New study finds clusters of Autism spectrum

Page 2 of 2 [ 31 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

Maggiedoll
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Jun 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,126
Location: Maryland

06 Jan 2010, 6:08 pm

I gotta say that my first reaction to the idea that higher rates diagnosis are more likely to be because of better recognition than because of actual higher rates of the disorder was "well, duh." It's the same as how the criminal justice system also tends to send affluent, white people to treatment and poor minority people to jail. When a kid's behavior is problematic, if they're wealthy, they get "diagnosed" and "treated." If they're poor, they get punished. It's also difficult to tell if all the cases that are diagnosed are actually real. Sometimes a diagnosis is just a way out of trouble.

But has anybody ever doubted that kids without access to decent healthcare aren't going to get diagnosed?



ruennsheng
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,523
Location: Singapore

07 Jan 2010, 4:33 am

I doubt so. Autism can be diagnosed in public school, in my opinion, even if one doesn't know what is autism...


_________________
Ex amicitia vita


ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 18 Jun 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,265

07 Jan 2010, 8:22 am

The question is, what kind of education do these highly educated parents have? Are both parents doctors? That explains the increase in diagnosis. Such groups might have higher diagnosis rates across the board because they are more aware.



exhausted
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jun 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 667

07 Jan 2010, 2:13 pm

well... yes. i think the numbers are so skewed in terms of socio-economic level. if your family is struggling just to put food on the table, you don't have medical insurance, etc., then how do you get a diagnosis? i wonder about autistics in school systems that are struggling as well. struggling school systems aren't good at nurturing strengths (and it seems that many people with AS have skewed strengths in one direction, deficits in others.) so if the strengths aren't being nurtured or recognized, are only the deficits seen? (ex: this child is struggling with math, or with "fitting in," or with... well, fill in the blank.) so if people with AS in such school systems are noticed at all, are they seen as having learning disabilities? or as problem children?

sorry. obsessing a little.


_________________
punctuation... life is full of punctuation.


Meadow
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Dec 2009
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,067

07 Jan 2010, 2:21 pm

Rocky wrote:
It is hard to tell without reading the report, but it sounds like they ruled out the possibility of highly educated parents being more prone to autistic children. I agree that it isn't necessarily true, but it might be. What do you think?


If this were true, it could only be in proportion to their bank account and nothing more.



MissConstrue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 17,052
Location: MO

07 Jan 2010, 3:03 pm

Maggiedoll wrote:
I gotta say that my first reaction to the idea that higher rates diagnosis are more likely to be because of better recognition than because of actual higher rates of the disorder was "well, duh." It's the same as how the criminal justice system also tends to send affluent, white people to treatment and poor minority people to jail. When a kid's behavior is problematic, if they're wealthy, they get "diagnosed" and "treated." If they're poor, they get punished. It's also difficult to tell if all the cases that are diagnosed are actually real. Sometimes a diagnosis is just a way out of trouble.

But has anybody ever doubted that kids without access to decent healthcare aren't going to get diagnosed?


Exactly.

I wasn't diagnosed up until I was an adult. Before then, both my parents struggled financially and had a hard time affording the costly visits and examinations of doctors.

I think another factor that plays a significant role in getting diagnosed is location, education system and resources. We didn't know about aspergers and none of doctors we saw ever brought up the possibility of such a condition. So finding a professional who was specialized in that particular field was not only rare but costly.


_________________
I live as I choose or I will not live at all.
~Delores O’Riordan


AnotherOne
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jul 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 454

07 Jan 2010, 3:13 pm

this would also explain why such an increase of autism cases, because people are more aware.

however it would be good to check within the same school district (here comes the assumption that AS would be noticed in school so nothing to do with financial aspects) what is the distribution according to the education of parents. i noticed that they mentioned education not income so if it the knowledge it would make more sense that MD would be more aware than engineers however i do remember some article from couple of years ago that mentioned science and engineering parents that have more autistic kids.



Jono
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 10 Jul 2008
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,606
Location: Johannesburg, South Africa

08 Jan 2010, 6:47 am

Rocky wrote:
Jono wrote:
Rocky wrote:
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6045CX20100105

It is hard to tell without reading the report, but it sounds like they ruled out the possibility of highly educated parents being more prone to autistic children. I agree that it isn't necessarily true, but it might be. What do you think?


Actually, what the article said was that among the more educated, the children are more likely to be diagnosed. This might make sense if the less educated of the population didn't have the same access to doctors and so on. It doesn't mean that the more highly educated are more likely to have children with autism. Where did you hear that anyway?


The study found a statistical correlation between more educated parents and incidence of autism. One could conclude that one caused the other. I did not mean to say that I believed that is the case, but I believe it is a possibility. The researcher did not say that there was no causal relationship, but seemed to imply it by emphasizing the fact that more affluent (and educated) people are more likely to get diagnosed. I agree that is true, but it does not rule out the causal relationship between education levels of parents and autism. I also do not mean to imply that all educated parents will have autistic children. The statistics would not bear this out.


One needs to be careful of making such connections. Correlation does not equal causation.



zen_mistress
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,033

08 Jan 2010, 4:46 pm

I think it could be because people who may have both some ASD traits marry... probably an ASD person is more likely to marry someone who also has ASD traits.


_________________
"Caravan is the name of my history, and my life an extraordinary adventure."
~ Amin Maalouf

Taking a break.


Rocky
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 May 2008
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,074
Location: Uhhh...Not Remulak

09 Jan 2010, 4:00 am

Jono wrote:
Rocky wrote:
Jono wrote:
Rocky wrote:
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6045CX20100105

It is hard to tell without reading the report, but it sounds like they ruled out the possibility of highly educated parents being more prone to autistic children. I agree that it isn't necessarily true, but it might be. What do you think?


Actually, what the article said was that among the more educated, the children are more likely to be diagnosed. This might make sense if the less educated of the population didn't have the same access to doctors and so on. It doesn't mean that the more highly educated are more likely to have children with autism. Where did you hear that anyway?


The study found a statistical correlation between more educated parents and incidence of autism. One could conclude that one caused the other. I did not mean to say that I believed that is the case, but I believe it is a possibility. The researcher did not say that there was no causal relationship, but seemed to imply it by emphasizing the fact that more affluent (and educated) people are more likely to get diagnosed. I agree that is true, but it does not rule out the causal relationship between education levels of parents and autism. I also do not mean to imply that all educated parents will have autistic children. The statistics would not bear this out.


One needs to be careful of making such connections. Correlation does not equal causation.


I am well aware of that fact. Coincidence is always a possibility.



DW_a_mom
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Feb 2008
Gender: Female
Posts: 13,687
Location: Northern California

12 Jan 2010, 5:30 pm

I would guess that I live in one of those clusters.

When you look at the families with the AS kids, it isn't hard to see a pattern. Yes, there are exceptions, but pretty much always we're "off beat" in one way or another. This area attracts people who are off-beat. We've got fun industries that value talent over appearance, a social culture that does the same, and so on. Its a great place to fit in when you don't fit in. So, given that AS has a strong genetic component, why wouldn't educated Aspies choose to move here and build their families here? Most of us weren't born here. We chose it.


_________________
Mom to an amazing young adult AS son, plus an also amazing non-AS daughter. Most likely part of the "Broader Autism Phenotype" (some traits).


ruennsheng
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,523
Location: Singapore

14 Jan 2010, 5:32 am

Hence we shouldn't be surprised by the results of the study...


_________________
Ex amicitia vita


Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

14 Jan 2010, 10:15 am

Rocky wrote:
Jono wrote:
Rocky wrote:
Link: http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6045CX20100105

It is hard to tell without reading the report, but it sounds like they ruled out the possibility of highly educated parents being more prone to autistic children. I agree that it isn't necessarily true, but it might be. What do you think?


Actually, what the article said was that among the more educated, the children are more likely to be diagnosed. This might make sense if the less educated of the population didn't have the same access to doctors and so on. It doesn't mean that the more highly educated are more likely to have children with autism. Where did you hear that anyway?


The study found a statistical correlation between more educated parents and incidence of autism. One could conclude that one caused the other. I did not mean to say that I believed that is the case, but I believe it is a possibility. The researcher did not say that there was no causal relationship, but seemed to imply it by emphasizing the fact that more affluent (and educated) people are more likely to get diagnosed. I agree that is true, but it does not rule out the causal relationship between education levels of parents and autism. I also do not mean to imply that all educated parents will have autistic children. The statistics would not bear this out.


Education (in parents) is more likely to lead to full use of the healthcare system and therefore less chance of a missed diagnosis. But there is something else that education (in parents) also leads to which might be a factor. Highly educated people tend to not only have access to more healthcare resources, they also tend to have children later in life. Maybe somebody should look at these clusters and see if having children later in life is something that these autism cluster parents have in common along with education. This could work in tandem with assortative mating- meaning that if you have couples carrying certain genes and they have children later in life then autism is more likely.



Katie_WPG
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 7 Sep 2008
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 492
Location: Winnipeg, MB, Canada

14 Jan 2010, 7:26 pm

Another factor to consider is not only sheer dollars, but also the amount of time that the family has to worry about a socially awkward kid.

The more a family has to worry about, the lower the likelihood that they will notice a smaller problem with another family member. Families that have less to worry about are more likely to notice small flaws in their children.

For example, my parents were dealing with working opposite shifts, looking after aging parents (one with Alzheimer's, one with cancer, one with fragile bones who was frequently in the hospital) and dealing with on and off drama with my mentally ill older sister.

Did they really care that I occasionally walked on my toes, or would flap my arms when I was excited? Did they care that I barely had any friends other than the kids on my street? And this was from an otherwise "well to do" family. Income and access to health care had very little to do with it. They could have tried to stick me into therapy and take me to psych appointments, but wouldn't that have just been more stressful for everyone involved?

This is a more exteme case, but look at the case of South African runner Caster Semenya. Sure, she was showing tell-tale signs of being intersex that would alarm anyone in North America. But coming from a poor family in rural South Africa, would they even think to pay attention to it? Or would they focus on the positives of her condition? When easily preventable illnesses and hunger are a very real threat, do you really care if your daughter never got a period and has muscles and a deep voice?



ruennsheng
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2009
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,523
Location: Singapore

14 Jan 2010, 11:45 pm

Katie_WPG wrote:
Another factor to consider is not only sheer dollars, but also the amount of time that the family has to worry about a socially awkward kid.

The more a family has to worry about, the lower the likelihood that they will notice a smaller problem with another family member. Families that have less to worry about are more likely to notice small flaws in their children.

For example, my parents were dealing with working opposite shifts, looking after aging parents (one with Alzheimer's, one with cancer, one with fragile bones who was frequently in the hospital) and dealing with on and off drama with my mentally ill older sister.

Did they really care that I occasionally walked on my toes, or would flap my arms when I was excited? Did they care that I barely had any friends other than the kids on my street? And this was from an otherwise "well to do" family. Income and access to health care had very little to do with it. They could have tried to stick me into therapy and take me to psych appointments, but wouldn't that have just been more stressful for everyone involved?

This is a more exteme case, but look at the case of South African runner Caster Semenya. Sure, she was showing tell-tale signs of being intersex that would alarm anyone in North America. But coming from a poor family in rural South Africa, would they even think to pay attention to it? Or would they focus on the positives of her condition? When easily preventable illnesses and hunger are a very real threat, do you really care if your daughter never got a period and has muscles and a deep voice?


I agree. Why worry about autism when the population is poor in general?

I am speaking this as a person from a country that had recently became more economically able in the past thirty years, which explains the spike in diagnosis of autistics in my country.

Perhaps the same could be said in the United States, which has experienced considerable economic growth in the past thirty years or so...


_________________
Ex amicitia vita