maybe i am not an aspie...

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't say all professionals didn't have biases either. I said you needed an "objective" perspective, which would mean you would need a professional who is happy to assess your behaviours based on what they are.

Look, not all professionals are perfect. I had a bit of a drama getting my AS diagnosed - a look at my co-morbid diagnosis will probably give you a hint as to why I had trouble and my first psychiatrist laughed me out of his office - but ultimately, I still think you can't solely rely on your own interpretation of your own behaviours. Simply because you can't stand outside of yourself and examine yourself.

An example: I've been told that my facial expressions, during conversations, can be somewhat "perturbing" - in that I basically lack facial expressions when I'm listening to people talk. Now, if I hadn't been told that by a third party, then I would never have noticed because I don't walk around with a mirror in front of my face all day.

On the other hand, someone with an underlying anxiety problem might think they are showing signs of the usual Aspie lack of social skills, when really they're appearing just fine - it's just their anxiety exacerbating their negative self-image and self-talk.

I spent a while suspecting that I MIGHT be on the spectrum, because there were things that I read that I could identify with, but I never outright strongly suspected it until I brought it up with my therapist who agreed with me and advocated on my behalf. Even then, I never said that I was "autistic". I would say that I think I'm autistic but I'm not sure.

As for stats about how accurate self-dxs are - I don't think you'll ever find out. It would be an interesting study, though. I do wonder if people who self-dx would be willing to come aboard such a study. The cynic in me thinks not, because I think some people like to wear the Aspie badge as some sort of a badge of honour.

I don't know if theory of mind here is influencing this high number projection e.g. 90%. But my self, having lived on my own for a while, would venture to say that these folks are right and fall into a significant majority, of knowing where the line is.

It just doesn't jive that 50 out of 100, or even 70 out of 100, would be biased enough to miss it. The ones that did, may have attention defecit.

I realise that you didn't say professionals don't have any bias. However, I do think you are quite wrong in expecting an "objective" perspective; everybody's view is coloured to a degree.



You'd be right, as have others in suggesting that a an experienced and neutral observer can see a lot in a persons external behaviour of which they themselves may be unaware. What I do have trouble with is others making assessments of what does or does not go on inside the closed world of another's mind. Too often this just seems to be a stab in the dark based upon their own personal preconceptions. For instance, I have a genuine difficulty understanding what people say to me and forming coherent sentences yet a psychologist I have seen has put this down to being overly self critical and anxious. This could not be further from the truth. It is true that as a boy I was shy and lacking in confidence but over the course of my life I have grown and overcome these difficulties yet the fundamental disabilities remain.

I'm starting to go off track, but in essence I'm trying to say that it is impossible to distil ones personal experiences and perception into something another person may understand particularly another who does not suffer from a distinct neurological difference. As an example I couldn't imagine what it would be like to perceive the world as a person with colour blindness, but this is exactly what it is like, as if a doctor was telling a person with colour blindness that they didn't see the world this way but that way instead.

I thought the option "Diagnosed" refers to those who have been professionally diagnosed and not self-diagnosed. If that is not the case a lot of people probably use it to be taken seriously on this site which is full of diagnose-nazis. Using the option "Diagnosed" without professional support is based on the same facts as claiming to have been abducted by space aliens is based on. And even if I would have a professional diagnose, I would be careful with that option until I had a brain scan with reliable comparisons on the similarities with other people on the spectrum, because a professional is not omniscient. It would only slightly strengthen my conviction to be diagnosed without a brain scan and being 99 % sure is not good enough...for me.

When did my thread become a debate over diagnoses and the possibility of correct self-diagnosis...? Don't get into a fight just over me guys! Can't we all just get along! Or at least stay on topic?

Oh this is VERY "on topic" my dear. You are making claims about having AS but yet nobody believes you have it AND you list symptoms that are not in the DSM criteria for being labled as AS. If you read this post in the right "frame" you may conclude that your symptoms are potentially more important to address than this other thing is. (the worry over you having AS or not having AS). Yes, keep it in mind but seek help for your real symptoms right now and if AS is present and is an actual disability for you, it will continue to show and then it will be easy to get help for actual AS symptoms. Right now focus on anxiety/depression in light of the fact that AS may be under it all.

Yes--Aspergers-Diagnosed means professionally diagnosed ie. REAL diagnosis. Aspergers-Undiagnosed means self-diagnosed--not a real diagnosis, but people who strongly believe they have it.



I would hardly call people who see professional diagnoses as more valid than self diagnoses as "diagnose-nazis". Or did you mean something else?

Yes I meant discussions which I have seen on this site about ignoring posts from undiagnosed people.

I think two months is quite typical around here, though I could be wrong. The price was outrageous, but it is very typical (even if it took them 5 or 6 months to get the results back to me--the price would be the same. And if I had to have more testing, it would be even more pricey, of course). I also did not have a psychoeducational analysis. Lots of people have that in conjunction with the ADIR and ADOS, and in those cases, the testing can range from 2000$-3000$. The psychoed is not to specifically diagnose autism, but to identify any resulting learning problems that may have risen as a result. Since I do well in school, she said I don't need to worry about that not. Luckily for me, I am pretty sure once I get my report back, because I am a student and received the diagnosis, the government will reimburse me for 80% of what I spent (I am in Canada).

I am sorry about the family issues you are having. It seems odd that with two autistic people in the family, they would refuse to accept you. Unfortunately, the ADIR cannot be conducted without an outside interview from either a parent or someone else who knew you well as a baby. It is impossible. Is there ANYONE is your family who you speak to who knew you well enough--grandparent, aunt, uncle? I like the ADIR and ADOS because they are less subjective in that the person is not asked to self-reflect about their condition as often people can exagerrate or diminish symptoms without even realizing it.

Only certain psychologists and psychiatrists are qualified to diagnose ASDs. Those psychs would have been properly trained in identifying them. The senior psychiatrist you mentioned likely does not have this qualification or training. There is no point on going to a psych who cannot diagnose an ASD in search of confirmation of an ASD. What else can you expect? If his specialty is personality disorders, then you obviously wouldn't make an appointment to see him about ASDs, would you?



Funny that you said I spoke with "apparent confidence". I NEVER ONCE SAID I KNEW FOR SURE. I always said that would be my guess. Are you aware of the definition of "guess"? I still believe that the percentages are LIKELY around there--based on my own experience and reading, not based on scientific studies (did you notice the part where I asked for a link to a scientific study showing ANY statistic if someone knew of one). There is nothing I hate more right now than people miscontruing everything I say, and for some reason it is happening all the time laterly. I notice how you did not belittle the 90 percent statistic as absurd armchair academics though! LOL

I never said 70 out of 100 are wrong. You got it backward. I said, the percentage (COULD for those of you who cannot read what I wrote in the last past...not you Mdyar) likely be 70/30 in that 70% would be correct not incorrect. Since so many people do not go out and get a real diagnosis, true statistics will never be known. I do not believe, though, that 90% get it right. I don't even think that is a likely possibility at all.

Edit: of course, like I said, I am not ENTIRELY closed off to seeing it 90/10--as long as someone could provide me with a scientific study showing me where it says that. If not, the 90/10 are entitled to their opinion, and I am entitled to mine which is no less valid until some proof either way can be offered.

Unfortunately once the original post is made and submitted, the original poster loses control over the trajectory of the thread.

That being said, the comments offered might not be what you want to read, but they are hardly off-topic.

Which is what I thought you meant.

I have not noticed anyone ignoring posts from undiagnosed people. I have seen people who do not accept self-diagnoses to be as valid as professional diagnoses. That is a very valid view point, and these people should not be labelled "diagnose-nazis". Professional diagnoses are seen as more valid in any organization, government, education, health, etc system. People can say they have anything--if it was accepted with no proof, the economy could collapse. So, professional diagnoses are important.

Of course, those self-diagnosed should not be ignored (and I have not seen that happen--particularly since a large portion of WP members are self-diagnosed), nor should they be disrespected. A professional diagnosis should still be encouraged, though, IMO.

Until we one day have a machine that can scan people's brains and spit out a definite yes or no to autistic neurology, there is no way to tell if one is autistic or not. It's all done by an analysis of behavior, which is always going to be biased. You can look at yourself, see a few autistic traits and consider yourself autistic. You can look at yourself, see a few neurotypical traits and consider yourself that. Even a professional assessment will always be biased.

Even the DSM criteria itself doesn't actually define autism. It's just a list of traits to look for. One can still have the traits and still have neurotypical brain wiring. Likewise, there are many aspies out there who do not meet the DSM criteria. Why do you think PPD-NOS is the most commonly diagnosed form? It's no surprise if you think about it.

Most of my diagnosis took place in two sessions in the same week, I think mine could have been done in a month, and most of that time was for waiting between appointments - I had a background information appointment where he got what I was like as a kid, in school, etc, and he decided in that that I was likely enough to have an ASD that I should go through the evaluation, an evaluation, and then a week after the evaluation met with him and got a diagnosis.

I am aware most people do not get this, but just a tidbit of information:

There actually are typical structural abnormalities that are found in the autistic brain that are common in people with autism, and rarely found in NT brains. These can be seen by a regular brain scan.