One of the most pervasive laws of nature is the tendency for animals to group together based on their sameness. This is exemplified by the proverb, "Birds of a feather all flock together."  If one looks at our society it is seen that this rule applies to people. We tend to segregate ourselves based upon our racial background, our religious preference, our occupational endeavor, our family ties, our entertainment preferences, etc, etc, etc. One might ask with this law of nature being so uniform, what is its survival value? Why is it such an intense force in our society?

        Note the root of the word kindred implies people of the same kind. Note when you say, "I like you.", there is the implication that "I am like you." and have common properties with you or would enjoy and prefer being "like you".  The need to be kind or "with kind" carries significant survival value. That survival value comes from the ability to communicate. Communication allows the individual to determine the intent or the threat that another animal or another person may pose. Think of the message you get when you see a dog snarling, a cat purring, your baby crying, your spouse smiling, or a person walking down the street with a friendly nod of greeting. Note that each of these forms of communication carried no words. An alien from outer space experiencing these examples for the first time would not have a clue as to what the various communications meant but if you are "kind" you recognize these signals even without a word being spoken.
Imagine what it would be like if you could not read these signals. More narrowly, imagine what it would be like if you could not read "the body language" or facial expressions or postures that another person used. Recall what it means to you when your spouse or your child or your friend assumes a certain posture and gets a certain look on their face telling you to "Watch out! I am starting to get angry." Husbands who understand this nonverbal communication stay married a lot longer than those who do not. Individuals in a bar who recognize these signals stay alive a lot longer than those who do not. Children who learn to read their parents fair much better than those who do not. In summary, reading nonverbal communication is a critical part of our survival.

        What if there was an illness or a mental condition in which a person simply could not read the other individuals nonverbal communication. What would happen to someone who simply could not communicate nonverbally themselves and could not read the nonverbal communication from another individual? What would their life be like?

        There is just such a congenital condition that is called "Asperger's Syndrome". This condition first becomes apparent at age 3 or 4 years of age when the child has tantrums that do not respond to usual parenting practices no matter what is done to deal with the problem. So difficult to recognize is that the child does not know or understand what others want because the child lacks the ability to recognize body language. The Asperger's child interprets verbal language literally and just does not understand slang or jokes so prevalent in the normal English conversation. Note the Asperger's child may develop a much larger vocabulary than normal at an early age and appear to be "a little genius" because of early language development and math and science capabilities.

        If preschool was difficult, school becomes almost impossible. Looking back, you may remember that school age children were very intolerant and downright vicious especially to class members who "did not fit in". All of a sudden, the Asperger's child is thrust into a group of 20 other children and has not a clue how to communicate or understand what these 20 other children want or expect. The result is predictable. The unfortunate Asperger's child is at odds with everyone because he does not understand how to communicate or recognize body language communication, he does not appear to be "their kind". The teacher sees the Asperger's child constantly in conflict with others and concludes that "this is a problem child that needs to be disciplined". The teacher soon learns that standard discipline does not work and the problem escalates most often with a tragic outcome.

        How would this scene be different if the teacher had a child in her class that acted the same way as an Asperger's child but instead was known to have a brain tumor? I submit the child with the known brain tumor would be treated with a great deal more tolerance and protection than an Asperger's child who has not been diagnosed or recognized as having a congenital condition. Yet, both children have a condition that prevents "normal behavior". The message of this column is more a question of human nature than any kind of moral. Why do we have to treat those who are not our "kind" unkindly?

        By far, the most common cause of conflict in our society is miscommunication. When our verbal or nonverbal communications are misunderstood, conflict follows because of our perception that "the other person is not our kind". There are at least three children in central South Dakota diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome and undoubtedly more undiagnosed. This is a very difficult problem for psychologists to recognize. Once the diagnosis is made care becomes one of tolerance and learning to communicate with the Asperger's child within their capability. There is no medication yet known that favorably influences the Asperger's child.

        As a closing remark, the next time you have a conflict with someone and they just do not seem to understand, try imagining that they have a brain tumor instead of believing that they are just being obstinate. You would be amazed how much easier the conflict will be to resolve.