The Dangers of Uninformed Public Discourse on Autism and Its Links to Eugenics

Recent statements made by Robert F. Kennedy Jr., the United States' health and human services secretary, at a news conference have ignited concern within the autism and disability communities. Kennedy's remarks regarding autism, particularly his assertion that autism 'destroys families' and references children who 'will never pay taxes,' have been widely criticized for their lack of scientific understanding and insensitivity. These comments coincided with a new report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) on autism prevalence, but Kennedy suggested that he would identify the causes of autism by September, fueling further controversy.

Kennedy's statements imply a view that autism is inherently destructive and devaluing, echoing dangerous ideas historically associated with eugenics—the pseudoscientific movement that aimed to improve the human race through selective breeding, often by marginalizing and eliminating those deemed 'undesirable.' Eugenics gained prominence in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, promoted by influential scientists, policymakers, and religious leaders who endorsed sterilization and institutionalization of individuals with disabilities. Its most extreme form was perpetrated by Nazi Germany, resulting in the systematic murder of six million Jews and millions of others, including approximately 250,000 people with disabilities.

Despite widespread condemnation after World War II, eugenic ideologies persist today. Modern instances include discriminatory immigration policies targeting disabilities, and controversial proposals such as legislation for the euthanasia of severely disabled infants—views supported by some aspects of bioethics that question the personhood of infants with disabilities. Critics emphasize that these ideas fundamentally devalue the lives and rights of individuals with disabilities.

Kennedy's comments also touch on the problematic link between human worth and productivity, a central tenet of neoliberalism. This perspective considers individuals' value based on their ability to contribute economically, often marginalizing those with disabilities who cannot fulfill such roles. Many autism organizations criticized Kennedy for portraying autistic individuals as incapable, which neglects the diverse capabilities and contributions of people on the spectrum. Such framing risks reinforcing eugenic attitudes that seek to 'fix' or eliminate disabilities rather than promoting inclusion.

Furthermore, these uninformed perspectives threaten to undermine the social model of disability—an approach developed in the 1970s and '80s that defines disability as a mismatch between individuals' impairments and societal barriers. This model shifted focus away from viewing disability as a personal flaw, advocating instead for societal change to improve accessibility and equality.

It is crucial for society to actively oppose eugenic-minded rhetoric and to uphold the rights and dignity of all individuals with disabilities. This includes implementing robust accessibility legislation, ensuring political representation for disability advocates, and respecting the lived experiences of people with disabilities in policymaking. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities emphasizes that disability results from societal barriers, not solely from individual impairments, and should guide inclusive policies.

As researchers and advocates, we must continue to educate the public, challenge harmful narratives, and promote a societal view that values human diversity in all forms. Recognizing and supporting the rights of people with disabilities is essential for building a truly inclusive and equitable society.