the act was allocated. A 2013 report from the Government Accountability Office found that of 1,206 autism research projects funded by the federal government from 2008 to 2012 (after the Combating Autism Act was passed), a little under half focused on either the biology behind autism or on the condition's causes. By contrast, only 21 percent researched treatment and interventions.

[See chapter 3 of The Politics of Autism for an extensive discussion of the politics of autism science.]

Autism Speaks:

Autism Speaks urges all the presidential candidates to come forward with a plan to address the needs of people living with autism. We have provided a blueprint that Autism Speaks believes is essential to good public policy. A national plan should be built around enhanced state and federal advocacy, groundbreaking advances in science and research, and a full discussion of the barriers to, and opportunities for, addressing the housing, transition and employment needs of those with autism.

AT NPR, Kelly McEvers interviewed Ron Fournier:

MCEVERS: So her plan calls, among other things, for, you know, more access to insurance compliance with Medicaid, more outreach on autism, a national campaign, help for people with autism to transition from school into adult life. I mean, how likely do you think it is that this could actually happen?
FOURNIER: Probably not very likely because one, all of that is very expensive. Two, you would have to get a polarized Washington, D.C., working together to get it done. And three, you know, it's fair to have doubts about her ability to be able to bring a fractured Washington together. So my guess is it's not very likely, but even then, just the fact that she's put it on the national agenda is a big first step. And I hope I'm wrong. I hope she can get it done.
MCEVERS: That's Ron Fournier. He has an upcoming book about raising his son. It's called "Love That Boy." Thanks so much.
FOURNIER: Thank you very much.

Reactions to Hillary Clinton's Autism Statement

In The Politics of Autism, I discuss the issue's role in presidential campaigns.  As I explain in the book, Hillary Clinton has a long history with the issue, and has issued an autism policy statement for the 2016 campaign.

Emily Willingham at Forbes:

Clinton’s new plan doesn’t characterize autism with words like “cure,” “epidemic,” “disease,” “crisis” or “suffer.” She even uses “disorder” only once, in giving the official name of the condition, and never mentions “cause.” The first section covers screening and awareness but emphasizes capturing underserved, underdiagnosed populations such as African American and Latino children and even mentions a need to better capture women and girls who are autistic. I’ve never seen a candidate do that before, and it shows that someone on Clinton’s staff did some serious homework on this one.

Eric Garcia at Roll Call:

On Tuesday, the former secretary of State’s campaign rolled out a plan to support those on the autism spectrum, and held a conference call with Dr. Fred Volkmar, director of the Yale University Child Study Center; Sen. Bob Casey, D-Pa.; and Ari Ne’eman, president and co-founder of the Autistic Self-Advocacy Network.

... 

Karen Fessel, founder and executive director of the Autism Health Insurance Project, who has a son on the spectrum, was optimistic about the proposal, despite some gaps. “I hope she can do half of it,” she said. “A lot of it’s already on the books. The programs are underfunded or there’s no enforcement, so there’s no penalty for following the law.”

Ne’eman said on the conference call that while as a non-profit his organization does not make endorsements, he was happy Clinton approached his team and consulted with people on the spectrum.

“The fact it was requested and the fact many of these priorities come directly from the community is extremely significant,” Ne’eman said.

Sara Luterman at The Guardian:

Donald Trump’s offhand and ill-informed comments about the supposed link between childhood vaccination and autism are even more obscene in the light of how well Clinton, or at least Clinton’s advisers, understand the issues. She is even far surpassing Bernie Sanders in this area – he hasn’t said a word about an autism platform. If he releases his own autism plan, I will reconsider my position.

Shannon Des Roches Rosa at Thinking Person's Guide to Autism:

Hilary Clinton's campaign published an autism plan yesterday. It's like nothing I've ever seen in an autism-centric policy statement, in a good way. It's not perfect, because this is politics, and politics are more about compromise and incremental gains than revolutionary change. But throughout the statement, autistic people are treated as human beings with legitimate and sorely unmet needs, and not the usual (infuriating-to-read) millstones, pity magnets, or financial black holes that are tearing the fabric of families, not to mention our nation's budget, apart. Human beings who deserve to be prioritized. That's welcome progress, and I would like to see such outlooks become our country's policy reality.

Ron Fournier at National Journal:

Clin­ton did not say how she would pay for her plan. Nor is it clear, giv­en the po­lar­iz­ing nature of her can­did­acy, wheth­er the former sec­ret­ary of State could rally Con­gress be­hind such an am­bi­tious agenda.

But let’s give her cred­it: The Demo­crat­ic front-run­ner has done the aut­ist­ic com­munity a world of good by be­ing the first pres­id­en­tial can­did­ate to el­ev­ate the is­sue. Oth­ers should soon fol­low.

Hillary Clinton and Autism

Hillary Clinton has made a policy statement on autism.  Here is the summary:

Today, Hillary Clinton is announcing a wide-ranging autism initiative—including screening, diagnosis, treatment, services, safety and legal protections for individuals on the autism spectrum across the lifespan, steps to ensure they are treated with dignity, partnerships to help them secure employment, support for families and caregivers, and a commitment to increase research funding to deepen our understanding of autism. More than 3.5 million Americans are believed to have autism spectrum disorder (ASD). According to a CDC estimate, one in every 68 children in the United States was identified as having ASD in 2010. And the costs of treatment and services are beyond the abilities of most families. Improving support for children and adults on the autism spectrum and their families can vastly improve their lives and open the door to more sustainable costs for Medicaid and other public programs as services are delivered using integrated, community-based approaches. And these proposals will not only help people with autism and their families but also will benefit others with developmental disabilities.

Hillary Clinton believes that our country must make supporting individuals and families with autism a priority—for the millions of people living with autism and their loved ones, and millions more who will be diagnosed in the future. As president, Clinton will:

• Conduct a nationwide early screening outreach campaign to ensure that all children, and in particular children from underserved backgrounds, can get screened for autism.
• Push states to require health insurance coverage for autism services in private insurance plans as well as marketplace plans offered in the state so that people with autism are not turned away.
• Launch the Autism Works Initiative to extend new resources and establish public-private partnerships that will connect people with autism with employment opportunities.
• Authorize the first-ever adult autism prevalence study in the U.S. so that we improve our understanding of how to identify, serve, and support adults on the autism spectrum.

See reports by Ken Thomas at AP, Sam Frizell in Time  and Sarah Karlin in Politico.

Clinton's statement notes that most states have already adopted insurance mandates.   As I point out in The Politics of Autism, however, the mandates have various limitations.  Moreover:

Sixty-one percent of Americans with employer-sponsored health insurance are in a self-funded plan, in which the employer takes direct financial responsibility for enrollees’ medical claims.[i] Employers that self-fund typically contract with an insurance company to run the plan. Workers then get cards that bear the name of the insurance company and often look just like those from a traditional plan, so many do not even know that they are in a self-funded plan.[ii] Most of the time, the distinction makes little difference -- unless the employees are seeking coverage for a family member with autism. The catch is that the state mandates do not apply to self-funded plans. A federal law (the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, or ERISA) exempts self-funded plans from most state insurance laws, including mandated benefits. When South Carolina passed its mandate, the Unumb family was in a self-funded plan, so Ryan could not benefit from Ryan’s Law. As lawyers, the Unumbs knew about this exception all along, but for many autism families in states with insurance mandates, it comes as an unpleasant surprise. [emphasis added]

---

[i] Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation, “2014 Employer Health Benefits Survey,” September 10, 2014. Online: http://kff.org/report-section/ehbs-2014-section-ten-plan-funding.
[ii] Lorri Shealy Unumb, letter to families, Autism Speaks, February 2014. Online: http://www.autismspeaks.org/sites/default/files/docs/gr/erisa_tool_kit_10232014.pdf.