Yup. And John McCain’s campaign too. The unfortunate thing about Wakefield’s study is we were JUST getting to understand how common autism was because of broadening diagnosis criteria, the ADA and IDEA. Then Wakefield set all of this on fire
Bear with me, this is a big part of the first chapter of my book. The 1980s and 1990s saw two important trends in autism. The first was the diagnostic criteria was broadened in the DSM. In 1980, “infantile autism” got a definition separate from Schizophrenia.
In 1987, that changed to be called “Autistic Disorder.” In 1994, Asperger’s Syndrome and PDD-NOS were included in the DSM. This meant that more people could get a diagnosis than in the past because there was a recognition that autism manifested in many ways.
And while scientific understanding of autism was evolving, so was autism. In 1990, the Americans With Disabilities Act was passed and shortly thereafter, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act.
As @jpitney notes in his book, the House report said “autism has suffered an historically inaccurate identification with mental illness.” This meant that autism was explicitly seen as a disability and students could get accommodations
Both the ADA and IDEA were monumental achievements but I would argue IDEA was slightly more momentous because it gave the federal government data. Schools now had to classify disabled students who received students, including autism.
These two concurring trends (medicine recognizing how autism manifests and public policy tracking the breadth of autism) lead to a spike of autism diagnosis in the 1990s. This was a good thing. If data don’t exist, doesn’t show on anyone’s radar.
After years of thinking autism was a narrow form of child psychosis caused by unloving parents, there was a real chance for policymakers to address the very real challenges autistic people faced. Autism had largely been exempt from the disability rights movement 1970s
Then, four years after the DSM change, Andrew Wakefield offered another more simplistic understanding. Instead of seeing autism prevalence increasing, he blamed vaccines. It made for an easy culprit because parents were absolved of blame and it was “evil doctors.”
In the first congressional hearings with Wakefield, Democrats and Republicans acknowledged the dark history of blaming parents for autism. But Wakefield took those new numbers, which could have been used to help autistic people and made them a reason to panic.
Wakefield’s hucksterism caused so many problems that will long outlast his debunked study. But perhaps one of his worst offenses was that he took what should have been a hopeful moment for science and public policy to create more understanding and created a public health crisis.
Similarly, this led to parents trying to find a series of crank cures. As @BrandyZadrozny has reported, some of the parents who believe vaccine cause autism are also ones who give their children bleach or other ways to harm their kids.
Now, I don’t want to bum you out on this fine Saturday, so there is another strain that happened. Those public policy changes AND scientific changes DID mean that a lot of millennials got diagnosed with autism. Many of them are now grown up and became advocates themselves.
Those kids who benefited from changes In policy (or didn’t) Currently there are two openly #ActuallyAutistic state legislators in the country @BriscoeCain, a Republican in Texas, and Democrat @yuhline in New York. Last month, @jessicalbenham won he primary in Pennsylvania.
