Is Aspergers trendy?

Post Reply New Topic

@perpetual_padawan
I didn't say anything about writing. I just think WP's a skewed "sample" of people with ASD because I think a disproportionate amount are married, have full-time jobs, active social lives and friendships etc. than would be expected of people with ASD in the general population. I think that gives people who judge ASD by the lives of people on this site a false idea.

You may be right.

I see this site as being for the members, though. Not as existing to convey what autism and Aspergers really mean. For that we have autism speaks, only we mostly dislike them. So I guess whether it matters depends on one's perspective.

My perspective is that I don't want this site to increase prejudice or intolerance. For anyone.

Sometimes when people on this site make the "autism is only a difference and not a disability" argument they discuss their own life and/or the lives of others on WP who have been as successful pr more successful than the average NT and how although they've struggled and/or they work very hard and/or are exhausted from it , ASD has overall been positive for them. I'm just saying that the majority of people with ASD don't have such an experience. Those who do are at present anyway, a very small percentage of those with the disorder. Also, many of the people on WP aren't officially diagnosed, of -course, so although they say "I have autism and am not impaired" they have nothing to substantiate the claim that they do indeed have autism. Of-course an official diagnosis ins't incontrovertible evidence because of course professionals are fallible human beings but it is some substantiation.

Of course its trendy, and when anything gets funding and become known to mainstream society, expect a rapid rise in diagnosis. High-functioning autism and Aspergers has become something that once started as a severe social and communication disorder, has now evolved to mean anyone who is introverted (who will by definition have problems with certain sensory stimuli like loud noises), analytical, technically talented or interested in the technical, and has at least normal intelligence.

Introverts tend to have these traits to a lesser degree. Now HFA is just something to describe someone who in the 80s would have just been called an introvert. Asperger's is now rampant in subgroups such as scientists, engineers, silicon valley software developers, etc. because we are now programmed to look at these traits as autism, as opposed to introversion. I have seen people diagnosed with ASD who clearly just exhibit traits found in your typical male introvert, and thats all. When something becomes labeled as an epidemic, expect overdiagnosis from psychiatric professionals, who are becoming retrained to see autism in everything, pattern seeking animals we are.

I'd say, if you are able to maintain a group of friends, and have a decent relationship with your family, then get a 2nd opinion.

I see, not excluding people for what is achieved, questioning applying a label without any impairment or struggle to be overcome. I understand better, thank you Daydreamer☺️

Sadly there is misconceptions about AS even in the AS community. Everyone is different and have different personalities, whether they are NT or AS, and are affected in different ways, some more severely than others. I wish people wouldn't trivialise other people's issues, you don't know how much it affects their life unless you have "walked in their shoes". Even with the same disabilities people won't necessarily react the same way either. Introverts may be more common among us, but not all people who have Aspergers (or autism in general) are, it depends on our different personalities, traits, and life experiences. My loved one for example has some issues, including physical ones, but he is not an introvert, he is social and has friends.

But anyway, whether a person is officially diagnosed or self-diagnosed, I doubt that anyone thinks "I'm an introvert therefore it means I have AS", there is a whole lot more signs than that, and you can have both social anxiety and ASD, one doesn't exclude the other.

Last edited by Shadi2 on 26 May 2014, 2:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

I'm surprised when I see people saying things like "Why are you all so outraged?" or coming up with some convoluted idea of why people are saying the things they do, when all I see is people just saying what they think.

I already mentioned that excuse being used defensively. It doesn't negate the fact that to be diagnosed you must meet the criteria and be impaired by the condition. Autism is defined as a triad of impairments.

Everything Gamer wrote is right, to a certain extent.

---

But for me, I am a writer. I write novels. I feel more confident and more comfortable saying what I have to say by writing. Than I do when speaking. It's easier for me to express myself through writing.

But I also chalk that up to the fact that we're all safe behind computer screens when we speak on WP. There is no one who can make a disgusted face or look at you strange. You feel less judged.

How can it be trendy if people with ASDs are murderers now? (According to the news).

I don't doubt, and never said otherwise, that many do have legitimate problems and legitimate diagnoses. That said, the obvious rise in diagnosis (1 in 68 now, as opposed to 1 in 1000 in the 70s) should give question to overdiagnosis. It is no coincidence that ADHD diagnosis skyrocketed around the time that treatment options became available (more people with ADHD = more $$$)

While it is no pill for autism, it does open therapy options covered by some insurances. Same logic applies, more people sick means more money to psychiatrists and therapists. This is not the ramblings of a cynic. This obvious conflict of interest has been discussed in detail in many scientific journals over the last couple of years, the result of problems with a system that can give an illness without any blood test or other forms of hard evidence. Hopefully, such a test will come available in the future, but for now we are stuck with a flawed system. http://www.foroaps.org/files/95e914f601 ... 526d2c.pdf

Back to the point, I think it is naive to assume that everyone with a diagnosis of HFA or AS is more than just a shy nerd with social difficulties. That is simply putting too much trust in a system where some of the very people working in it say it needs reform. Pointing out this fact does not trivialize anything, and a 2nd opinion is a logical solution to ward from misdiagnosis.

Last edited by Gamer on 26 May 2014, 3:36 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Trendy doesn't mean positive , only inclining toward something popular or fashionable. People talk of school shootings as trendy, well someone in my family did and apperently people on the internet. First hit on google for ;are school shootings trendy? link

definition: linkdef

I'm not sure what you mean by "being used defensively", its just a fact, we all have different personalities. Yes about impairments, and I mentioned it ("issues", "disabilities") as well in my post, and that some people are more severely affected than others, but this doesn't mean that the others, who are less severely affected, are not affected at all, and that it doesn't cause real and serious difficulties in their life. However some traits that are generally considered impairments, are not necessarily so, it depends on how it affects your life, and also how you feel about it, depending also on the severity and how disabling it is of course.

For example, I mentioned Temple Grandin in other posts, how she thinks in images before text, this can be considered as an impairment, because she doesn't think the way a neurotypical person thinks, but it allowed her to do some things that a neurotypical person couldn't do. So eventho it was an impairment to begin with, because it was making communication with other people difficult, and without her mother's persistence she might never have been able to get where she is now, this "impairment", along with her intelligence, is also a gift.

One of the traits that is also common is honesty (naivety as well), strangely this is also a social impairment (it would definitely be difficult for me to be a politician or a saleswoman ... well I could be a saleswoman I guess but I would have to really believe in the product I have to sell), I have learned the hard way (probably like many of us here), except I wouldn't have it any other way, I want to be honest and I appreciate honesty in other people. I have learned to not just say everything that crosses my mind tho, and realise that some things might insult people, but despite this I still do it unintentionally, but less than I did when I was younger (and I got punished by my parents quite a few times because of this, eventho I was never intentionally rude, nor did I insult anyone intentionally).

Anyway, I don't know if I'm explaining correctly, but I'm trying.

It's hard to know how much misdiagnosis (false pos and neg) without a set of objective lab tests for bio/brain/cog/beh traits of autism.

Maybe the definition of what it means to have ASD has changed. Maybe that doesn't have to be a bad thing.

The official definitions are currently still the ones in the DSM 5 and in the ICD 10, both of which include severe impairment in daily functioning.

Just because people think it means something different and that they have it doesn't make it true. Many people say "yeah, I'm so OCD' when they're a little perfectionist-y or obsessive about something and they associate OCD with that kind of punctiliousness. My aunt is obsessive and eccentric and she often used to say she was so OCD and my uncle used to call her OCD. She doesn't have compulsions or anxious obsessions that take up time during the day though she is anxious. The doctor diagnosed her with general anxiety and obsessional tendencies and SAD. She takes meds for it now. The point is , just because she and some others see OCD as being type A personality obsessiveness doesn't change what the thing actually is.

The thing I hate the most is when people diagnose themselves with a mental or developmental condition and then claim that the thing is different from the official definition because they experience it differently. It's very circular logic. Someone diagnoses himself with a condition with nothing to substantiate it and then says he's not impaired so therefore the condition doesn't involve impairment despite the official definition saying differently .

I could say I have thoughts that are kind of like delusions (weird superstitions about lucky numbers and the like) and find similar means to say that I have mild versions of other symptoms of Schizophrenia and then say "I have Schizophrenia" but for me the symptoms are quite mild and don't impair me. Maybe I'd talk about how I worked so hard to overcome my symptoms and that's why I'm unimpaired so if others with Schizophrenia worked as hard as me they wouldn't be impaired, so Schizophrenia doesn't cause impairment. It's the same logic. It doesn't make sense.