Any other groups that are more accepting of self-diagnosis?

Post Reply New Topic

Just speaking in general about life I am surprised by how often people feel the need to express their opinions. I rarely do.

There are lots of other things to talk about in a forum, like experiences, stories, and feelings. Personal opinions are not always wanted in those kinds of discussions.

The analogy I keep thinking of is it's like sitting down to eat with someone who criticizes the kind of food you are eating. They think it is wrong to eat that food, but I like it and I'm going to eat it anyway. That's fine that they have that opinion, but I don't want to hear about it through the entire meal.

Since this post immediately follows one in which I expressed some opinions, should I take it as an indirect message not to express myself about these things? I hope not!

In a discussion forum, when someone creates a new post about a certain topic, it is pretty much expected that people will express their personal views about that topic. In so doing they may share experiences, stories and feelings, but these are seldom given with total objectivity. It's OK if people don't all agree about stuff and if you don't like the general direction of someone's post, you can just skip it.

Yep...in a discussion, people will invariably express their opinions. Otherwise, it's not a discussion. Any potential discussion will be "stopped in its tracks."

Hmmmn. I don't feel so much that it is aimed at me or anyone else in particular. On that I have no idea and really don't care.

What is annoying and frustrating is that people generalize about people doing those things as if there are lots of precedents, ie examples of those people being found to do those things. When in reality I don't think there are many examples of situations like that at all. I personally don't know of even one example.




I really wish you wouldn't try to explain how other people think/feel/perceive on their/our behalf. I tend to ignore posts that misinterpret me because I feel like it takes too much time and energy to correct it.

I don't understand why people need some sort of explanation of "the motives" of people. Either they can relate to me, or not. If people don't relate to me or dislike what I'm doing, I don't think it is going to matter to them "why" I'm doing it.

Er, no, I didn't see your post while I was posting. I was responding to Kraftie's post before yours. I am slow at writing so I am usually at least a step behind on responses.




Or I can comment about what I think of someone's post if I don't like their post, the same as they can give their opinion. I am not required to skip it.

I understand what you're saying, Dianthus. Dialogue is also about sharing one's experiences without the need for criticizing every point.

I think we need a hybrid site: One where one could express opinions--and one where one could convey their experiences without immediate judgments being thrown your way.

The trouble with the internet: it's really quite a vehicle for venting, owing to its anonymous nature.

Last edited by kraftiekortie on 03 Dec 2014, 10:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

Well, that's a relief!


Of course! And that's part of what keeps things interesting.

I'm hyperlexic, and I have sensory dysfunction to go with it. I have hypergraphia and the seizures that go with it. Whether you know it or not, we are not affecting this, and some of us are harassed and bullied over it. On the other hand, there are some in our own number who would call you names (of four syllables) and question your level of education because of the fact that you are different in your own manner of communication. In fact, there are some individuals who have a sensory dysfunction and relatively high level of intelligence and even think that others, who require noise in their environments to stimulate them, are just "bad people" and may even be moved to hateful acts.

Because our society truly has lost its way, people in today's culture will not believe that a person who thinks differently from how they do could be a well-meaning person. For instance, some of us feel comforted by the sense of "legitimacy" that is associated with professional diagnosis, and they find it sort of scary to be out there on their own without the help of a person who is in an officially recognized capacity to help them on their way. Others find it self-affirming and empowering to take a mindset of "self-help," and this doesn't mean they reject western medicine or something. They just feel best if they figure themselves out on their own terms before heading for a clinic. This is not because they think they know better. They just find it sort of scary to "take the plunge" to go seek diagnosis.

Today, we have an attitude that someone who thinks differently and has different needs just has something wrong with them, and that is why our society is crumbling.

Alas, it's always been like that.

People tend to be tied down to their own narrow ideals, and frequently are not able to extend themselves beyond their "comfort zone."

At times, my response to this would be: "tough nuggies." That's when I'm in a "screw it" mood.

Other times, and I hope they are more productive times, I could, in a Socratic fashion, try to encourage these people to "extend" their comfort zones through the overt expression of ideas. Ideas which are kept hidden by fear are wasted.

Thanks Kraftie. I'm delighted that someone understands what I'm saying.

Yep. If others would imagine themselves as a 50s-something adult who has accidentally come to realize that he or she probably has an ASD, they might see the experience differently. Imagine that, as a result of his or her realization, the adult seeks a diagnostic evaluation. Before the evaluation, the adult completes legitimate screening tests and factor tests, researches and writes a list of his or her lifelong characteristics (many of which are still affecting his or her daily life despite a lifetime of self-taught adaptation skills).

The evaluation starts off badly because the diagnostician doesn't want to discuss the adult's test results and characteristics, and takes notes during a Q&A discussion where the adult can't refer to his written evidence. The diagnostician then has the adult complete a psychology test which has no history of recommended use or effective results for diagnosing ASDs in people of any age.

At the follow-up meeting, the diagnostician finds a couple of factor diagnoses, but declines to relate them to an overall diagnosis of an ASD, and fails to refer to, examine or rebut any of the adult's written evidence in a written evaluation. Dejected and a little angry with himself or herself, the adult ends up re-researching where he or she must have gone wrong in the self-evaluation and accidentally finds Wrong Planet online.

After just a few weeks of interaction with the forum, the adult starts reading criticism about self-diagnosis from others who say that they have been professionally diagnosed. The criticisms aren't exactly personal attacks, just some generally unflattering descriptions that the adult knows are aimed at those like him or her, though, even if true, the descriptions do nothing to support the professionally diagnosed individuals who published them. So, why would they write such things?

How should that adult feel about Wrong Planet at that moment? It is apparently not as welcoming and inclusive as he or she had believed. The criticisms persist and pervade, and months later, the adult sees the same descriptions pop up again, and again.

To me, the illustration provided by AspieUtah is right on the mark--and most illustrative, cohesive, and understandable for all readers.

Of course, an official diagnosis carries more credence, in general, than a "self-diagnosis." However, there are many times when the process of a "self-diagnosis" leads one to the latest research. Clinicians, at times, are too busy (understandably) to harken to the "latest research," and rely upon impressions which were formed, say, 10 years ago. Autism has changed quite a bit even over a 10-year span.

This is why clinicians should really take a look at what the potential diagnosee has uncovered in the course of his/her research.

Alas, owing to overwork, clinicians frequently are reluctant to incorporate these new impressions; they rely, in a primary sense, upon the established diagnostic process. They find it a convenient template.

Very well said AspieUtah.

Without a professional diagnosis, I would never feel comfortable saying that I am Autistic no matter how much it might seem to me that I do. So I don't claim to be self-diagnoses, but that it is possible that I may have it.

Several years ago, in a half hour conversation with someone who's job is working with children who have Asperger's, he asked me if I had ever been diagnosed with Asperger's! I asked why he asked and all he said was that it would fit. Before that conversation, the thought had never even crossed my mind.

Since then I have taken the on-line tests that indicates that one might have Aspergers and scored rather high on them. However, I also know that there can be a certain bias in even asking such questions. "Do you ..." can easily get the test subject to interpreting the question in such a way that the results favor whatever is being tested for. Without an independent evaluation by someone expert in doing the evaluations, I really don't trust the accuracy of the results of those tests.

Consequently, I don't claim to have Asperger's. The closest I will come is "Maybe, maybe not".

I respect that. I always say that "I have been screened" with AS or an ASD, or "I very likly have AS." It is a tedious difference, but one which I believe is necessary to remain accurate and truthful. Maybe, eventually, I will seek another diagnostic bite of the apple, but, for now, the experience is still too bitter.

I made a bet with my roommate as to how many people would find some god forsaken way to apply what I said to them and then either go on the defensive or go on the attack. Thank you I just won $5. (Which means I can go get myself a new paint brush yay!)

Btw all the things I said are common quotes, common sense, words of wisdom stuff. Mark Twain, Earnist Hemingway in specific for the ten dollar words. None of it was directed at any particular person or group or cognitive difficulty. If you found you fit the specific behavior that was described then maybe you do, though I certainly didn't say anyone did nor did I make fun of it or give any indication of hostility towards it.

Oh and those four syllable words your group is calling me, do share as I'm sure some of them fit, some of them won't fit, and some might just be hilarious.