Going off-topic in support group - need help!

Post Reply New Topic

Alright, here's the thing. I help organize a support group for people on the spectrum, and we have recently tried having a topic-focused, real-time online discussion. The topic of the discussion was supposed to be "relationships", but we kept digressing from the topic all too often.

This is not a group-unique problem. I have noticed that my conversations with other ASD people often consist of a very spontaneous kind of logical sequence. When there is a large group of people, the process of keeping the conversation on track becomes even more difficult as the momentum of the conversation becomes more difficult to control. Even here, I have noticed that threads have a tendency of going on tangents.

Since we are getting complaints from some of the members about the topic inconsistency, this is a problem within the group that needs fixing.

Any ideas on how the conversation CAN be kept on track better?

Well........I have a number of suggestions that I think will be of value with this particular problem and many other problems in AS support groups that I have experienced. Please feel free to comment Mathgirl.


I have mild AS and like many people who have been formally Dx with AS I am self-aware and emotionally mature enough to tip-toe over the more imprisoning walls of the spectrum and consequently feel like I am living in that 'in-between world' (autistic/non-autistic world)
This 'in-between world' I know is a very common experience for many with HFA/AS.

It has been well documented that the more self-aware the person with AS is, the more mental health problems they are likely to face, so the need to find connection and support is just as important for people like me who are very independent, as it is for those in the spectrum who are more severely impaired and thus rendered dependant.

I have noticed that there are often 3 groups of people in attendance at AS support groups which could loosely fall into the following categories, and feel that by having 3 separate groups that fall into the categories below, would work best for all 3 groups.

High dependency:
Very limited emotional understanding. Empathicly challenged (unable to grasp emotions or affirm emotions in others) Limited range of interest outside of computer games.

Moderate dependency:
Emotionally immature.
Able to empathise cognitively but greatly challenged by expression of feelings. Unable to communicate well with others unless there is a shared interest.

Independent
Emotionally able, but difficulty in regulating emotions.
Able to empathise cognitively and emotionally and have consequently learned how to adapt and communicate with others less awkwardly.

It is my experience that being in a support group with such a varied mix of expressions of autism is often overwhelming and alienating.

Living in London there are so many support groups I could go to with respect to comorbid conditions of ASD such as OCD, depression, and anxiety or addiction related issues. However, I only feel really understood and at home by others with AS.

I understand that if it were possible (and i do believe it is possible) to divide a large group of attendees to AS support into the three categories I have outlined above, there would still remain many possibilities for discord and disunity, such is human nature, but i feel it would contribute enormously to the general welfare of us all.

I hope many people will express their thoughts on this matter so I can learn from others experiences here prior to contacting my autism support group in London.

Many thanks for reading this.

Thanks for the response. Perhaps it is too difficult of a question to answer without actually knowing the people involved, but I was hoping that perhaps someone did have the same experience and knew how to get around this problem.

I disagree with your definition of "mild". I can only speak for myself in terms of my self-awareness (since I'm not sure what specific feature defines someone as "self-aware"), but I have been told that I'm very self-aware. I am far from "mild", however, when put into a group of NTs my age and expected to socialize with them. In that situation, I go completely blank. I cannot drive, have difficulty concentrating in school (I only get by due to having a very good memory), and have very weak central coherence overall coupled with sensory processing issues. Despite this all, I am very outgoing and self-confident, which does perhaps make me look like someone who is "mild", but that can fall apart very quickly once I get out of my comfort zone. Perhaps I could say that my self-awareness has enabled me to come across as "mild" and to integrate myself into society well, but my self-awareness came only after my special interest has become autism/AS and I started applying what I have learned about it productively to create a better lifestyle for myself.

Since people on the spectrum are so diverse, trying to fit them into boxes is difficult and unnecessary. Moreover, we may struggle with different issues and some members may have advise/coping strategies to share with those who may benefit from them. When it comes to social groups overall, a greater amount of diversity seems to do more good than homogeneity. For example, there is a group organized here in my city for people who have the Myers-Briggs type INFP. Since they're all very similar in personality, there is apparently an overall cold vibe in the group; conversations are slow and tend to be very self-centered. I myself periodically go to a group where there are mostly introverts, and as an extrovert, whenever I'm not there, the group seems to die down. One simply needs more friction to create more energy, and more friction results from more opposing characteristics in people.

Overall, I don't see how dividing the members into even smaller subgroups would help resolve this issue. Dividing people based on their interests would, perhaps, be a better solution. The only problem is, almost everyone in our group has a very specific, unique interest.

I'm sorry, but it's sort of hilarious you made a thread on this! Based on my involvement in the conversation, I don't really see your concern. It was a normal conversation and if anything was a little too hyper-focused on a very narrow issue that we selected, especially given the minimal input that most people had to contribute to it. It was established as a casual and voluntary conversation just like all of our meetups, and I thought the branching was quite logical.

I also thought the conversation also went well because it flowed at the will of the group. Hmm, are you talking about the one individual who left? The one guy we will call "S" complained that we weren't talking about specifically what he wanted to talk about relating to relationships and left, but he had his opportunity to discuss it in length, and he really didn't inspire much of a discussion after that, so unless he was more clear of what he wanted, I don't think it was possible to address his complaint.

I think the more casual style is more mentally healthy, as we all simply have many thoughts. Although there was a specific topic that was preselected to inspire conversation, people were free to talk as they wished.

It was set up exactly correct this time. I wouldn't change it one bit. Unlike the last meetup, we preselected a topic which helped start and guide it, and people were free to branch. Seems ideal to me.

thank you mathgirl.

I wish you well with the group.

Although I wasn't there, I have a feeling that from what you've described, S. may have seen the topic as a chance for him to just talk about *his own* issues further, seeing that relationships are an area of focus for him. Perhaps when the topic shifted to something that was *not concerning himself* he became bored and decided to tune out and leave...even if it was something he could learn from or easily relate to. During the last online meetup, I noticed he did a similar thing (left when we werent talking about something of immediate interest to him), but at the same time I kind of expected it.

The reason I say this is that he can be very egocentric sometimes, and although you could argue that egocentrism is a common thing on the spectrum, the way it presents in him is that he has an incredibly hard time listening to and relating to other's experiences, preferring to go off on his own track without any regard to others.

He isn't doing it intentionally, but just doesn't have the level of self awareness that you or I do. Basically, he may have made that comment afterwards because perhaps he was not able to talk about his experiences as much as he would have liked...and *to him* the group was going off topic.

Judging from what you have told me and the response from the other poster above, the meetup generally went well, and while the main topic may have switched a little, it was, in a way, bound to happen, just like how it did during the last online meetup (although judging from the discussion I saw beforehand, the topic at hand may have been more focused)

Let me know if this makes sense.