By Cat Woods -
For the hundreds of thousands of Autistic Australians, their families and friends, the propagation of myths surrounding autism are hurtful at the very least, and even dangerous. Whether it relates to healthcare, government policies, or workplace and industrial relations laws, the spread of misinformation and disinformation can affect the quality of life of Autistic people and the broader community. Recent claims by the US administration baselessly linking Tylenol (paracetamol) use in pregnancy with autism have had global repercussions.
Annie Crowe is a human rights lawyer turned CEO of NeuroAccess, a consultancy specialising in neurodiversity, disability rights, and inclusive workplace design. She is recognised as a leading voice on systemic accessibility reform, helping organisations and governments build environments where neurodivergent, disabled, and chronically ill people can thrive.
She tells LSJ Online, “Once misinformation enters the public sphere, especially around something as deeply personal and emotional as pregnancy and disability, it’s almost impossible to undo the harm. Even if studies are later debunked or retracted, the initial headlines tend to stick in people’s minds far more than the corrections.”
Crowe refers to the “correlation equals causation” error.
“That creates a lingering suspicion, and for Autistic people and their families, that can translate into stigma, guilt, and harmful narratives about blame.”
“We know from decades of public health history, from vaccines to diet myths, that misinformation has a long tail. It shapes beliefs, policies, and even clinical practice long after the science has moved on.”
In 2022, Autistic people made up just over 1 per cent of Australians (290,900) according to the Australian Bureau of Statistics. This was a 41.8 per cent increase from 205,200 in 2018, which doesn’t necessarily indicate increased prevalence of autism, but could reflect more accurate, early diagnoses and a broader understanding of the autism spectrum. In 2024, NSW-based autism research and advocacy organisation Aspect suggested that 1 in 40 Australians are autistic. Aspect’s CEO, Jacqui Borland stated, “There has been no epidemiological study into autism prevalence in Australia, however based on the most recent studies conducted here and in other western nations it is clear the prevalence of autism in Australia is much higher than previous estimates.”
She put the higher number of cases in recent years down to increased awareness and better diagnoses, along with increased diagnoses amongst previously under-recognised groups such as women, girls and Australians aged 60+.
Discrimination laws under review
The Australian Government is currently reviewing the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) – a critical piece of legislation that protects the rights of people with disability, including Autistic people.
Following the Disability Royal Commission, which revealed significant discrimination remains within Australian society, in August the Attorney-General’s office called for a review, including proposed amendments and ideas for improvement. Amongst the concerns the review aimed to address were both access to employment and education, and access to justice. The latter highlighted the need for protections for people with disability from offensive behaviour and vilification. Last year, the Australian Government published its response to the recommendations made in the Royal Commission, which included accepting, in principle, the 15 recommendations related to the Disability Discrimination Act. The consultation process remains open until 24 October.
The Kingsford Legal Centre, within UNSW, included a number of recommendations in its submission. They included that the Act should define direct discrimination as ‘unfavourable treatment’, modelled on the Equal Opportunity Act 2010 (Vic) and Discrimination Act 1991 (ACT). Further, the Act should clarify that discrimination does not require a discriminatory motive and should draft amendments so as to capture unconscious bias and discrimination by artificial intelligence systems as a matter of “future proofing”.
Importantly, the submission pointed out that in many cases, the burden of proof rests on the victim, and this can unfairly advantage the defendant, which may be a major corporate entity in the case of workplace discrimination. The submission reads: “In our experience many matters do not proceed simply because an applicant does not hold or have access to the requisite evidence to discharge their burden of proof.”
“The current Disability Discrimination Act in NSW was written with good intentions, but it’s not built for the reality Autistic people live. It’s reactive instead of preventative, it puts the burden on us to prove harm after it’s happened, and it doesn’t even recognise many of the barriers we face, from sensory overload to masking pressure to workplace bias.”
“Right now, the system protects organisations more than it protects disabled people. But with the Act under review, we have a real chance to shift from a model that punishes discrimination after the fact to one that actively builds accessibility and inclusion from the start — and that’s a future worth fighting for.”
KLC has advocated an approach akin to section 361 of the Fair Work Act 2009 (Cth) in which the applicant would need to show that they had an attribute and were treated unfavourably. The respondent would then have to show that the unfavourable treatment was not because of their attribute.
In terms of civil vilification, the KLC supports a harm-based test for vilification aligned with the reforms made in Victoria or the proposed test in Queensland, which would co-exist with the incitement test. Both Victorian and the proposed Queensland tests state that a person must not engage in a public act towards an individual or group that a reasonable person with that protected attribute would in the circumstances consider hateful towards, seriously contemptuous of, reviling or seriously ridiculing the other person. Further, a person must not, by a public act, engage in conduct that is likely to incite hatred against, serious contempt for, revulsion towards or severe ridicule of, another person or a group of persons on the ground of a protected attribute. In recognition of how online our lives are, and the extent of vilification online, the Act, according to KLC, should explicitly cover the dissemination of materials through social media and other electronic methods.
However, the proliferation of pseudo-science on social media, and traditional media, can’t easily be stemmed and as Crowe says, the damage is often done before legislative measures can address whether material is intentionally false or malicious.
“When the most powerful figures in the world frame autism as something that must be ‘fixed’ or ‘cured’, it reinforces the idea that Autistic people are broken, that our existence is a mistake to be prevented rather than a form of human diversity to be understood, supported, and included.”
Pharmaceutical companies face lawsuits over claims
On 23 September, the US Government – specifically the President and his Health Secretary – announced that autism was linked to a mother’s use of acetaminophen during pregnancy (known as paracetamol in Australia, marketed under the Tylenol brand in the US). There was an additional claim that folinic acid (a synthetic form of vitamin B9, or folate) could ‘cure’ autism.
“The data cited do not support the claim that Tylenol causes autism and leucovorin is a cure, and only stoke fear and falsely suggest hope when there is no simple answer,” the Coalition of Autism Scientists said in a statement published by Reuters.
Nonetheless, the Food and Drug Administration or FDA (akin to Australia’s Therapeutic Goods Administration) said it would seek a label change for over-the-counter Tylenol and its generic versions to indicate that use during pregnancy may be associated with an increased risk of neurological conditions, including autism and ADHD in children. The FDA also sent a letter to doctors expressing the same information, but notably also stated that a causal relationship had not been established.
The Royal Australian College of General Practitioners (RACGP) has a Specific Interests group for ADHD, ASD and Neurodiversity. Its Chair, Adjunct Associate Professor John Kramer, has warned GPs here to expect an impact.
He said that these current unsubstantiated cause-effect claims from President Trump are redolent of the spurious claims made by the British clinician Andrew Wakefield, whose study linking the combined measles, mumps and rubella vaccine to autism was published in The Lancet in 1998, only to be completely debunked several years later (see “The Doctor Who Fooled The World” by investigative journalist Brian Deer).
But can these claims be defined as hate speech or discrimination?
Crowe says, “The legal reality is that much of Trump’s commentary would likely fall into a grey area. Our current laws around hate speech and vilification are narrowly drawn, and they don’t always capture harmful rhetoric about disability unless it meets a very high threshold, for instance, inciting overt violence or serious contempt. While there are provisions under the DDA (Disability Discrimination Act) and other legislation that prohibit discriminatory conduct, harmful misinformation about causes and ‘treatments’ for autism often slips through the cracks. That’s a gap we need to talk about. Spreading falsehoods that dehumanise Autistic people should be treated seriously, because words like that don’t just stay on the page, they shape attitudes, policies, and lives.
If we want a society where autistic people can thrive, we need to look beyond outdated myths and address the systems that perpetuate them. That means tackling misinformation, strengthening our laws, and designing policies that protect and include — not punish and exclude.”
Note on language: In accordance with independent advocacy organisation Amaze and the National Autism Strategy, the writer has used capital A for Autistic, and identity-first language (‘Autistic person’ rather than ‘person with autism’).
Further reading
https://www.tga.gov.au/news/media-releases/paracetamol-use-pregnancy
https://www.autismawareness.com.au/navigating-autism/autism-and-your-rights
Review of the Disability Discrimination Act | Attorney-General’s Department
