Is self-diagnosis reliable?

Post Reply New Topic

The motto of self-diagnosis, "No doctor left behind.".

This is getting plain ridiculous. The argument that has been put forward by Wing for nearly 30 years is that Autism is Autism is Autism, PDD is PDD, they are ONE, SINGULAR medical condition that has a RANGE of impacts on individuals relating to the individual. She based this argument on the study of the work of Kanner and Asperger which was published in 1943 and 1944, and the inclusion of studies of the work of Emanuel Miller who was a third phychiatrist in the same time frame as Kanner and Asperger who recognized the same autistic traits in children and adults supports this view as well.

fMRI and EEG studies have continued to support this view. A major criticism of the DSM criteria introduced in version IV in 1994 was that, strictly followed, an individual should ALWAYS be diagnosed with autism and not asperger because asperger syndrome requires the individual meet the description of autism first, and no further diagnosis beyond that is useful or necessary. This is not MY argument, this is the driving argument behind the next set of changes expected to be incorporated into DSM V. If you have access to a medical lit search, I could suggest six different articles referenced in support of this idea and the years they were published range from 1995 to 2001.

The argument that has been put forward by Wing and colleagues, which I agree with based on my understanding of the evidence as presented, is that this continued separation has been a prime motivating factor in the ongoing misunderstanding of what Autism is and what it means to those diagnosed as within the spectrum. Wing suggests that the first step to resolving some of these problems is to recognize that which is medically true and always has been, that autism is one medical condition with a spectrum representing the range of possible patient outcomes.

If clinicians refuse to recognize a medical fact, then as the ones that live and breathe that medical fact we have a responsibilty to self-advocate and self-diagnosis in a proper manner. If politics are holding back proper medical treatment, we can establish good science practices on our own and encourage professionals to pull their heads out of the sand and catch up with modern knowledge. Recent studies suggest there are more than five hundred thousand children with autism in the united states, and there are even more adults. They have a clear, medically demonstrated physiological condition that causes extreme stress throughout their lives because they might appear outwardly intelligent but they have a language disorder that leads to confusions in communication without either party being aware.

We have identified useful ways to help these individuals cope, but that outward intelligence continues to result in disenfranchisement because it is assumed they should know better and are just being lazy. People get all bent out of shape because they think people are self-diagnosing with Autism all willy-nilly but the studies suggest a rate in my country of 1 in 150 being born autistic if not more. The average class size in our schools is about 35 kids, meaning in every 5 classrooms in america, there is one autistic child. Most of those children are being told they are just normal kids who have a discipline problem. That they are just lazy, inconsiderate, have no empathy, that they are jerks. Autistic individuals have likely been told these things since the first one was born. There was a time when you could just move away from society when it became too much, but where do you go today? The system is too large for us to just go hide from, so we have to take a stand and be recognized as humans with human rights like any other.

It always appears like the Autism diagnosis describes the underlying condition, whereas the Aspergers diagnosis describes a limited set of outward expressions of the internal condition (which is Autism). Of course, I am no expert, but purely from reading, personal understanding, and observation alone, it appears this way to me.

Appeal to authority is: You don't have AS because you don't have {some symptom that isn't a part of the disorder}, and if you question me, you're wrong because I'm the expert!

An analogy, you would assume that a pilot who has his piloting license will be qualified to fly the planes he is approved to fly? It's a given, as probability stipulates that the pilot with the qualifications will know how to fly that which he is qualified for. We rely on experts to know more than "us" in their field, for we can't know everything and we don't go through the training they do.

I'd much rather a person qualified to fly fly me somewhere than someone who claims to know how to fly; probability, you see? Hence, a given.

(Naturally, nothing is certain. And people need to prove that they are experts in their field if they state they are.)

O, and yes, you can say that my analogy is a fallacy, but it only is without questioning the validity of someone's expertise; one should always question the claims people make.

yesplease: The point of the study I linked and the 5 other studies it makes reference to in the abstract is that the diagnostic criteria creates a divide based on criteria that does not fit the progression of actual patients, and it has lead to a situation where no two doctors are applying the criteria in the same way, because they are all actually autistic individuals and there is no clinical basis for an Asperger Syndrome designation.

What stage they are at in development at the time they are first diagnosed is what is setting the tone for how far they are expected to develop because it is preventing them from being given proper support if they are seen as "too high functioning".

What special factor are you saying changes this if you only look at a group that was diagnosed after the age of three?

B.
Delays or abnormal functioning in at least one of the following areas, with onset prior to age 3 years: (1) social interaction, (2) language as used in social communication, or (3) symbolic or imaginative play.