Shutting down RFK - Sometimes silence is not an option

As a mental health professional, as in my work in education, I have always understood the importance of keeping my political views separate from my work. This is a clear and conscious choice as it is crucial that every individual who seeks support from me feels they are being treated with empathy and respect within an ethical and moral framework. If someone has the courage to seek help, it is my responsibility to keep judgements of all kinds out of 'the room'.

However, the reality is that there are moments when silence is not an option. Today, I feel compelled to speak out as a Neurodiversity Advocate against the disgraceful Robert F. Kennedy Jr. proposal to create an ‘autism register’ in the United States.

This unconscionable proposal is consistent with Kennedy’s bizarre long-standing and scientifically unfounded belief in a link bet ween vaccines and autism—particularly the repeatedly debunked claim that the MMR vaccine causes autism. These assertions originated from a now-retracted and discredited 1998 study by Andrew Wakefield, which has been refuted by numerous large-scale, peer-reviewed studies across the globe (e.g., Taylor et al., 2014; Jain et al., 2015).

Kennedy's continued promotion of these falsehoods not only undermines public trust in science and medicine, but also places neurodivergent individuals—and public health more broadly—at significant risk.

The persistence of this narrative contributes to vaccine hesitancy and reinforces the harmful idea that autism is something to be feared or eradicated, rather than recognised as a natural neurological variation—one of many that exist within the broad spectrum of human diversity.

It is disheartening and beyond unacceptable that in 2025, there are still attempts to categorise neurodivergence as an illness or neurodivergent people as societal outliers. This perspective not only undermines the dignity of those I support and myself as a neurodivergent person, but also contradicts the values of understanding and acceptance that should define our approach to the mental health and wellbeing of all people. While the decision to reverse this proposal is a small victory, the fact that it was ever considered in the first place is deeply, deeply troubling.

It is for this reason that I feel a deeply rooted moral obligation in my professional capacity to make it absolutely clear that I stand firmly against such actions and invite anyone who reads this to do the same. I remain committed to upholding the values of empathy, respect, and support for every individual, and on this occasion, I feel making my voice heard is part of that professional pledge.

We MUST continue to challenge and reject any actions that seek to marginalise or stigmatise neurodivergent individuals, just as we must do across the whole of the diversity movement.

I feel the need to declare clearly here that, regardless of politics, I will always choose to advocate for a world where we are all valued for who we are, as we are.