Is it not potentially more coercive to assume that everyone has the neurological ability to understand and enact TCS, than to hypothesise that for some neurological reason, certain people are, as the situation stands, incapable?

We happily accept, for example, that people are colour blind. Given a certain shade of grey, they will not be able to tell whether the colour is red or green. Someone else will forever have to tell them. We happily accept that this inability is a result of a genetic mutation that is highly heritable.

There are families out there who cannot experience pain. They have a genetic mutation. Would it be inconceivable to imagine that they risk hurting their adopted child when they pick it up, simply because they do not get the right feedback? OK, so one can attempt to prevent this by using other circuitry, but it is apparent that the deficit will always cause some accidents that would otherwise be avoided in a TCS family.

Given that Asperger Syndrome is much more frequent in monozygotic than fraternal twins, I think many brain doctors would say that it does have a genetic component. It seems perfectly conceivable that there is simply a part of the brain that is not functioning, and that this is likely to be due to genes interacting with environment in ways that render a person unable to will themselves out this situation.

The current lack of a precise neurological explanation for the deficits currently known as Asperger's, such as the inability to read body language, does not mean that there aren't any.

It would seem to me more humane to search for and deal with any genetic and non-familial sources, such as viruses, than to try to help someone understand TCS when they simply cannot do so.