People with milder forms of autism struggle as adults

Post Reply New Topic

V, so you believe that one can get over autism? You match the symptoms, you deal with them, you no longer match the symptoms. Cured. Really?

"Someone who has a single kidney can be identified as such without doing a screening and an ADOS and an ADI-R or equivalent"

Yes, but they wouldn't be tested unless they presented symptoms. They go through their life undiagnosed, then their child dies from a kidney infection. That seems legitimately analogous to successful undiagnosed autism, to me.

One can have impairments and still be successful even the diagnosed. For the last couple of months, wrongplanet has featured HFA ladies who could easily pass for non-autistics. Seeing them and reading their stories, it's not out the realm of possibility or probability THAT there could exist more Autists like them YET simply undiagnosed .

Again, it's an extremely large spectrum with various 'abilities' along with 'disabilities'. No Autistic is completely alike. There are vast differences among the population.


TheSunAlsoRises

That's true. I think success can only be measured subjectively. Ask them if they're happy. Then ask me if they're lying.

Those who haven't need to go out(IF at all possible) and see YOUR Autists brothers and sisters.

I guaran-damn-tee YOU; it will give you a different perspective on the research THAT you read and cite concerning Autistics.

Until more Autistics get directly involved in research, as practitioners, a lot of Autists will not get the answers they seek concerning their unique neurology.


TheSunAlsoRises

I find the definition of "success" our society has a bit insulting. With that terminology, being able to make money, get married, and have kids is thrown at people as some kind of yardstick and de-facto yard stick of self-worth. The problem is 90% of the population meets this standard, many who are not truly exceptional any way. The thing is defined by exclusion in that you "fail" because you are "defective" in doing what 90% of people do, regardless of the fact that you may have unique talents and positive qualities that 99% of others do not. I think it's no wonder that many people who can't seem to find their niche in life often give up after constantly getting hung up by their weakest link. I'd also say that the job market is changed today compared to what it was in the past. There are few jobs left that don't require social skills as one of the top qualifying factors.

These people don't care about us and keep making it seem like we're doomed over "social skills" because that's all they care about. Has it occurred to them that not EVERY BODY cares about how many friends they have or don't have? Seems like a lack of theory of mind at play and the same old applying their standards onto others to hide the fact that they cannot be an individual enough to understand that not all of us are the same nor should we be and that is just fine.

Their life would be ruined if they have no friends. Projection. Who cares if someone is an intelligent loner with hobbies. Has it occurred to these biased people that hobbies can make someone happy and perhaps they should try it too?

Nobody is saying that there aren't successful autistic adults. Nobody here is saying that there aren't undiagnosed autistic people who have jobs. What they're saying is that statistically, the rates of unemployment of autistic people are unlikely to change drastically when you include undiagnosed adults.

Rates of employment of diagnosed autistic adults is 12%.
"Unemployment" rate in the UK currently is 8.4%. Judging by the US's "unemployment" rate vs employment, the actual rate of having jobs for adults overall is likely about 80%.

If I could find the rates of diagnosis of adults in the UK (rather than the estimated rates of ASD, which is 1/100 in adults as well as children), I'd go through various calculations, including how many undiagnosed autistic people there would need to be with jobs to get the rate of employment to be the same between autistic people and non-autistic people.

The difference between clinical and subclinical in the undiagnosed population would appear to be largely situational. The subclinical ones are 'getting away with it', perhaps due to random chance.

"What they're saying is that statistically, the rates of unemployment of autistic people are unlikely to change drastically when you include undiagnosed adults"

I can't understand why anyone would assert this without evidence. We know that adults get diagnosed when they're having problems. The undiagnosed ones would seem therefore to be more successful.

You don't have evidence, you have the DSM begging the question!

Undiagnosed adults initially included people with and without problems in the same proportion to diagnosed children. Once you subtract the diagnosed ones - who we assume all have problems - then the undiagnosed ones have fewer problems. We don't know how many there are. This is straightforward.

anybody wanna go to the island of unwanted but lovable toy humans with me?