ABSTRACT
This chapter explores the ethical controversy that underpins the ‘treatment versus acceptance’ debate with regard to autism. It proposes a new analytical framework, structured as six categories of intervention. Examples are offered for each category, from pre-conceptual measures to post-birth intervention, and from individually targeted interventions through to wider societal measures. The ethical principles at stake in each are highlighted, as are the semantic and scientific ambiguities that are often ignored within a polarised debate. The essay explores contrasting ethical approaches to the question of cure and prevention, including questions of identity, pressures for normalisation, and the kinds of suffering and harm that autistic people and their families actually experience. It is concluded that cure and/or prevention is not justifiable as a broad goal, and should not be confused with supportive and therapeutic interventions to address particular problems that autistic individuals may experience.
