Overturning AS Diagnosis

Post Reply New Topic

I disclosed it to them. The last thing you want is to not disclose something and have them discover it weeks into your training when your regiment's physician obtains your medical records from your GP, because then you WILL be discharged regardless of how healthy they think you are.

And Apple_in_my_Eye you'd think that'd be the case but it's not. The truth is that legally nobody will send somebody who is labelled as on the autistic spectrum into that kind of job. The legal ramifications of doing that are simply too great, a bit like they wouldn't send somebody who had been diagnosed as schizophrenic into battle even if they were presenting no symptoms. I completely understand why they do it and hold no grudges; it'd bother me far more if they did admit people with Asperger's Syndrome, because often these people have a nigh-on crippling disorder that I clearly, CLEARLY do not have.

As I said on PsyForum, you will need to get another assessment done with a neuropsychological eam to double check for any deficits. You want to clear your name, you're going to have to prove your health. I'm sorry it's going to have to take a while.

I agree it's far too vague.
Nothing's really changed in 20 years.

That's the problem with using a Spectrum model. It's too broad.
I don't think that it's helpful or appropriate to lump people together with very different needs/manifestations of the thing. When people are lumped together under one label they're stereotyped as being all the same. I've experienced this, being leered at and assumed to be stupid just because I was labeled. I sometimes wonder what the hidden agenda behind all this labeling is and who it's really meant to help. It didn't help me much at all, in fact it exacerbated and unnecessarily drew attention to the issue.

I think that the behaviours do exist in milder forms grading into so called "normal".
I don't think that milder versions of these behaviours need be a issue if the person can cope.

It just bothers me that so called assessments and diagnoses can be carried out with little physical medical evidence. What about inherited or genetic evidence?

I also think, to some extent, sensible people with systematic brains are being unnecessarily pathologised. An increase in social expectations can disable some people who'd cope perfectly well in a different working environment/role.

Surely it's possible to help and include people like this without stigmatising the issue?

What about considering people and their own strengths and weaknesses one at a time?

I couldn't agree more! AS isn't a disability in my case except for the fact that people who don't like me being the way I am abused me until I had PTSD. that disables me far more than having a literal and analytical thought process. individual and possibly related issues to AS like insomnia are also disabling, but not everyone with AS has sleep issues, so discriminating against everyone on the spectrum because they might have disabling symptoms is stupid.

What strikes me is that you mention some stereotypical stuff about people who have asperger's. Having a girlfriend/boyfriend doesn't mean you don't have it. There are people on this forum in a relationship.
When it comes to OCD's it's not always apparent that you have one. It took me some to realise what my real obsession was.

That's all I can say on this matter.

I agree with AmberEyes.

I certainly have traits, but I can't see the usefulness of the label applying to me anymore.

I feel as though just because someone is introverted this has suddenly become a disorder, in some ways.

On the other hand I have government assistance which I wouldn't have got with just an Anxiety label.

Just imho DoctorManhattan would have been better off taking a risk on the Army finding this, but I can see his point too.

I would bet there would be people in the Army with some ASD traits anyway, but in that way that it would be a strength to their work. However trying to translate that to the way people are pidgeonholed in the real world, doesn't work.

When I last found out about records, the GP and another Psychologist said they kept theirs for a decade and that was it.

You'd be surprised what a good indicator it is. Even though people with AS fall within a bell curve, it's a different bell curve, and sadly many stereotypes are true; very old virgins, people who probably could be working or studying but aren't for no good reason, overweight, WoW accounts, a little too rude and so on. These are being diluted as more and more people are being caught in the ever-expanding definition of Asperger's Syndrome (not even mentioning self-diagnosing people), but the truth is that if somebody is working, is socially savvy, is getting laid a few times a year and has no anxieties regarding the outside world then the odds are they're not ill.

With me I had to ask myself "Where am I actually suffering?" and the answer was, quite simply, nowhere.

None of the characteristics you describe are included under diagnostic criteria; I believe you are confusing adaptation and performance with an absence of effect on the individual.


M.

Where, at any point, did I state these were characteristics from diagnostic criteria? In fact I explicitly stated that I was describing a bell curve of characteristics that I considered a "surprisingly good indicator" of people with AS. How about actually reading the post you're replying to before cracking out a half baked response?

Perhaps you could help me find information on a "doctor". It seems I cannot find record of him anywhere, and he presents himself as incredibly unprofessional.

Eugene Raoul Gruenberger, M.D, would be his name...

You argued that a stereotype was a better indicator than research, investigation and diagnostic process; I disagreed. There are many who are affected who have developed different coping and functioning skills that lie far outside your presumption that those who fall into your bell curve are the most likely affected. I have read your post; perhaps you would consider responding in an according fashion instead of attempting to backhand an insult my way.


M.

No I didn't. At no point did I state or even imply this. If you don't actually read anything inside the post you're replying to, your reply itself is going to be gibberish. And it was.

For you to be able to read what you wrote:

That a stereotype is a good indicator of a medical condition.
That those who refine the diagnostic criteria are in error through expanding their understanding of the condition.
That those who discover that the criteria fit their own experience are not worth mentioning.
That those who have managed to adapt and find a level of functioning are 'not affected' by their condition.

No gibberish, Dr_Man. If you insist on being rude, that's your choice - your insistence that your perspective is right above anyone else's makes any further conversation with you on my part useless.


M.

You're absolutely intent on sticking by your lie aren't you? Despite the fact that you quoted my entire post in a block, the list of things you claim I said do not appear anywhere in the text (if they did I imagine you'd have quoted the relevant sentences, instead of the entire thing).

At no point did I say people who expand the definition are right or wrong. It didn't appear in the post.
At no point did I say those who discover the criteria fit their own experience are not worth mentioning. It didn't appear in the post.
At no point did I say that those who have managed to adapt are 'not affected' by their condition. It didn't appear in the post.

The only thing I did even partially said was that some stereotypes are surprisingly good indicators. Not GOOD or better than the diagnostic criteria, but better than you'd expect.

Once again, it's clear you're not reading my posts at all before cracking out an infantile and half witted response to them. Your posts read like a 7 year old has commandeered a keyboard and decided to fight the internet one post at a time, and so far you've been able to do nothing but try and hide the complete lack of a point by block-quoting my post and literally inventing things that I've said that don't even appear in your own citations.

I don't like DrManhattan's tone in the posts.

But to be realistic, what he is saying is how the diagnosis is treated in the real world community, as a disorder/illness

That is how society applies disability labels whether we like it or not.

There is a difference between how having traits and getting on well with an online community or people with similar personalities vs

Having a diagnostic label applied to my life. Also because it will take a long time to educate people as to what the truth is and get rid of stigma.

I am not saying I agree with DrManhattan but I can appreciate what he is saying and how it's affecting his possible career.