So, everyone is on the Autism Spectrum?

Post Reply New Topic

I think this is why they say you're not supposed to use the DSM as a "checklist." Otherwise, everyone will have a "disorder."

Remember that Asperger himself Autism to be an exaggeration of basic MALE traits (why more males are dx maybe???) so he would agree with that. Every human has basic behaviors. Even schizophrenics just seriousl over-do or under-do these.
The same with ASD people. Its a matter of degree. Or so that hypothesis goes.

Sincerely,
Matt

I wouldn't say everyone is as the autism spectrum varies some people have it mildly some have quite severe and some moderate.

In "A Complete Guide to Asperger's Syndrome," Tony Attwood says to view AS as a puzzle with 100 pieces. Any NT will have 10-20 pieces of the puzzle but a diagnosable aspie will have 80 or more pieces. Everyone has a least a few of what would be considered autistics traits. In this regard you could say that "everyone is a little autistic." This is why when you mention a trait that is particularly troublesome for you that you often get the "everyone is like that" response. Everyone is not like that but you can find NTs that do have that particular autistic trait. You can reverse this and say "All autistics are a little bit NT."

Consider the Aspie Quiz. No one gets 200 out of 200 aspie and 0 out of 200 NT. There's always some mixture.

The psychiatric community has decided that if you have the correct 80 puzzle pieces that you can qualify for a label. If you have 60 or 70 pieces (probably me), then you are considered sub-clincal. It does't matter if you have some traits that cause you lots of problems, you're only considered BAP or something similar.

Everyone is on a spectrum of traits, and the autism spectrum is a subspectrum of that.

This makes sense to me.

Edit to add: However, I think the symptoms (although they may be fewer in number) of those who are borderline can possibly be severe even if they don't meet the diagnosable criteria.

Maybe tha person would meet the criteria for something else?

A few decades ago, it used to be popular to say everyone was a little mentally ill or that society at large was ill, so that's what made it acceptable to people who weren't for there to be people who were. Somewhere around the 90s, a lot of people made themselves feel better about homosexuality by saying everyone was bisexual or that everyone had a little bit of gayness in them. These are stupid arguments. A thing is either okay or it isn't. There shouldn't have to be this argument that everyone falls into a category before the category doesn't inspire hate and fear. People need to get over themselves. You can't make two blades of grass be alike. How can you expect it of people? And why should you? How horrible!

That's possible too.

I think the psychology teacher wanted you to feel better, I highly doubt that's actually true.

I'm going out on a limb here and guessing that he didn't mean "everyone," but meant "everyone who's been..." diagnosed with some sort of Autistic disorder (AS, PDD-NOS, Autism, etc). I really don't think he actually meant everyone. Unless he was talking about a broader philosophical idea of "human spectrum." Lots of people without true Autism have some Autistic traits. He could have been talking about that idea too. A lot of people do, but don't have true Autism, and I'm sure he knows that.

I have been having a few sessions with a councillor (despite my long-held scepticism of talk therapies) to try and help in dealing with this big AS realisation. She clearly knows something about ASDs (as she recommended a particular local phsyc for diagnosis) but from our 4 hours of conversation so far I suspect my 2.5 months of solid non-stop obsessional research might make me more of the expert whether I get a diagnosis or not. I know that sounds very arrogant but she does not specialise and I have to explain a lot of the less discusses aspects she appears not to have heard of.

At the last session she tried to explain how everyone was on the spectrum somewhere and I found it infuriating. Using every drop of diplomacy I had in me I tried to explain that I had heard people suggest that before and, after a lot of serious research on the subject, that is not at all my understanding.

I am sure she was trying to reassure me but the problem is that I have never thought of myself as normal so the question has always been 'why not' rather than 'am I'. The actual not being normal thing is something I, to a degree, came to terms with in my teen years. The scale and exact nature of the difference is the big shock of all this. I DO NOT want to hear how normal I am as that just feels like someone trying to disregard all I have struggled with without having any clue. If I seem normal it is because I have learned over the years what to keep to myself, how to do a bloody good impression of normal, when a smile is expected, what to say to someone in a pub etc. This all takes constant effort, causes masses of anxiety and says nothing about how I really am when I am not putting on a show.

I agree with what as said previously about individual traits/symptoms being on a global spectrum but the conditions of AS or Classic Autism etc being clear cut subspectrums. I believe that autism is a distinct condition which happens to lead to a significant increase in certain traits. The problem seems to be people mistaking the outwardly visible symptoms of the condition for the root condition itself.

I don't know. Be a bit like saying everyone has got Dementia to a degree because everybody forgets things at times. Or a bit like saying everyone's got Irritable Bowel Syndrome because everyone gets stomachache at times.

Well, everyone in this world seems to share at least one symptom of the autistic spectrum, but this doesn't make them autistic.

It's partly true. Autism Spectrum is like a sliding scale that goes from social ace NT through NT nerd all the way to low-functioning autism.

However, you technically, be on the "scale" your symptoms and dysfunction have to be of a certain severity. Another reason this breaks down is because, while the "scale idea can account for symptoms, it can't account for things like odd behaviors and the cognitive profile necessary for ASD.

Basically, what I'm trying to say is that all ASD, including AS, is more multidimensional than just envisioning it as a scale about social dysfunction.

Very true. These traits aren't just exclusive to Autistics. They are human traits, just took to an extreme that is noticeable and can cause differences in the person's behaviour, often grouped together to indicate an ASD. NTs may have some of these traits, often grow out of them, some can exhibit them throughout their life, but it is not enough to make up to a disorder of any sort. The main difference is NTs don't exhibit all of most of the traits concurrently like Autistics typically do, and often not to the same degree.
Everybody can feel anxious about certain things, but that doesn't mean everyone has an anxiety disorder. Conditions like ASDs aren't a case of all or nothing, like anxiety. You get some people who don't seem to get anxious about anything at all, you get most people that get anxious over certain things at some point in their lives, and you get some people who remain anxious their entire lives, took to an extreme where it can easily interfere with the person's life and also cognitive behaviour.
My dad is NT, but has a mad obsession with football, and it doesn't actually take over his mind and his life (he has always put football before his family). This does not make him an Aspie.
I'm Aspie but I can read body language clearly, I don't take everything literally, I make eye contact, I know when to lie to save someone's feelings, and there's a few more ''more-so NT traits'' that I have got, but that still doesn't make me non-Aspie.

In short, there are shades of grey. The human mind is a very complex thing to explain.

Last edited by Joe90 on 05 Dec 2012, 4:34 pm, edited 1 time in total.