First of all I have no opinion on this as I know nothing about it. I keep hearing that autism is becoming more common. Is there and link between mothers or fathers for that matter not bonding with their children early on and a rise in autism. I was at a clinic the other day and couldn’t help but notice the young mothers who were there seemed glued to their cell phones and their babies seem to be little more than a distraction? I don’t know if what I witnessed was typical or not.
I don’t think the rise in autism diagnoses is because the disorder is more common - just because it is being diagnosed more because of awareness.
I have heard the idea that it is caused by a lack of (mostly) maternal care, but I don’t think that has been substantiated in any significant way. Nobody knows exactly what causes it.
It used to be autism, then Asperger’s, now it is a spectrum. People on one end of the spectrum can function normally, or nearly so, or at least within normal limits. People at the other end are disabled, but they didn’t use to call it autism - people with autism just were developmentally disordered in general.
Everybody seems to be on screens all the time, not just people with autism.
Regards,
Shodan
We’re all on the spectrum somewhere.
If it was caused by lack of parental bonding, autism would have been ubiquitous in Britain during the 1600-1700s. Sending a baby to live with a wet nurse (or several different wet nurses) for their first years was a common practice.
The upper classes considered it unfashionable to feed their babies, thought not breastfeeding would help them get pregnant again faster, or just couldn’t manage it as well as the rest of the ‘women’s work’ involved in running a large estate. Of course, they didn’t want their baby to lose out to the poorer wet nurses’ baby, so that baby was generally sent to an even poorer woman to care for… Later, into the 1800s, having the wet nurse move in was more common for the wealthy, but infants would be largely cared for by a nurse, rather than the parents.
But of course, there was no such thing as autism back then, just a huge range of other conditions like ‘weak mindedness’ or even ‘possession by demons’, that have since magically disappeared…
Continuing that line of thought, here is a Wall Street Journal article about “diagnostic substitution.” The article includes a truly amazing graph.
https://www.wsj.com/articles/diagnostic-substitution-drives-autism-spike-1442425517
Paywalled, but we’ll take your word for it.
Most prevalence graphs that I’ve seen have a smooth and increasing trend in diagnoses from where they start counting, usually some time in the 1990s. However, since the numbers of diagnoses in 1940, before the condition had actually been labelled at all, must have been zero, clearly there has always been a steadily increasing prevalence of autism, for as long as we’ve recognised a thing called autism.
sunny daze should be here in a few to help with the discussion as shes rasing an rather active autistic child while going through health difficulties
but in my dads line 3 out of his 5 kids with my mom and stepmom have some sort of mental/physical problems …….
My parents were wonderfully attentive to me throughout my life.
I have Asperger’s syndrome.
I wasn’t suggesting it as a primary cause as much as possibly another contributor.
I’ll just point out that there are more people.
This is a very interesting topic, one I’ve thought about quite a bit. I think the OP has it backwards: autism can cause a lack of parental bonding, not the other way around. There is no, or little, reciprocity from child to parent, so for some parents (those without strong parental skills/instincts/understanding of spectrum disorders) this could result in an inability to bond emotionally with the child. Ultimately, its the autistic child that suffers (obviously) because they are just as human, just as in need of the same nuturing, as neurotypical children. But since they dont have the same ability to outwardly express or communicate feelings, they get isolated within themselves.
Yes, I think this is a very good point.
My mother told me that no matter what she did I would not bond with her or anyone else. I never liked being held or cuddled. I also showed strong signs of being on the spectrum at a very young age. I was obsessed with statistics from all countries, population, natural resources, industry etc. I outwardly outgrew it by my early teens but never have been one to care for cuddling with some exceptions where I really enjoy it. But trust has to be almost perfect.
Poor parenting as a cause of autism and its greatest champion, Bruno Bettelheim, have been discredited for decades. The consensus now if that autism is a neurodevelopmental disorder (i.e., medical and not psychological). There were still adherents to Bettelheim’s “refrigerator mothers” theory when our daughter was diagnosed in the mid-90s. Fortunately few and far between by then, but in some circles there was a stigma attached to a diagnosis of autism.
Last I heard, they were saying there was a strong correlation between ASD and parental age - the older your father was when you were conceived, the likelier you were to be on the spectrum. Is that still a going theory?
I have observed myself that it seems to run in families.
All I know for certain is it ain’t got anything to do with vaccines.
Part of the numbers being reported is because of how the data is collected now. One might suppose that it’s an accurate count of how many children undergo testing and are pronounced autistic by their doctor. But it isn’t. Instead there are 14 sites in US cities where records, not actual children, written by doctors and teachers (including regular classroom teachers) about children who are turning eight are examined to see if the written description of the child sounds like it meets the criteria for an autism diagnosis. This methodology is of arguable validity.
Yes, a rise in diagnosed cases. Though I’m pretty sure autism is something you’re born with and not something that’s caused by faulty parenting.
No. Autism is a spectrum, but neurotypical people aren’t on that spectrum.
Yes, a good point. Also, people not diagnosed earlier in life are getting diagnosed as adults (like me.)
As far as I am aware, autism spectrum is generally recognized as neurological (that is medical) in nature, not psychological. As mentioned, some autistic people can find it difficult to display empathy or share emotions, which might make family bonding difficult. My son is very affectionate, but not always very empathetic. I’ll take my hugs. 
Overall, while I agree that screens sometime seem to separate individuals, I know of no reason to believe that the digital age has caused autism.
The lil’wrekker has had screens in her face from nearly crib age. She’s had an iPhone since age 12. Shes 19yo now and is the lovingist, sweetest girl around. She still tries to sit on my lap when she’s home. Kissy, huggy, the whole 9 yards. So, no screens don’t cause bonding issues. That doesn’t mean every kid will be the same. I remember TV, in my day as being the bad guy. Then video games. Before that, rock and roll was gonna make all kids drug heads.
Lack of maternal/paternal attention was thought to be the cause of autism back in the dark ages when autism was first diagnosed. It’s been long debunked.
Simple example, I have twin girls. One on the spectrum and one neurotypical. How is that explained by lack of parental love and attention? It’s not like we ignored one twin from birth on ward.
The cause of autism has not been identified. A lot more screening is done, and the spectrum has widened given that “aspergers” is now part of the autism spectrum.
Wired had a seminal article on autism in the silicon valley. Basically, parents that are both “geeky computer nerds”, tend to have a higher rate of autism. Anecdotal: I never saw numbers when I was at Microsoft, but there are many folks on the spectrum that work at MSFT, and the autism parents group was very large. At the time, MSFT had the best insurance coverage for autism for a major corporation, and I’m so grateful we had that benefit for so many years. MSFT coverage literally paid for 40 hours a week of 1:1 therapy, and could go over with additional justification. Now Amazon and other hi tech companies offer similar coverage.