Breaking News: Autism Runs in Families (But It’ll Cost You Millions to Prove It)
UC Davis’ MIND Institute, revered by many as a beacon of autism research, consistently releases studies that reinforce an agenda of erasure. Their latest contribution, a study on the familial recurrence of autism, follows the same well-trodden path: positioning autism as a ‘risk,’ something to be diagnosed, prevented, and mitigated. As an autistic person with autistic siblings, children, and elders, I can confirm that this revelation—autism runs in families—is nothing new, and certainly didn’t require the millions of dollars in research funding that this study likely consumed.
The Power Threat Meaning Framework (PTMF), which I’ve adopted in my personal and professional life, helps me process studies like these with clarity and awareness. For me and many other autistic individuals, this kind of research is a “well, duh” moment. Of course autism runs in families—it’s part of our human diversity. But when institutions like the MIND Institute cling to deficit models, positioning autism as something to fear and control, they deny the inherent value of neurodivergent minds.
In my 2023 book, No Place for Autism?, I explore these issues further, building on Jared Reser’s Solitary Forager Hypothesis of Autism. This hypothesis traces the origins of autistic genes back to prehistory, demonstrating that these genes have persisted despite natural selection precisely because they offer valuable survival traits. Autistic people, with their unique ways of processing the world, have historically played vital roles in the survival and flourishing of human communities. Our deep focus, ability to observe patterns, and tendency toward independence are not deficits, but strengths that have enabled humanity to thrive.
Studies like those produced by the MIND Institute ignore this reality, pushing a narrative that frames autism as a modern-day pathology, rather than a natural and useful variation. The PTMF allows autistic individuals like myself to resist these narratives, reframing our experiences not as ‘risks’ but as meaningful expressions of neurodiversity. Instead of focusing on genetic “prevention” or early detection as if we were an affliction, we should be investing in understanding, acceptance, and practical support for autistic people and their families.
Illustrating absurdity by being absurd
As autistic people, we often find ourselves processing the absurdity of the world around us in creative ways. One of those methods is to highlight the ridiculous by being absurd ourselves—turning the nonsensical into something we can laugh at. Studies like the one from the MIND Institute, with their overblown language and focus on “familial recurrence” as if autism is a genetic disaster waiting to happen, can feel like a personal affront. It’s not that we don’t understand the science; it’s that the science is presented in such a way that it disregards our lived experiences, framing autism as a burden rather than a natural part of humanity.
In response, sometimes humour is the best coping mechanism. Absurdity helps us process these “well, duh” moments, where researchers spend millions to figure out things we’ve known all our lives—autism runs in families. This is where Stefon, the fictional SNL character known for his wild club recommendations, comes in. Through Stefon’s outlandish style, we can turn the tables, mocking the ridiculousness of these studies while highlighting just how out of touch they are with the reality of being autistic. Let’s dive into a Stefon-style take on this latest study!
Weekend Update …
Looking for the hottest new autism research from the MIND Institute? UC Davis’s hottest study is…"
Stefon: This study has everything. Autism “recurrence” rates, creepy data surveillance on siblings, and something called autistic girl genetics—like X-Men but without the fun powers. The study comes with all the bells and whistles to make parents feel like they’re stuck in some kind of dystopian reality show where autism is the Big Bad they must fight… while ignoring the fact that most autistic people just want to live their lives, thanks.
Imagine being at a club called ‘Genetic Risk,’ where…
You’ve got researchers peering into baby cribs like paparazzi stalking a scandal, screaming, “That one’s next! Look at the sibling data!” And don’t forget the gender panic! Boys! Girls! What does it all mean?! It’s like a gender reveal party that no one asked for, except instead of blue or pink balloons, they’re popping out outdated stereotypes about autistic traits. Bonus: if your first child is a girl, researchers will “inform” you that you're 50% more likely to have another autistic child—as if your family just hit the genetic lottery jackpot. Congratulations?
But wait, there’s even more to freak you out!
Introducing: the undercurrent of racism and classism! That’s right, folks, the MIND Institute has it all. They’ll tell you, in a cool, clinical tone, that non-white families and moms with less education are at higher “risk” for having autistic children, as if that’s a bad thing. It’s like they’ve forgotten the real issue is access to diagnosis and support, not some mythical link between melanin and autism.
Need more useless predictive models?
This study has you covered. Imagine a team of scientists with clipboards running around like they’re in an episode of CSI: Autism Edition, trying to figure out whether baby siblings are going to “turn out” autistic by age 3. They’re measuring things like eye contact and social “delays” because nothing says “scientific rigor” like pretending autistic people are some kind of tragic inevitability rather than, you know, human beings with different ways of being in the world.
But that’s not all!
Let’s talk about recurrence. Stefon: It’s that thing where autism gets treated like a family curse in a gothic novel. You know, like when your great aunt Mildred leaves you her haunted manor and instead of ghosts, you get multi-generational neurodiversity. Spooky, right? Except instead of embracing it, this study suggests we need to closely monitor siblings for early signs of differentness—because nothing builds trust in the medical community like treating your child’s existence as a “risk factor.”
Oh, and you thought we were done? Not even close.
How about the tracking of infants like they’re lab rats? The researchers at 18 sites around the world are basically the Ringling Bros. of autism studies—rounding up over 1,600 infants, poking and prodding them from 6 months old to age 3, just waiting to see who “qualifies” for an autism diagnosis. It’s like baby reality TV, but without the prize money, and with a lot more pressure to perform social norms.
But don’t worry, there’s still more to make you feel uneasy.
What if we told you the MIND Institute isn’t satisfied with just one study like this? Oh no. They’re cranking out data like it’s hotcakes, constantly reinforcing the idea that autism needs to be caught early, intervened upon, and “treated”—all while ignoring the actual, real-world needs of autistic people. You know, like jobs, healthcare, and not being stigmatised as some kind of genetic aberration.
And if you need a cherry on top of this dystopian sundae…
The study’s lead author proudly declares that we now have two big, independent studies showing autism recurrence rates are in the same range. Wow! Groundbreaking stuff. It’s like re-watching Groundhog Day, but instead of Bill Murray, it’s a parade of researchers telling you the same tired story about autism genetics while continuing to ignore the voices of actual autistic people.
Final thoughts …
It’s sickening, really—how institutions like the MIND Institute continue to churn out studies that do absolutely nothing for autistic people, whilst consuming massive amounts of funding that could be used for real support. The Autism CARES Act, which dictates how the nation spends its autism funding, prioritises this type of research. Instead of directing resources toward programs that actually help autistic individuals thrive, we see endless studies aimed at identifying genetic “risks” and tracking familial recurrence as though autism is a disease that needs to be stamped out.
These studies do nothing for people like me and the countless others out there struggling just to get by in a world not only not designed with us in mind, but openly hostile to our very existence. What they fail to understand is that autism is not a modern problem to be solved. It’s a variation of humanity that has existed for millennia, playing a crucial role in our species’ survival. Yet, here we are, with funding funneled into studies that reinforce outdated, ableist narratives rather than addressing the pressing needs of autistic people.
Autistic people in the US face an unemployment rate approaching 90%. Many struggle to access healthcare, housing, or basic accommodations in school and work. Yet, instead of using funds to build systems of support or create employment opportunities, money is wasted on studies like these, telling us things we already know. This is the direction autism research has taken under the Autism CARES Act: away from the lived realities of millions of autistic people and into the sterile, academic pursuit of erasing us from the gene pool.
It’s time to shift the focus. We need research and funding that centres on support, acceptance, and practical solutions—helping autistic people live meaningful, fulfilling lives rather than continuing to treat our existence as a problem to be solved.