Misconceptions re. re-classifying Asperger's in the DSMV

Post Reply New Topic

Slight tangent, but it looks like big changes, including support for AS adults in the UK will be introduced next year: http://www.autism.org.uk/nas/jsp/polopoly.jsp?d=2251 It is not clear yet just what that support will be. And not sure how the laws will integrate with diagnostic procedures.


Not really true! It is much harder to change as we get older, but change *is* possible. I'm *much* more socially skilled than I was in my early 20's ! It is an ongoing, never ending process.

I agree with what you say about 'trial and error'. That is how I've learned and it is slow and painstaking, sometimes backfires with negative effects that can take months/years to recover from as effectively I'm using real life for training. I think social skills training - if done sympathetically, with good understanding of the AS experience, (OK, thats a big 'if'...) , in aa safe environment, would be valuable for AS adults at any age.



Maybe not innate 'social ability', but many of us have an innate desire to like (some) others and to be liked by (some) others, yet struggle to achieve this. NT's social skills develop through their lives, too. Obviously they have more to start with, but they don't stay with the innate set they were given at birth. Also, empathy varies a huge amount between individuals here, it would seem from 'little' to 'more than the average NT'!

A vague concern I have is related to AS being currently so easy to fake. Those allocating benefits will almost certainly know this - in the UK we have teams of snoopers that catch disability fraudsters by, for example, filming them playing tennis when they're claiming they can't walk more than 10 yards. Due to communications difficulties (I have terrible problems communicating with doctors, for example), in my fevered imagination, I see the fraudsters being able to con all the resources due to their social expertise, while the genuine cases get nothing because we will come across as 'shifty' and unlikeable.

that's a bit rich coming from you baiter. considering your postinf life here revolves around twisting context and bending the reality of what people have said or are trying to say and baiting them into fighting with you. and defining this and that with your "preferred definitions" (haha imagine if we were all so grandiose we did that!!), i've NEVER seen you back yourself up. no good at all!

having said that, i agree with you in this thread for the most part.

Did you not look at the severity labels that were posted in this thread? If you are severe Asperger's you will be put under Less-Severe or Moderate from what I understand. Severe is for those that are non-verbal. There is subclinical for mild AS.

Greentea wrote

Hey! I am one of those low-lifes who prefers to live my own world (mostly my own head) and is mystified as to why others want to have friends. I understand why you wouldn't want to be associated with the likes of me, but now you are going to feel obliged to rail against us, too, as well as those fiendish NT's. You are going to have your hands full - my sympathies .

Im not too worried about it because really the proof is in how an NT perceives us. I know when I used to attend an AS group I would feel very mild, as I was about the 4th highest functioning there, by my estimations.

But once I got back to my real situation I was again floundering helplessly in a perilous sea of confusing NTs.

The reality is, even if you do receive a subclinical diagnosis, the fact that you went in for a diagnosis at all likely means you have had real problems relating socially to people, otherwise you would never fork out all that cash.

Also, just because the name Aspergers is being phased out doesnt mean people will stop using it. People are likely to find "Autism Spectrum Disorder" to be too much of a mouthful to use in everyday conversation.

So, am I worried about a bunch of professionals playing musical labels? No.. it changes nothing for me.

88BK
You should probably read the TOS if you intend a long tenure as a member here.

Not everyone will repeatedly turn a blind eye to rule breaking attempts to provoke them into petty, childish and pointless hostility for its own vindictive sake. If you really have this much of an issue being seen to be factually wrong in your assertions, it would be more productive to check your facts before you post rather than lashing out at other members while placing your own membership in jeopardy.

Do not bother coming crying to me if you end up being warned or banned trying these silly antics out on others. They are against the rules and not everyone is as lacking in vindictiveness as I am. Even I will report you if I come to believe you are disrupting others with this ridiculous vendetta of yours. Goodness knows how you would respond if someone actually intentionally wronged you rather than merely pointing out an inaccuracy in some post you made on an internet forum. Chill out, all this aggression cannot be good for your internal organs.

Now does any one know if they will be inclueding NVLD as part of the spectrum in the new DSM?

what are you talking about?? i was simply pointing out that your statement was a bit hypocritical. i didn't attack you. well, unless you consider someone addressing you an attack! i noted some observations on posts that i have seen from you around here. i apologize if you considered them to be derogatory, i was in no way lashing out at you! and i'm not bothered about you pointing out inaccuracies in my post, cause as far as i'm concerned, you haven't succeeded in doing that, so no malice there!

i'm on no vendetta, though you seem to be, but i wont get into that as it's boring.

maybe YOU should take some of your own advice and chill a bit and not be so defensive and think everyone is attacking you when they're just pointing out an observation! i guess it's kinda nice that someone as talented with semantics and as eloquent you considered something i said as report-worthy though, i must be deeper than i thought!!

88BK, Whatever your personal opinion about what you posted, I am very confident the post I commented on is not compliant with WP’s TOS. If you genuinely do not understand this, then I suggest you raise this issue with a moderator yourself. If you want to abide by WP’s rules and approach them reasonably asking if your conduct is within the rules, I am sure they will be helpful and understanding in their response.

To be clear, I've cited the relevant rules above as excerpts, some in bold or underlined. If you two need to talk, do so privately or better yet - let it go.


M.

i have talked to a mod. i asked them how i can better deal with people who take advantage of and pick on people who aren't as smart as they are. we're not all high IQ aspies you know. i struggle to put a sentence together let alone keep up with all your twists and turns. i come here to have fun and talk about ASDs, not have some high horse person come and point out inaccuracies in my opinions or experiences, that's no fun for me, i don't have the brain to do what you do. i just want to say what i think and feel and that be the end of it. maybe have a nice talk with someone about something i'm interested in.....but you're just horrible.

now, i was advised by a mod to avoid sounding like i'm attacking you by twisting and turning my words into different shaped sentences...or something (i think maybe it's like instead of me saying "but you're just horrible" i should say something like "i think someone else who isn't you but does and says exactly what you do is horrible" so it's not actually at you?? but that's nowehere near as pretty or clever as how i imagine you would twist such a statement). but i am HFA, and it affects me alot with this kind of thing, so i am unable to do so. so, please, just pretend i worded this like one of your attack type posts.....all pretty and disguised and clever.

No. It falls under the difference "I think you're horrible" and "I think that doing [insert] is horrible" - attack the idea or action, not the person. I would suggest that both parties take a moment and walk away awhile before responding.


M.

see...i told you i sucked at it.

but i think i sort of get it...make sure you only say negative things about objects/actions...but don't imply that those actions (however awful) make the person awful....they just do awful things.

see even that sounds odd in my brain, cause i thought awful actions were taken by awful people. BAH!! !! !! !! I HATE these social rules.

I dislike social rules too! but only because I can't under stand them because they shift shapes and change all the time.

yes, you're right about distinguishing the action from the person. It is the action of the person that is inappropriate, not the person doing the action.

This decodes a lot of social situations in your offline life, too, it's the same distinction that govern social rules everywhere.

Merle

I like the Separate Asperger's Diagnosis. No offense, but because it was considered as autism in the past, i was put into inappropriate settings as an adult with people who are mentally ret*d, and I had no friends and no one to relate too. The agency was an agency funded under the state's D D Mental Retardation agency. On top of that because of that, these programs thought I was not able to do anything treated me like I was stupid, and gave me inappropriate job placements. I had to go out of my way to get out of them and be re-evaluated as Asperger's with a high IQ, so that I could leave. In my state they do not put anyone in these types of programs who do not have mental retardation. I was able to get the appropriate help, through the State's rehabilitative office, which deals with all disabilities, not just mental retardation, who saw great potential, and is paying for my schooling, so I can be a Histology Technician. The old program I was in admitted that the type of services that are for adults who are not able to even work a decent part time job, and who need people to control them all their lives. So that is why I can be bitter at times about this.

Psygirl, I think that what you experienced will be less likely if the two conditions are merged.

What happened in your instance was based on the premise that if someone receives a Kanner Autistic diagnosis then particular jobs are suitable for them and particular jobs are not, and if someone receives an Asperger diagnosis then other jobs are suitable or not accordingly. The same is true for group home placement etc.

This would not happen under the suggested amendment because there would only be one category and individual assessment of performance in particular domains of functioning. Rather than making assumptions based on whether you receive a Kanner or Asperger diagnosis (assumptions that continued to be acted on until you could get your diagnosis changed), under the suggested amendment, you would have been diagnosed as Autistic but then assessed for functioning, and further treatment, placement and assistance would be premised on your assessed functioning in the measured domains rather than a series of assumptions that are indiscriminately applied in the wake of a somewhat arbitrary label.

The suggested amendments should go some way towards preventing the kind of inappropriate treatment you are describing. The way you were treated was premised on the current division between Kanner and Asperger type Autism and assumptions being made about the meaning of that somewhat arbitrary division.