Neurotypicals HIJACKED the Aspergers diagnosis!

Page 5 of 5 [ 74 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5

FlanMaster
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Jun 2012
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 618

04 Aug 2013, 10:24 pm

My wife was diagnosed with an autoimmune disorder. When this disorder was first classified, the inclusions were limited to severe cases where the patient is usually dead within a few years of diagnosis. This was devastating to us. Today there are 4 categories within the disorder. The least debilitating category includes people who have symptoms and episodes but can function like "normal" people and live longer than some "normal" people. If we are fortunate, my wife will be in that category or misdiagnosed. But if she is in that category, does that mean that she somehow hijacked the diagnosis, or that she faked it in order to not be considered a "loser" because of her physically debilitating episodes and symptoms?

"losers" have something wrong as well. Perhaps not AS/HFA, but the need for direction and/or help/support is still there. Misdiagnosis happens because of the imperfections of humans. And misdiagnosis is more likely during the "birthing" of the acceptance of a disorder than after years of study and classification.
This isn't lyme disease that can be cured with 3 weeks to 3 years of antibiotic cocktails. This is a disorder.

But what qualifies one person's need or disorder as more deserving of help than another? Nothing more than discrimination.

The only "losers" are those who resent others receiving help. This classification isn't some admission into an elite social Club. This thread is proof of that.

No one will ever become wealthy from the miserly public assistance offered to some with the diagnosis, and if history repeats itself again, any with the diagnosis will be at risk of forced sterilization or even being euthanized. Simply for economic reasons if nothing else.


_________________
http://lovebybonnie.blogspot.com
Bonnie, The Boxer, ~2005/2006 - October 26th 2013
We love you always Bonnie. Bless God as you have blessed us.


Aspendos
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 21 Dec 2012
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 394
Location: Switzerland

04 Aug 2013, 10:34 pm

Verdandi, in my understanding evidence is not the same as proof. Yes, observations are evidence that supports conclusions, i.e. a diagnosis, but proof makes any subjective conclusions unnecessary, i.e. brain scans may make diagnosis superfluous, if we ever get there.

Until then, diagnosis doesn't rest solely on what someone tells the person doing the assessment, but also and most importantly on that person's observations and comparison to other diagnosed cases they encountered, which makes faking autism or AS difficult. I would venture that the people protecting their egos are more likely those that don't even seek diagnosis to verify (or falsify) how they diagnosed themselves.



Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

04 Aug 2013, 10:46 pm

Aspendos wrote:
Verdandi, in my understanding evidence is not the same as proof. Yes, observations are evidence that supports conclusions, i.e. a diagnosis, but proof makes any subjective conclusions unnecessary, i.e. brain scans may make diagnosis superfluous, if we ever get there.


You're getting into semantic games here. I don't like the word "proof." I prefer the word "evidence," so I used that word instead. My point is that clinicians gather objective observations as part of the diagnosis.

Quote:
Until then, diagnosis doesn't rest solely on what someone tells the person doing the assessment, but also and most importantly on that person's observations and comparison to other diagnosed cases they encountered, which makes faking autism or AS difficult. I would venture that the people protecting their egos are more likely to be those that don't seek diagnosis to verify their self-diagnosis.


You don't have to venture, you can check profiles and see what they say.

But, as with disagreeing with the OP, there are many reasons people may not seek a diagnosis, and not all of them are under their control. I would hesitate to suggest that not seeking a diagnosis implies that one might be faking.



Phssthpok
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 227

04 Aug 2013, 10:47 pm

Jonov wrote:
Indeed, right now you look at yourself (and that counts for me as well) with the suspicion that a lot of things you remember from your past are related to autism, because you have an answer for it.
Basically you have an answer and work backwards to find questions that confirm the answer, rather than your initial questions about your current behavior and personality traits that could be answered with autism, slowly you gather more "evidence" that your suspicions were true, but you have to stay objective and that is extremely hard if not impossible.

Its like Nietzsche says "If you gaze long in to an abyss the abyss also gazes into you", you cannot look into your past with a suspicion and be 100% sure you stayed objective when you have gathered the answers.

I constantly keep asking myself questions, and also question my parents about myself to determine if I do not lose myself into autism, and everything that comes with it, its a journey you cannot simply take by yourself if you want to stay in the role of the observer.


I really just have to trust that on the day that I discovered that AS was a thing, that I was being objective. I might be able to take the internal consistency and complexity of my narrative as evidence but that would sort of be like racing against myself.



Phssthpok
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 16 May 2007
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 227

04 Aug 2013, 10:57 pm

Verdandi wrote:
I didn't say up is down or black is white or anything comparable. I pointed out there are more reasons than ego to disagree with the OP. I did not state that ego protection has nothing to do with anything in this thread. I suggested other possibilities, because I think that projecting a single possibility as you did is inaccurate and comes fairly close to ad hominem. Even if they are protecting their egos, it doesn't negate their arguments.


So it's not that they don't have egos it's that they don't usually explain personal motivations and behavior? That is not as bad but it still leaves us at an agree to disagree point that I'm pretty comfortable with.



Jonov
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jul 2013
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 116

04 Aug 2013, 11:03 pm

Phssthpok wrote:
I really just have to trust that on the day that I discovered that AS was a thing, that I was being objective. I might be able to take the internal consistency and complexity of my narrative as evidence but that would sort of be like racing against myself.


That's indeed what it boils down to.

Personally I love to ask questions, so for me its not problematic to occasionally question myself about things I thought I had the answers for, but for some it may be easier to hold on answers without further questioning, as constant uncertainty can work in a self-destructive way.

But if there would ever be evidence that my initial diagnosis would not be accurate, I would definitely want to search for other possibilities, as I want things to be done right.



XFilesGeek
Forum Moderator
Forum Moderator

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2010
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,697
Location: The Oort Cloud

04 Aug 2013, 11:10 pm

Phssthpok wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
I didn't say up is down or black is white or anything comparable. I pointed out there are more reasons than ego to disagree with the OP. I did not state that ego protection has nothing to do with anything in this thread. I suggested other possibilities, because I think that projecting a single possibility as you did is inaccurate and comes fairly close to ad hominem. Even if they are protecting their egos, it doesn't negate their arguments.


So it's not that they don't have egos it's that they don't usually explain personal motivations and behavior? That is not as bad but it still leaves us at an agree to disagree point that I'm pretty comfortable with.


No......

It's that there are more reasons than "protecting their ego" for people to seek a diagnosis.

The fact that people sometimes do things to "protect their ego" does not make it the sole motivation for all of human behavior.


_________________
"If we fail to anticipate the unforeseen or expect the unexpected in a universe of infinite possibilities, we may find ourselves at the mercy of anyone or anything that cannot be programmed, categorized or easily referenced."

-XFG (no longer a moderator)


DVCal
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Apr 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 636

04 Aug 2013, 11:52 pm

People have NO right to judge who is or isn't an aspie. We all suffer, and for others to say our suffering isn't real is an insult.

Just because someone who diagnosed until adulthood, doesn't mean their Asperger isn't real. Horrifying that so many would want to deny the suffering of their fellow aspie.



Last edited by DVCal on 05 Aug 2013, 12:14 am, edited 1 time in total.

Verdandi
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 7 Dec 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,275
Location: University of California Sunnydale (fictional location - Real location Olympia, WA)

05 Aug 2013, 12:01 am

Phssthpok wrote:
Verdandi wrote:
I didn't say up is down or black is white or anything comparable. I pointed out there are more reasons than ego to disagree with the OP. I did not state that ego protection has nothing to do with anything in this thread. I suggested other possibilities, because I think that projecting a single possibility as you did is inaccurate and comes fairly close to ad hominem. Even if they are protecting their egos, it doesn't negate their arguments.


So it's not that they don't have egos it's that they don't usually explain personal motivations and behavior? That is not as bad but it still leaves us at an agree to disagree point that I'm pretty comfortable with.


It's not "bad" at all. What is "bad" is to take irrelevant information about a person to discredit or undermine argument.

XFilesGeek wrote:
No......

It's that there are more reasons than "protecting their ego" for people to seek a diagnosis.

The fact that people sometimes do things to "protect their ego" does not make it the sole motivation for all of human behavior.


^^^^^

Also, this.



TallyMan
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Mar 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 40,061

05 Aug 2013, 2:56 am

DVCal sums this thread up well. And here it ends.

DVCal wrote:
People have NO right to judge who is or isn't an aspie. We all suffer, and for others to say our suffering isn't real is an insult.

Just because someone who diagnosed until adulthood, doesn't mean their Asperger isn't real. Horrifying that so many would want to deny the suffering of their fellow aspie.


_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.