Knofskia wrote:
AceofPens, I agree.
I do not know how symptoms can "cause clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of current functioning" in order to qualify toward a diagnosis and not be a negative. For example, if your restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior (e.g. special interests) are positive and do not impair your functioning, then how did it qualify toward an autism diagnosis? Would you not just have a social pragmatic communication disorder?
My hyper-focus is not a positive trait. It is not about being able to ignore outside distractions when beneficial (e.g. ignoring distractions when hyper-focused on studying); it is about not being able to focus on anything else though detrimental (e.g. ignoring self-care when hyper-focused on studying). Being stuck on a task like that is, at best, frustrating and, at worst, terrifying.
I have had similar experiences with the hyper-focus trait and, there's usually burn-out waiting for me on the other end of the tunnel to cap it off. It's wearying, even if it is sometimes enjoyable at the onset, and the people around me usually find it obnoxious (I can't say that I blame them, given the mundane nature of my interests). Narrow interests mostly lacking the obsessive quality are much more enjoyable but are also useless except on a personal level.
Like you, I find the application of the diagnostic criteria to harmless or positive traits confusing and frustrating, especially when the different-not-disordered type is pushed as the defining image of autism, ignoring the vast majority of us. I have seen it again and again, especially here on WP. Everyone wants to remake autism in their own image, usually at someone else's expense. This is why the ASD umbrella doesn't work.
_________________
I have not the kind affections of a pigeon. - Ralph Waldo Emerson