alex doesn't have Asperger's

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't see any sarcasm.

mw99 said

Daniel HAS said IN THIS VERY THREAD:



That is the WHOLE message to keep message context. It was only the 6th response, and I saw nothing to affect THREAD context! SO, I would LOVE for someone to tell me how Mw99 was sarcastic, etc....

1. MW99 was NOT sarcastic. He was stating what he believed as a fact, and STRONGLY implying the possibility he was wrong!! !! !
2. Danielismyname was stating FLAT OUT that MW99 was correct and that daniel DEFINITELY believed he was right, and left only the smallest of "wiggleroom" to say otherwise. GRANTED, he said people with AS can learn to appear to have 2 way conversation, etc... Frankly, that all sounds WAY to "fishy"!

So where am I wrong? I stated facts and gave you WHOLE posts! Daniels post apparently came 36 minutes AFTER MW99s, which was apparently never edited.

I was responding to the people who said my point was wrong, it's not. The DSM-IV-TR explicitly states that two-way social interaction doesn't occur, or in some cases it's mechanical in origin (rote memory).

I wasn't agreeing with the OP in relation to speculating whether someone has the disorder or not, I was agreeing with myself and my own observations in relation to two-way communication (I sometimes talk in third person).

Also, it's impossible to agree with Mw99, unless one wishes to be proven wrong.

Thats so interesting that you sometimes talk in the third person. My niece also talks in the third person but Ive not noticed myself or my daughters doing it.

Do any other WPers talk in the third person?

For the record, MW99 waasn't speculating. He was merely showing how the logic(you admitted once again that you agree with) can be applied.

BTW for the record(Yeah, I know you didn't actually claim that I did) I never even mentioned the third person reference. I kept it in ONLY because it was part of the post. Few here would fault you for that. HECK, bob dole does that, and is noted for it, and he STILL got to where he is.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Dole

Danielismyname,

I think that you are interpreting the DSM based on your own experience, just like most of us do, and you are reading into the DSM things that simply aren't there. In the quote that you posted here, nowhere does it mention mature adults. Yes, it does say that



but it doesn't categorically say that everyone with Asperger's will have have social disability that becomes more striking over time. It qualifies by using the word "often" - it doesn't make a blanket, inflexible, black and white statement.

One of the problems with the DSM (much like the any other authoritative writing) is that it is open to interpretation. Based on my personal experence, I interpret what you quoted to indicate that I fit the criteria, even though my experience might be atypical:



In early childhood I was indifferent to other children and having friends, was in my own world exploring my surroundings. By high school I wanted friends and was able to maintain friendships.



In my middle school years I shut down socially because, at the time, I couldn't figure out how to relate to my classmates effectively. I had, by that age, developed a tremendous memory and essentially cataloged appropriate responses to social situations in my mind which helped me greatly in my high school years.



I was bullied from 6th grade through the 9th grade, and being self-aware and realizing how my social abilities weren't keeping up with my peers, I became anxious and depressed by adolescence and young adulthood. While a junior in college I briefly saw a psychiatrist for depression.

THIS IS WHERE THE DSM-IV TR QUOTE ENDS - IN EARLY ADULTHOOD

AS A MATURE ADULT I have become skilled in conversation, eye contact, social interaction, etc. etc. If you met me you might say that I couldn't have Autistic Spectrum Disorder because I don't outwardly appear to have the characteristics that "everyone else" has. I am not "mechanical" in my interactions and I've been so successful in emulating social interaction that it can now be very natural for me to be social. My MATURE ADULT approach to other people is not severely impaired - it has GREATLY improved over my lifetime.

I do, however, continue to experience social interaction difficulties. I am often anxious in social situations although frequently I can hide the anxiety; I spend most of my time outside of work alone; at 43 years old I live with my mother.



As of the publishing of the DSM-IV in 1994 and its Text Revision in 2000 this was the case, although the 5 to 1 ratio might be changing.

Edit: Date of DSM-IV is 1994 - I had it as 2004, my bad.

Last edited by Zonder on 06 Apr 2008, 8:40 am, edited 1 time in total.

Many DO, but most of them probably obscure it in posts. For the record, I don't and don't think I ever have. One person on here doesn't SEEM to, and she may not now, but said she once did. Apparently, it is a possible symptom of AS and, I guess, ASDs in general.

Doesn't EVERYONE basically have to keep a catalog of sorts? I mean I have to remember political affiliations to some degree, family member status, etc... I DO remember having to remember that you can't refer to any thing about a persons appearance, disabilities, etc... HECK, you sometimes can't even refer to a persons ABILITIES!

Yes, everyone does, but with NTs, social interaction is more automatic because their social intuition functions more effectively. Its like their emotions and intellect work better in tandem to maneuver through social interaction. I, on the other hand, learned social interaction through trial-and-error, and kept a memory of all of my social successes and failures to make future decisions. I've developed a great long-term memory.

Z

Zonder,

I was just pointing out that the DSM-IV-TR isn't specific to children, and it even says that some young-adults can apply certain skills to compensate for their difficulties; which is rote memory (this doesn't equate to fluid and spontaneous interaction, only that people may be able to know what to say in situations for they've learnt such--you said you did this, and I did this too). I haven't seen much information in relation to [mature] adults, other than that one will mask certain symptoms, but that they'll still be "impaired", just not as overt (this makes sense).

One will still show signs of social impairment no matter how well they've scripted the world around them, whether it's one of the many nonverbal cues one will lack, fail to reciprocate, or use inappropriately. Problems with verbal communication, whether it's odd voice characteristics or frequently misinterpreting what's said--taking things literally, or missing implied meanings. Lacking in body language, odd posture, facial expressions, and the list goes on and on. There's just no way one can hide the severe social impairment of AS completely.

I'll post some more from the DSM-IV-TR:

Last edited by Danielismyname on 06 Apr 2008, 8:49 am, edited 1 time in total.

I agree with you , Danielismyname. I'm just trying to make the point that for some mature adults with AS who've successfully compensated for their deficits, social interaction can be as "imperfect" as an NT, and indistinguishable from an NT. NT social interactions aren't perfect, either.

Z

The suggestion is so ludicrous I won't even bother arguing, except to say that just because you have AS doesn't mean you can't do something - in my experience you simply don't pick it up intuitively and need practise in how to do it; you LEARN as opposed to 'pick up'. One aspect of my asperger's is I'm incredibly stubborn, and if I want to do something then dammit, I will do it! So yeah, sure, as a kid my conversations were a bit one-sided and weird, granted. But I'm now successful in my field of work, communication is what I do as a career, and I have AS. Woopie. So I can have a spontaneous interaction without problem, and I do so every day of my life. So what if I didn't pick that up as a child immediately in the way my peers did; I learnt it in my own way. Just because you have AS doesn't mean you're stupid or that you're incapable of learning...

1 : learned or memorized by rote
2 : mechanical 3a

1 : the use of memory usually with little intelligence <learn by rote>
2 : mechanical or unthinking routine or repetition <a joyless sense of order, rote, and commercial hustle — L. L. King>

Odd how one word can be taken so many ways. It seems to me, that it means ONLY repetition with no other effort.



The DSM doesn't even say the social impairment has to be "SEVERE"!

Severe is there.

To sum up:

Most people with AS will participate in one-sided conversations only [as per the DSM];
those who learn to utilize certain strengths to mask their weaknesses will still show other features of the social impairment [as per the DSM]; even though this learnt socialization isn't "real", it's like someone using a fork in place of a hand, there'll be many things that you can pick up with said fork, but when you're given something you cannot grasp, you won't be able to pick it up.

The above is my argument; not whether someone has it or not.

It's just the facts.

I did not mean to be sarcastic, but you have a point.

"One-sided" is probably the wrong term.
Sometimes I let my son tell me about pokemon for an hour. That's one sided! Mostly we have conversations that go both ways (two sided). It doesn't just go from A to B, but also from B to A.
This may be clumsy, but it's definately two sided. It is also creative i.e. not just by rote.

I think it can be compared to learning a new language: you start by learning set phrases (rote memory) but once you get going, you find you can improvise. You may always have an accent (be less skilled = have an impairment), but you do speak the language.