emtyeye
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 522
Location: boondocks
|
 Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 8:50 am Post subject: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
 |
|
I understand there are low functioning Auties out there who need major help with daily functioning for whom the word "diagnosis" is more appropriate for their condition. But for those of us at the higher functioning level, I feel that the idea of "recognition" rather than "diagnosis" is less stigmatizing, more accurate and more positive.
NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also?
Last edited by emtyeye on Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:21 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
Sora
away away
Joined: Sep 16, 2006
Age: 25
Posts: 5645
Location: Europe
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 9:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
In order to have AS it is required to have clinical significant impairments. That is why it is called a diagnosis. If a person is not clinically significantly impaired by their "weaknesses" then it would be incorrect to call their clinically "insignificant" impairments AS because AS = disorder. AS is a human-made category that describes a disorder and so can only be diagnosed until some day people agree to that AS isn't a disorder anymore but that those people are "normal" and do not have anything called "AS".
The issue is: the underlying cause isn't pinpointed.
People who have AS may not all share a common underlying cause for their impairments. (I know that research showed that this is true for "autism" and that there are multiple causes known that likely amount for minimal parts of the spectrum but without looking it up, I don't know if these results already includes people with AS.)
Likewise, with that in mind it's perfectly possible that a person has parts of that "cause" but is otherwise different from people with AS and therefore does not display clinically significant autistic behaviour.
If I remember correctly, research on siblings of autistic children who themselves do not display enough traits for diagnosis showed that those siblings are found to have a few - not all - very similar neurological process and neurological oddities going on as in their autistic brothers and sisters.
I do see how that becomes a problem though for someone who shares some the underlying traits of people with that the disorder AS but whose impairments or weaknesses are no more severe than other normal people's weaknesses in other areas are. On the other hand, those other "normal" people are all perfectly abnormal and have small parts of disorders or few traits of disorders.
Seriously, I've never met a person, adult or child, who doesn't have "a little bit of something".
Normality happens to be just another spectrum of chaotic insanity that is positioned surrounded by "abnormalities" such as the autism spectrum. The difference is that normal people don't require a diagnosis for as long as they happen to not be too extremely impaired and may try to improve their weaknesses with common means available to them if they have recognised what their difficulties are. Recognition alone just doesn't cut anymore it if a person's happens to be positioned even a little outside the norm and cannot receive suitable means to assist them with their difficulties.
So, yeah, diagnosis sounds perfectly good to me. Recognition is an important term too though because even a diagnosed individual needs to recognise what they're like (learn about themselves and how they function) and what their talents and impairments are in order to change things about their lives.
_________________
Autism + ADHD
++++ no spell check when posting from my IPAD ++++
______
The trouble with having an open mind, of course, is that people will insist on coming along and trying to put things in it. Terry Pratchett |
|
| Back to top |
|
MrXxx
Moderator/Enigmatus Paradoxius
Joined: May 12, 2010
Posts: 5678
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 10:31 am Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
| emtyeye wrote: | | NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also? |
No. Because the issue isn't related to whether a behavior or trait is "unpleasant."
The issue is whether or not traits and behavior interfere with normal daily functioning, as in, "Can this person perform a job, live on their own without support, pay their bills, and be a productive member of society?" If the answer is "yes," you're not considered disabled. If the answer is no, you are.
Lying, cruelty, judgmental thinking, etc. my be unpleasant and even objectionable behaviors, but they do not interfere with daily functioning and productivity in and of themselves. An exception could be compulsive lying, but that would indicate a probable disability, so there you go.
_________________
MrXxx is taking a long sabbatical, and no longer moderating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
emtyeye
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 522
Location: boondocks
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:17 am Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
| MrXxx wrote: | | emtyeye wrote: | | NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also? |
No. Because the issue isn't related to whether a behavior or trait is "unpleasant."
The issue is whether or not traits and behavior interfere with normal daily functioning, as in, "Can this person perform a job, live on their own without support, pay their bills, and be a productive member of society?" If the answer is "yes," you're not considered disabled. If the answer is no, you are.
Lying, cruelty, judgmental thinking, etc. my be unpleasant and even objectionable behaviors, but they do not interfere with daily functioning and productivity in and of themselves. An exception could be compulsive lying, but that would indicate a probable disability, so there you go. |
Then how do you explain the fact that many members here at WP have official diagnosis yet have jobs, live on their own or are married with families, presumably pay bills, and contribute to society?
What about Temple Grandin, clearly an autistic person but someone who has learned to do /does all of those things? Is she now, suddenly, no longer a "diagnosed" or "recognized" autistic person? |
|
| Back to top |
|
emtyeye
Phoenix
Joined: Nov 08, 2010
Posts: 522
Location: boondocks
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
Furthermore, lots of neuro-typical people do not pay their bills and go into debt (like half of America), get fired from or leave jobs due to interpersonal conflict, spend massive amounts of time on their kind of group "special interests" like watching sports or stupid TV shows, yet they are not stigmatized by being called "disordered" or "diseased" ?
Last edited by emtyeye on Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:20 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
OliveOilMom
Queen of cans and jars
Joined: Nov 12, 2011
Posts: 6783
Location: Living in Faulkner's nightmare
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 11:53 am Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
| emtyeye wrote: | | MrXxx wrote: | | emtyeye wrote: | | NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also? |
No. Because the issue isn't related to whether a behavior or trait is "unpleasant."
The issue is whether or not traits and behavior interfere with normal daily functioning, as in, "Can this person perform a job, live on their own without support, pay their bills, and be a productive member of society?" If the answer is "yes," you're not considered disabled. If the answer is no, you are.
Lying, cruelty, judgmental thinking, etc. my be unpleasant and even objectionable behaviors, but they do not interfere with daily functioning and productivity in and of themselves. An exception could be compulsive lying, but that would indicate a probable disability, so there you go. |
|
I am one of those people who is married with kids, live with my husband and family, I handle the bills and run the house, etc. Just because my AS may interfere with that by causing those things to be more difficult for me at times does not mean that I cannot do them. Interfering with doesn't mean ruling out the ability to do. Something may be more difficult for us, or we have to use a different method to do something, or give things more thought than an NT. After a very full day of stress, normal work around the house, handeling unexpected things that come up, etc, I may require quiet time alone to prevent myself from shutting down or melting down, while an NT may simply enjoy time alone to chill and relax.
_________________
Frances
What if Jessie's girl was Stacy's mom and her number was 867-5309?
Last edited by OliveOilMom on Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:31 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
XFilesGeek
Pretentiousness personified.
Joined: Jul 25, 2010
Posts: 1792
Location: The Oort Cloud
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 12:18 pm Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
| emtyeye wrote: | | MrXxx wrote: | | emtyeye wrote: | | NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also? |
No. Because the issue isn't related to whether a behavior or trait is "unpleasant."
The issue is whether or not traits and behavior interfere with normal daily functioning, as in, "Can this person perform a job, live on their own without support, pay their bills, and be a productive member of society?" If the answer is "yes," you're not considered disabled. If the answer is no, you are.
Lying, cruelty, judgmental thinking, etc. my be unpleasant and even objectionable behaviors, but they do not interfere with daily functioning and productivity in and of themselves. An exception could be compulsive lying, but that would indicate a probable disability, so there you go. |
Then how do you explain the fact that many members here at WP have official diagnosis yet have jobs, live on their own or are married with families, presumably pay bills, and contribute to society?
What about Temple Grandin, clearly an autistic person but someone who has learned to do /does all of those things? Is she now, suddenly, no longer a "diagnosed" or "recognized" autistic person? |
Count me in as an employed Aspie.
My mother also has a job, but she also has multiple sclerosis. She can work and feed herself, but it's a hundred times more difficult for her. Anyone who thinks she's not "disabled" just because she can care for herself is an utter lackwit.
Anyway, I don't mind being "diagnosed" as opposed to "recognized."
_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced." |
|
| Back to top |
|
Matt62
Phoenix
Joined: Jan 05, 2012
Age: 51
Posts: 1159
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well, I'm employed. But still single, still have trouble with shoelaces (ughh, stop talking about this!), and have few friends. I'd say there was some impairment here, despite my accomplishments elsewhere.
No official dx yet though..
Sincerely,
Matthew |
|
| Back to top |
|
NicoleG
Phoenix
Joined: Dec 26, 2011
Age: 36
Posts: 661
Location: Dallas-Fort Worth
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:30 pm Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
Pardon me while I rant for a moment. I probably needed to get this off of my chest anyway.
| emtyeye wrote: | | But for those of us at the higher functioning level, I feel that the idea of "recognition" rather than "diagnosis" is less stigmatizing, more accurate and more positive. |
Recognized by whom?
I recognize that I have AS traits. I recognize that I have NT traits. I recognize that any person that knows me has already diagnosed my OCD, to which I reference it as functional-OCD because I do not require medication, therapy, or clinical diagnosis to be functional within society despite my very obvious OCD. I recognize that I am not disabled, I am on the very-high-functioning end of the spectrum, if I am on it at all, and that just talking with other folks who have been diagnosed has been of great benefit for me, and I hope that my insight may sometimes help them as well.
So in your opinion, whom should I be getting recognition from besides the one person that really matters?
I do not like other higher-functioning people speaking for me, whether they are AS, NT, OCD (as I'm pretty sure I'm some wacky mixture of all of the above), or whatever else have you. In fact, that's what I think makes me unique. I honestly don't want to be classified one way or the other. I have both NT and AS traits and I've come to accept myself for exactly WHO I am without feeling some need to label WHAT I am.
emptyeye, I see where you are going with this, and what you are trying to say, but I honestly disagree with you. Recognizing that people can have similar traits which can be worked on in similar fashion does not mean that every single person on the planet requires a label to be attached to them. Even getting a diagnostic "label" of AS is a very difficult thing for some people, especially those who have shared that they have dealt with even more difficulties after getting their diagnosis than before.
| Matt62 wrote: | | (ughh, stop talking about this!) |
LOL - I've always chalked up this particular thought to my OCD. I'll get stuck in a mental loop of things recently talked about or mentioned around me. Then it becomes "the song that never ends."
Last edited by NicoleG on Sat Feb 11, 2012 1:09 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
MrXxx
Moderator/Enigmatus Paradoxius
Joined: May 12, 2010
Posts: 5678
Location: New England
|
| Posted: Fri Feb 10, 2012 5:46 pm Post subject: Re: Diagnosis vrs Recognition |
|
|
| emtyeye wrote: | | MrXxx wrote: | | emtyeye wrote: | | NT people have unpleasant behaviors also: they often lie, they engage in various and often subtle forms of cruelty, they tend to be judgemental about other who are different. Yet they don't get "diagnosed" for their maladaptive traits. They are accepted as a normal part of being who they are, something to work on as a part of "personal growth" maybe, but not considered a disease state. Shouldn't this be the case for Aspies also? |
No. Because the issue isn't related to whether a behavior or trait is "unpleasant."
The issue is whether or not traits and behavior interfere with normal daily functioning, as in, "Can this person perform a job, live on their own without support, pay their bills, and be a productive member of society?" If the answer is "yes," you're not considered disabled. If the answer is no, you are.
Lying, cruelty, judgmental thinking, etc. my be unpleasant and even objectionable behaviors, but they do not interfere with daily functioning and productivity in and of themselves. An exception could be compulsive lying, but that would indicate a probable disability, so there you go. |
Then how do you explain the fact that many members here at WP have official diagnosis yet have jobs, live on their own or are married with families, presumably pay bills, and contribute to society?
What about Temple Grandin, clearly an autistic person but someone who has learned to do /does all of those things? Is she now, suddenly, no longer a "diagnosed" or "recognized" autistic person? |
The short answer is "no." She isn't suddenly no longer recognized or diagnosed, nor has her Autism just "disappeared."
Diagnosis doesn't necessarily mean disabled. I'm talking disabled in the sense that you cannot function without support. Not all of us need support, or may need it for a while and adapt enough from it to no longer need it. That doesn't mean you're no longer Autistic. It doesn't mean you no longer have any difficulties from Autism.
See OliveOilMom's response too. It's a really good one
_________________
MrXxx is taking a long sabbatical, and no longer moderating. |
|
| Back to top |
|
Vito
Blue Jay
Joined: Dec 20, 2011
Age: 21
Posts: 99
Location: Czech Republic
|
| Posted: Sat Feb 11, 2012 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think that the answer you are searching lies in how to view a neurodiversity. I think that neurodiversity is a characteristic that is similar to, for example, IQ, EQ, but even to some unchangeable physical characteristics such as height in the sense that it has a spectral nature. That means if you assemble a large group of people and compare them according to their IQ, EQ, or height you will get a large spectre of diverse values; there will be similar values that are characteristic for larger portion of population of this group (which would be considered as a norm), than other, which will be displayed only in a few individuals (which would be considered extremes); this is basic statistics. If a extreme characteristic causes some problems to those who bear it (such as it is a case of extreme height, extremely low IQ or EQ) it is usually described and diagnosed as a disorder. If you apply this on the subject of neurodiversity, you will get some neurocharacteristics that are considered norm (neurotypical traits) and you will have an extreme (in this case serious form of autism) between that, there will be number of people who will be closer to the norm and those who will be closer to the extreme. To classify something as disorder here, means that you must draw a line somewhere between the norm and the extreme; that will lead to the situation where you will have person close to the drawed line qualified as "person with disorder" and the person who will be close to this line from other side and will not be qualified as "person with disorder" although it will have certain characteristics similar to the "person with disorder" (to use your word, you will be able to "recognize" these traits in that person).
I hope I did not make this even more confusing.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
