When Eros meets autos: Marriage to someone with autism spect

Post Reply New Topic

I am sorry if this report have been brought up before, but my search on this page did not show anything at all.

When Eros meets autos: Marriage to someone with autism spectrum disorder

by Rench, Cathryn, Ph.D., CAPELLA UNIVERSITY, 2014, 264 pages; 3681894
http://gradworks.umi.com/36/81/3681894.html

She concludes


This is based on 10 persons!
For me it seems to be the other way round - Asperger people seems to have a high risk to run into a narcissistic/sociopath individual, but I might be wrong.

I do not deny that unrecogniced asperger with people of the very rigid persuation can be difficult - but violence? and trauma to the poor NT?

Any views on this?

Yes, it doesn't seem like it would be that black and white. Recent posts by NTs asking questions about current or recent, ex-partners shows that being with someone on the spectrum can be difficult but that there are NTs who really do want to understand why their relationship has/had difficulties.

It is also easy for someone on the spectrum to attract an exploiter, though the reasons for that would not necessarily have to be 100% due to autism (it could be lack of people experience, skewed expectations for relationships created by family members with similar personality issues). In my short time here, I've certainly seen some posts by individuals on the spectrum detailing abuse from partners, though they didn't always seems to recognize that it was abuse. Of course, many people, NT or otherwise, can fall into those patterns, unfortunately. It's probably most helpful to realize that each relationship is a combination of unique individuals, and while many relationship struggles may be common, how they manifest, are dealt with, and can be solved will depend on the natures of those specific individuals.

TL:DR summary: At first glance this looks really depressing--a study "shows" that autistic people abuse NTs in intimate relationships. The "Cassandra" people were right, and science proves it. But A little examination of this work brings up all sorts of problems. Maybe it isn't science. Maybe it isn't true. Maybe this is bad work in which an ideologically driven researcher used questionable methods to come to a conclusion that supported her ideology (and bash autistic people in the process.)

Longer thought:

Do you understand the terms used in the description that you linked to?

What is "Giorgi's descriptive phenomenological method" ??? We can learn about this with some Googling:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descripti ... psychology
(it's wikipedia, but well supported with sources--if you think I am being unfair in picking out these highlights, I would be happy to back this up with original sources)

"Giorgi promotes phenomenology as a theoretical movement that avoids certain reductionist tendencies sustained by many contemporary approaches to psychological research.[8] According to the phenomenological psychological perspective espoused by Giorgi, researchers are encouraged to "bracket" their own assumptions pertaining to the phenomenon in question by refraining from positing a static sense of objective reality for oneself and the participants whose experiences are being studied. "

So this is a movement that sets aside the idea of objective reality.

In analyzing the "data" (interviews):
"a single description is broken down into separate units, each unit can then be transformed from the language through which it was given into "psychologically sensitive" meaning units, which is done with the help of imaginative variation. "

So you collect an inteview subjects words, then pick them apart and use your imagination to make them into "meaning units" that mean what you want. This is supposed to be data--and who can object when the project denies an objective reality?

So the book is based on project that uses this method, but what else did the researcher bring to the project?



Edith Stein, philosopher, Jewish-born Catholic martyr and Saint, is a fascinating person and I encourage anyone interested in this to do a little reading on her life and work. Stein is famous, among other things for her 1916 treatise "On the Problem of Empathy." This work puts the inner feeling of understanding of others at the center of a subjective appreciation of external

But in order to not to make this too long, I think it's fair to question the ethics of a researcher who begins a study of autistic-NT relationships with the understanding that


and chooses to interview the NT spouses only and then approaches this research in a framework of gender theory.

The methods and conceptual frameworks the researcher focus on empathy and prioritize empathy as the critical tool for appreciating phenomena under study. This is, at the very least, problematic in a study that claims to be (at least in part) about the behavior of autistic people.

I would be happy to discuss this further, but I have to get to work. This research is interesting, but the methods suggests the possibility that this work may be more a piece of anti-autistic propaganda than a scholarly attempt to understand relationships.

Thank you for pinning out many of the problems of the study.

I noticed the 10 persons, which is a very small sample to base a whole report on!
I had no idea what Giorgi's descriptive phenomenological method was, but I think that if I tried to use it in my research (natural science) I would be in deep trouble!

I absolutely agree with Adamantium. I use something called Grounded theory, which is basically just LISTENING. But there are a lot of weird theories. There's a new thing going around about "pedagogy" where you're supposed to consider your own "entitlements" and "privilege" in your "positioning" as you do your research. Perhaps that should also be in quotes. "Research." Like Adamantium said, it requires the researcher to use his/her imagination, which throws the whole thing off.

I do think there is a lot of expectations for the neurotypical person to change things around for the autistic partner when they have problems in a marriage. But I think it's for a reason that is different, but just as insidious. I think there's an assumption that the autistic partner can't understand the other person's point of view or can't change. Which is BS. Autistic people are forced to change and do internal acrobatics all the time to live in a neurotypical world. When there are problems, both parties can and do give and take equally to make improvements.

Based on a cursory reading of this so-called "study", I call bullsh*t and am appalled that it would even presume to be written in pseudo-academic language.

First the so-called "sample" is only 10. Any Intro to Stat 101 I've ever seen would call that absurd.

Second, the "sample" (I hate to even use that word in this context) is presumed to be drawn from couple seeking therapy, i.e. those already in trouble.

Third, it is based on interviews with the NT partner! Well duh, of course they would tend to present themselves as victims.

Jeez.

Oh my god the sampling bias. My poor little statistics-loving brain is cringing away.

Drawn from couples seeking therapy. By a therapist who believes in the "Cassandra" thing. Yeeeeah. No sampling bias there. (Heavy sarcasm.)

So let's see: Basically, they found the most troubled couples they could, some of which had already broken up at the time of the study. They interviewed them in a practically totally unstructured way, and the interviewer knew exactly what the study was all about. That shouldn't even get past my undergraduate research methods teacher, let alone a doctoral advisor.

And this dreck actually got someone a doctorate? That does it; I'm finding this committee and submitting my cat's academic paper on the relative merits of milk-jug rings and squeaky mice as entertainment, because I'm pretty sure it'll get a doctorate, too. Christy, PhD. Sounds nice.

Indeed! I note that this is posted on "ProQuest". I'm not familiar with that bunch, but I would not be surprised if, for a modest fee, they would happily post your kitty's paper.

Am I the only one here who does not understand one word of what this thread is on about?

Somebody dumb it down for me, my mind isn't as clever as most other individuals here..

Thank you for bringing up this article. In full agreement with all comments and thanks for pointing out the methodological issues! The author seems to have very clear assumptions from the start:

"Anecdotal and clinical reports consistently underscore serious adverse effects on the physical and psychosocial well-being of NT spouses"

Through careful selection and unstructured interpretation she then reaches the "surprising" conclusion that her assumptions were right:

"The results were unexpected, and revealed a pattern of intimate partner abuse so pervasive that it emerged as the lifestyle of the couples"

Searching for the name, it seems she works as a counsellor in France now:

http://www.counsellinginfrance.com/THER ... SELLOR.htm

Maybe she would appreciate some feedback on her article:

[email protected]

PS she looks frightening or is it just me

A biased piece of research has concluded that NT spouses are at risk of all forms of abuse from their AS spouses, based off questionable research methods with ten NT people who have experienced marital crisis in a NT/AS relationship.

Its called Cassandra Affective Deprivation Disorder, essentially the NT needs in the relationship are not met by the AS partner due to related social deficits/etc, and the relationship spirals downwards, with the NT partner feeling more and more neglected/abused and developing trauma related symptoms.

Take it for whatever it is worth. ..

My husband (prediagnosis) was violent during meltdowns, at work and at home. Out of control rages. He has a right to rage, but I have the right to not be around it.

He would follow me out the door screaming, "Where are you going?" after he had bashed his head into the wall 5 or 15 times.

I'm sorry. I'm not his parent, social worker or psychiatrist. I'm not the one who is paid to figure out his issues. (prediagnosis). I was getting panic attacks tip toeing around, and that isn't living.

When he was diagnosed, the psychologist ask If I had a million dollars, would I stay or go out of the marriage. I was very close to saying, "Go".

Our current deal is we work together on our issues. And we are both doing it. We meet each other half way. It isn't all me or all him.

Life is too short to live in a sh***y marriage, whether you are dealing with Autism or something else. If he had told me he was incapable of changing, I would have left. The stress was making me ill. No amount of benzos, antidepressants, mediating, or exercise was helping.

The current party line is spouses with Autism are really not able to change. So it is up to the NT spouse to put up or shut up. The person with Autism is dog paddling so hard just to deal, he/she can't be expect to do anymore than that. (A therapist told me that).

I told the therapist I thought that was BS. So what he told me, is I married a man child who is so emotionally disabled that he could never grow. So I was always going to be "mom", and never have a partner? Supposedly pretty much.

That's horrible and not true. My husband isn't a narcissistic man child. There are plenty more narcissistic man child NTs, but no one writes them off.

I had more support about leaving than ever working on our marriage. When a NT marriage hits the skids, everyone talks couple therapy. When an ASD/NT marriage crumbles, all the NT spouse hears is put up or shut up (leave).

I won't even get into how few therapist even understand how an ASD/NT relationship could possibly work.

Not surprised by the study. It is the common party line, and paints the person with Autism as a disabled, child like adult with no hope to change.

Ugh....

Hi Tawaki,
I am in very much the same circumstances, or should I say my partner is. My "meltdowns" have no physical aspect to them however they still cause much injury. For me it is a bottling up effect. I don't feel that my needs are being met or that I am being coerced into something I don't want to be part of. I keep quiet, and keep quiet and then explode in words that cut deeply, not abusive, just the bottled up facts with how the events made me feel without the politeness of course. Communication is the problem! We can't change our mind, neither Aspie nor NT, we can only change our behaviour I believe. (Who is I,other than my mind?). What I need from my NT partner are CLEAR instructions on what to do to make her happy. When she says "I still need to clean that door", then I do not understand that she means "I would appreciate if you could clean that door for me!" If she meant the latter, why would she NOT say so! That is what I do not understand. Please say what you mean and I will do my best to comply. And I should say something before I explode rather than trying to keep quiet when I know it won't work. As you say we have to work on it.... And it's just as hard for both I would say.

Does this mean I'm going to turn out abusive to my partner?

No. It means that people have strange pre-conceptions of autism.

I agree with Tawaki that the 'party line' is that folks on the spectrum can't change. When I was desperately hunting around for advice about how to live with this it felt like every single article said that all the work-arounds would have to be mine. That I would have to make all the compromises and that if I wanted to have emotional support I'd need to find it elsewhere. For someone already at a low and desperate point if felt like more of the problems would be heaped on me. Be understanding. Be explicit. State your needs. I did all of this and more. My needs were still ignored. Being 'nice' meant my requests were ignored. Writing down what I needed was also ignored. Being clear verbally was perceived as an attack. Anything I said no matter how trivially critical was perceived as an attack and was often met with rage and verbal abuse. Often in front of my kid.

All the little things too, like being left alone when company came (like his family) or being left behind if we were walking somewhere or him placing his order but not asking me what I wanted when he got to the counter left me feeling like I didn't matter.

I don't know much about psychological or sociological academic research methods. (I do research for a livng, but not that kind) And I'm not paying for that paper. But I do know that what's being described in the rough synopsis is my lived experience. Do I think there's some sampling issues... yes probably. Do I think 10 is too small of a sample? Not necessarily, there can be certain approaches where that's appropriate. You can't draw conclusions across the whole population from that number, but I am glad that this experience is starting to be investigated a bit more thoroughly. The answer cannot be "The NT partner must make all the concessions in the relationship" because that's too much to place on anyone and there are mental health consequences to that approach.

More research needed.