Autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder.  Its a condition characterized by lack of social skills, problems with communication
and repetitive behaviors.  It's back in the news because the Federal Government conceded in a case last week that vaccines given to Hannah Poling as a toddler complicated a rare underlying brain disorder and led to her Autism. 

As reported in the media, the result now seems to be a battle between "anti-vaccine" parents and a panel of "experts" warning us of all the dangers of disease without the routine vaccinations.  I really hate when people who don't know what they are talking about jump into the middle of an argument and try to make a judgment. 

Even the most ardent believers that vaccines (or more specifically the mercury laden thimerasol used to preserve them) contribute to autism are not calling for parents to refuse the vaccines for their children.  They are calling for 1) the production of "safe" vaccines which don't have the thimerasol, and 2) a less aggressive vaccination schedule that is less likely to exacerbate any underlying conditions in the still developing neuromotor transmitters of infants. 

Think about it.  You give shots at birth, 2 months, 4 months, and 6 months, and these are not mild little vitamins we're talking about.  We are giving our precious future injections of some of the most toxic and harmful substances known to man and then we step back disingenuously and argue that they are "safe?"  How do we know they are safe?  Long term studies of vaccinations have not been done.  Did you catch that?  There are NO long term studies on the safety of vaccinations. 

Yet we are told that there is scientific proof that vaccinations are safe.

Poppycock.

Vaccines are not "safe".  And for some kids they are harmful.  Whether or not they contribute specifically to the incidence of autism may yet be a subject for debate, but there's no reasonable person anywhere who can say they are "safe" without revealing a massive lack of ignorance about what it is we are talking about. 

The argument might be, "Populations of children who receive vaccinations suffer fewer deaths from diseases than none vaccinated populations.."  That's demonstrably true.  It cannot be shown empirically that the vaccines themselves do not cause harm of a different manner and degree than the diseases.  And IF the choice is between death, the ultimate evil, and disability which will follow that child through the rest of his or her life, lets be clear about what it is we're choosing and don't ridicule parents for their concerns.   As a parent who is now dealing with the repercussions of lifelong disability in both my kids, I would have liked someone to have been a little more honest with me 13 years ago, and maybe considered a less aggressive vaccination schedule.

There is much we don't yet know about the long term impact of many many medical practices we have not questioned.  But the fact that we don't know for certain doesn't support the assertion that there is no link. 

I realize that it's not as much fun to report logically as it is to stir up crap.  But it sure does irritate me.  Apply some critical thinking skills Mr. News Reporter Man. 

Further reading on the subject of Vaccinations

Tonight Oprah broadcasts the discussion that goes with Chapter 2 of Eckhart Tolle's book, and then we move on to chapter 3 which deals with resentment, grievances, the need to be right, the weight of illusions and other issues that interfere with enlightenment.

I've done less than skim Chapter 3 because to be perfectly frank, I don't think I need much help with holding grudges and nursing resentment, I can do those things just fine on my own. 

I'm still busy and productive at work which is a very good thing.  The more productive I am, the more people are being helped. 

The boys only had minor issues heading out to school on the first school day after the time change.  Michael volunteered to make it easier by skipping his shower to save time and aggravation.    Tucker cried all the way to school but told me when he came home that he'd had a really good day. 

The diagnostician called to tell me that they are almost finished with all the testing and evaluation they will do on my baby this year.  And to almost no one's surprise (except my own - I still can't quite wrap my mind around it) he is showing up squarely and indisputably autistic.  See, Michael LOOKS autistic to me.  So I'm not messed up by that diagnosis.  But Tucker looks ... squirrelly.  So I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around it.  And I know that there are those who argue that it's not a good thing to pin a label on a kid.  But since we started down this path, we've uncovered many clues and strategies for helping him cope and succeed in school.  It wouldn't make sense to pin a meaningless label on him.  But when the word opens the door to real help, I'm all for it.

Altogether, I've had another interesting day. 

The cats have taken their job as Terri's Supervisors very seriously.  Here's Joe on his favorite perch from which he can observe the preparation of food, the goings and comings of the neighbors, and the lighting of any fires in the fireplace. 

I don't know, does this light make my butt look big?

Has everyone heard the story of the boy and the snake? 

A snake crawled high on the mountain, not noticing the falling temperature until suddenly his blood cooled too much and he was almost frozen.  On the verge of death, he sees a boy also climbing the mountain and pleads with the boy to carry him down to the warmer rocks of the valley.  The boy feels pity, but resists the plea because this snake is a venomous one.  The snake promises, begging for his life that he won't bite the boy if he will just carry him down to safety.  The boy gives in, carries the snake to safety and as the snake becomes warm in the boy's shirt he focuses on the beat of the heart beneath that warm skin.  Before the snake has time to consider, his fangs come out and sink deep into the boy's chest, filling that heart with deadly venom.  As the boy lays dying the snake crawls away saying, "you knew when you picked me up ..."

Co-dependency has been the theme of the week around here.  I've had conversations with friends, relatives and people I don't even know all describing situations in which they so want to help but realize that they have instead enabled their loved ones to continue in destructive behavior. 

One friend told me of how her attempts to love her husband have not resulted in the reciprocal relationship she desires.  Instead, the more she gives, the more he takes while she spends her days lonely and her nights wishing for more.  One friend described a situation with an adult child who has given her grandchildren, but fails to parent those children well, and in fact neglects and emotionally abuses the kids.  So my friend often "babysits" in order to give the kids a place of stability and security even though she knows that she is enabling her child to continue in immature and abusive behavior.  A third friend is in a situation with an adult child that is probably going to cost my friend close to $20,000 not counting legal fees before its all over, and the child is very likely to serve time in jail for bad decisions made.  Another friend was forced to file bankruptcy this week over a car loan she co-signed.  The other party defaulted on the loan and the car was repossessed without her having been informed of the problem.  Now her credit is trashed and she's being sued for the balance of the loan, which she can't afford to pay.

I used to hear more stories of co-dependence with a partner who couldn't shake bad habits.  Now, as much because of my age and that of my friends as anything I hear more and more stories of parents who know they are enabling negative behavior in their adult children but can't seem to break the cycle.  Especially because they seem so helpless in the face of choices they can't understand.  After all they never made THESE mistakes.  They don't understand how their kids can be making these choices now, or why the kids don't seem to care about the damage they are creating in the lives of the people around them. 

Finally, you come to the place voiced by one of the people described above, "I don't care anymore 'what he was thinking' there's nothing I can do about his thinking anyway." 

Dr. Phil describes a situation in this month's Oprah magazine of a woman who was unfaithful to her husband.  She repented of the infidelity and realized that she truly loves her husband.  So she came back and has dedicated herself to restoring the marriage, but the husband can't get over it. Although he says that he loves her, he doesn't trust her and has begun to behave toward her in ways that can fairly be described as abusive.  As with all tragic human relationships the bottom line there is that either the woman can sign up for a life-sentence of guilt, recrimination and abuse as her just due for having betrayed her husband's trust, or she can move on.  There is no middle ground.  Changing his behavior is not an option for her to choose (although he can choose it, she can't choose change for him).  And in fact, the more often she allows him to behave in an abusive manner, the more likely he is to repeat that behavior.

You know, I'm aware that "birds of a feather flock together".  So when I sense a trend in the lives of my friends I take a look at myself because my friends aren't just randomly chosen or conscripted into friendship without some commonality attracting me to them. 

We love our partners.  We love our kids.  And we want so desperately for them to love us back, to respect us, to be good people, make good decisions, we want them to reach out and hold us.  But none of us can compel these qualities in another.  The more we try to "provoke them to good works" the more they seem to take our solicitation as license to behave in the same old way and then some. 

I may yet have these issues with my boys.  They are certainly not immune from bad decisions and I love them so much that its easy for me to be blind to a problem until it's reached a point of crisis.  One thing that I'm trying to live by is a rule I adopted when they were much younger, "Never routinely do something for another person that he is capable of doing for himself."  Of course I will cook meals, do laundry, and a hundred other things that my boys are capable of, but I also pull them into the rotation of chores so they aren't learning that I will automatically and routinely handle things for them. 

Its been especially difficult with Michael because of the challenges presented by his autism to know when to let him take his lumps and when to step in and ask for leniency.  The kid tries, and most of the time is recognized by his teachers as one who tries very hard.  But sometimes they miss something that means his best effort doesn't look like much, and then he needs help from his advocate (me) in negotiating his way through the world.  As he's getting older I'm also teaching him to advocate for himself, and that's a whole new level of tricky. 

Another rule that I've adopted for myself after hearing Dawn's description of it is: Don't offer them solutions for their problems.  Acknowledge their frustration, but give it back to them, "How do YOU intend to solve that?  What's YOUR plan for fixing this?  What will YOU do next?"  Even if you can see so clearly what they could do to fix it, let them decide how to proceed.  That's important for two reasons, first it gets you out of that enabling behavior and second, it comminucates to the person that you believe in them and trust them to be able to handle it. 

My kids don't look like snakes.  I'm pretty sure they aren't venomous.  It's not apparent to me that their nature is to harm.  My friends' kids didn't look like snakes when they were 11 and 13 either.  But the road that has led to a place where my friends seem to have no choice in the matter, they either enable or allow the grandkids to suffer, enable or allow the child to go to jail, enable or allow the child to face financial consequences, enable or allow ...

And it's a false choice.  We aren't allowing anything.  They are going to do what they are going to do.  I'm not a big Dr. Phil fan because he strikes me as arrogant and uncaring much of the time but he's not all wrong.  He says "when you choose the behavior, you choose the consequence."  The hardest part of parenting may be that we have to get out of the way of the consequences our children have chosen, and we have to be wise enough to limit our own risk in the process. 

If you know that your kid has a drug problem, don't co-sign a loan for them.  If you can't afford to pay for the car, don't co-sign the note.  (I am more and more opposed to being a co-signer on anything for any reason.  I'd loan or give money before I'd co-sign and risk my own financial position.)  Certainly don't agree to be a joint account holder.  And if you ARE a joint account holder or co-signer, move as quickly as possible to get out of that legal entanglement.  (Note to all who haven't thought about this, if you have a joint account with someone you are legally responsible for any bad debt that person creates with that account whether you wrote the bad check or not.)

Love your kids.  Love your spouse.  Love your friend.  But be smart.  Don't expose yourself to losses you can't afford.  Don't buy into the myth that it will be better later. 

"... having a belief system - a set of thoughts that you regard as the absolute truth - does not make you spiritual no matter what the nature of those belifs is.  In fact, the more you make your thoughts (beliefs) into your identity, the more cut off you are from the spiritual dimension within yourself."  Eckhart Tolle

I've written about the difference between religion and spirituality before, and have been thinking about it again as it's the theme of the first chapter of Eckhart Tolle's book "A New Earth".

As could have been easily predicted, as soon as people started reading the book, knee jerk reactions began popping up on the message boards.  People declaring themselves to be Christians and defenders of truth took exception to this distinction as though their beliefs were under attack. 

Christianity has often been reduced to a series of propositions to which you give intellectual assent.  Put another way, you are presented with a roster of ideas and you either agree or disagree with them.  If you can put a checkmark in the "I believe that's true" box beside each of the propositions, you're in.  If you have questions, doubts, or just don't believe that one or more of the items on the list is the absolute literal truth, well, you either find a brand of Christianity that subscribes to your list, or you're out. 

A question worth considering is whether this basic idea is or possibly could be true.  Is it possible that all that's required of you is that you "believe ten impossible things before breakfast" and then you're automatically a "Christian"?  It's been a long-standing tenet of the church in which I was raised that "sitting in church doesn't make you a Christian any more than sitting in a garage makes you a car."  So it's not a difficult concept for me that there might be a little more to this thing than the outward rules, structures, and propositions. 

If you've attended any protestant or fundamentalist service, even if you've caught a Billy Graham crusade on television, you've probably been exposed to the "Sinner's Prayer."  Spoken with all the same ritualistic trappings of a magical spell or incantation the person who's praying (or repeating the prayer after the speaker) is assured that's all that's required for salvation. On the other end of the spectrum are the churches which require classes, the memorization of doctrinal principles and then once it's clear that everything is understood and that the person can say he or she believes it, it's time to be welcomed in to the fold.   

Christians are not the only religious group who do these things, but they are the only ones I've seen on the message boards protesting the statements in Tolle's book.  But what if you have an intellectual impairment that prevents your ability to make a reasoned decision?  What if the information you've been presented is incomplete?  What if you didn't really understand it?  What if you believe it wholeheartedly but someone slipped in an extra little fillip that puts you in a heterodoxical camp?  What are you then?

Religion in all forms consists of both doctrine and theology.  It's both the principle and the practice.  It's both the understanding and the doing.  To say that "religion" is different from "spirituality" doesn't mean that one is superior to the other, but simply that there are two different concepts under discussion. 

When the Apostle Paul writes that those who have never heard the doctrines are yet "without excuse" because the Spirit of God has spoken to their hearts and has manifested in the world in ways that make a relationship with God possible, I doubt that he threw that in merely as a means of condemning the person without doctrine.  I believe he meant what he said.  There's more to being a Christian, a Muslim, a Hindu, a ... you fill in your own blank here ... than agreeing to the ideas these religions espouse.  (To put it another way, James wrote and I paraphrase, "So what if you've memorized the Bible.  The Devil memorized it too for all the good that did him.")

**********

I'm tired.  I've been working long hours, getting a lot done, but neglecting a lot that I need to do for myself.  So I'm not sure what today may hold, but I'm leaning toward spending some time this afternoon in the contemplation of the lilies of the field.  They don't work or worry.  But still they are beautiful, clothed in glory and sheltered beneath the open sky. 

 "To recognize one's own insanity is, of course, the arising of sanity, the beginning of healing and transcendence." Eckhart Tolle

"Life's a lot better now that I know I'm crazy." C.A.M.

There's a whole spectrum between the crazy of thinking you're a poached egg, the crazy of thinking you have nothing in common with a poached egg.  On the one hand, you're so completely self-absorbed that you can't discern the implications of living in the world around you.  On the other hand you're so completely lacking in self-awareness that you aren't able to effectively interact with your world.

I'm reading Eckhart Tolle's book "A New Earth".  I'll admit that I had a couple reservations before I picked it up because I've read a lot of "spiritual" books that were the warmed over pablum of wishful thinking that gave flower children a bad name.  (Although it did give them more interesting diseases.)

But I'm enjoying this book much more than I expected.  So far, it's more psychology than anything, with Chapter 2 devoted almost entirely to the bedrock concept of semantics, "The word is not the thing."  Oh, he dresses it up a bit, gives is a perfume bath and makes it sound deeper, but it's not a deep concept. 

We get very caught up in things and symbols. A cigar isn't just a cigar, it's a phallic symbol.  A rose isn't just a rose, it's a phallic symbol.  A car isn't just a car, we hope that it's a BIG phallic symbol.  (Okay, I know that's a little more Freud than any of us overtly ascribe to believe.)  But we make the same logical error in less phallic ways.

That new car doesn't have anything to do with transportation and everything to do with whether or not we feel important.  That house has nothing to do with shelter, and everything to do with whether we feel secure.  That bank account has very little to do with cash flow management and everything to do with superiority.  That diamond ring has very little to do with ... investment ... and everything to do with feeling valuable in and of ourselves because we own it.  We very seldom are able to separate our things from what they represent to us, or hope they represent to others about us.  (See the subtle mention of phallic symbols above.)

And isn't that crazy? 

You are not your stuff. 

You are not even your thoughts about your stuff.

You don't have to defend yourself by gathering more stuff.

I'm acknowledging my own insanity every time I recognize a thought about my "stuff" that makes the stuff have any bearing on my vision of who I am. 

There's a television pastor who loves shiny earrings.  And will frequently buy them.  But she knows that if she isn't careful she won't own the stuff the stuff will own her.  So often she tells stories of how she starts thinking of the stuff as important and recognizing that she doesn't want to have that insanity, she gives the stuff away. 

Interesting.  I don't think I'm ready to give away my stuff just to prove it's not my owner.  But I'm ready to step away from an insame relationship with my stuff.  (Except for my shoes.)

"Feelings of joy and love are intrinsically connected to the recognition of beauty." Eckhart Tolle

Have yo unoticed how quickly feelings of disappointment or anger become generalized to a broader group?  "Men", you snort.  "Women", you grunt.  "Kids", you say with cranky disgust.  It's so hard to avoid generalizing negativity.

But love, joy, happiness ... those feelings focus your gaze like a laser.  And the more you narrow your gaze the more interesting the view can be.  William Blake found the world in a grain of sand. 

Michael has eyes like dark cocoa with cinnamon and a hint of cream.  Sometimes when he laughs, I hear the echoes of waterfalls and the opening of flower petals.  Tucker has eyes like green tourmaline faceted by a way of seeing that leads him places no one else would ever go. 

The boys love to play, "Momma, who do you love the best?" 

I answer, "Tucker I love you the reddest.  I love you the red of the sun on the mountains just before it slips over the horizon.  I love you the red of chiles strung up in the morning light.  I love you the red of a laugh, the red of a gladiola climbing off its stalk, and the red that lines a magician's cape."

I answer, "Michael, I love you the bluest.  I love you the blue of the moon on pinon pine.  I love you the blue of the sky just after dusk.  I love you the blue of a whisper, the blue of a meditation pool, and the blue of a morning glory rising with the dawn."

I love my boys.  And when I look at them with the eyes of love, I see nothing but beauty, even when Tucker is grinning with mischief, or Michael is zoning in the quiet of his thoughts.   

I used to want five children.  I'd have liked to have a little girl.  But it wasn't so much that I wanted a girl as that I just wanted a house full.  I didn't realize that it doesn't take numbers to fill a house or a heart.  It just takes seeing. 

(As I type these words, one child is telling me that surely he isn't dirty enough to require a bath because he's pretty sure he had one ... on Friday.  And the other is telling me that he made out the grocery list and didn't I see that earlier ...)

I had a wonderful day today.  I completed my DAY ONE writing goals. 

I attended a poetry workshop.

I washed my sheets.

AND

In a wild fit of courage, I removed all the "do not remove under penalty of law" tags from my pillows.

(I posted the results of the poetry workshop on Mysterri)