Autism Speaks, which calls itself the largest autism advocacy organization in the country, ran a full-page “Autism Awareness Day” ad in The Wall Street Journal on April 2, asking individuals to light up their homes, businesses, schools, places of worship and websites in blue to “shine a light on autism”; donate $10 to Autism Speaks; and sign a petition for the government to create a national plan to address autism.
A national full-page ad in The Journal costs $185,000.
In addition to the enormous energy cost of this light-up surge, turning on all the blue lights in the United States is not going to help a single person living with autism progress from point A to point B.
We parents and families living with autistic sons and daughters have long known what they need — namely, a continuum of appropriate service options that address their individual needs, and the right to choose those service options we feel are most appropriate for each of them.
One hundred eighty-five thousand dollars for a newspaper advertisement. Local contributors might think of this the next time an Autism Speaks fundraising walk descends upon our town. Would not an area hands-on charity or service provider be a wiser choice for your donated time and money?
Daniel A. Torisky
The writer is president of the Autism Society of Pittsburgh and secretary of the Autism Society of Pennsylvania.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- ‘Food fight’ lamentable
- Biased? Guilty as charged
- It’s not personal
- Getting bad advice
- Amendment levels playing field
- UAW won in Tennessee
- Out of ‘other people’s money’
- HUD & Larimer
- Low blow
- Diplomatic difference
- Seeking Christ in kids