Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

In defence of the self-DX "mild" Aspies...

Page 4 of 4 [ 57 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4

Previous topic | Next topic

shades720
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jul 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 18

07 Jul 2011, 9:55 pm

I feel like a self-diagnosis would almost always be correct if the person fully understands the condition. I feel this way because I don't think a neurotypical would diagnose themselves with this, due to the social stigma. Someone would most likely have to be looking for an answer to something they've had to deal with their entire life. Personally, I started as self-diagnosed and, technically, still am. It started with about a year of psychological research. However, I've spoken to professionals and had sessions with them. They agree that I am an aspie. The reason I'm not formally dx'd is that I won't benefit from any disability services requiring it. I don't need extra time on tests, and I don't desire any medications. This is because I don't think meds could make me anymore socially graceful. I merely desire a better understanding of myself so that I can self-improve, and to have some comfort in knowing why I struggle with the things I do.



Jellybean
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Apr 2007
Age: 36
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,795
Location: Bedford UK

08 Jul 2011, 3:16 am

My Mum worked out that I had AS before anyone did! I self diagnosed myself with it back in my teens, but I wasn't happy enough with that. Unlike the majority of self diagnosed people, I was severely impaired by my AS, enough so that it was literally ruining my whole existence (I used to say I didn't have a 'life' because I wasn't technically 'living').

Here's the problem though. When we presented these issues to the 'professionals', they said that they have no idea what AS is or how to diagnose it. They even had the cheek to say that I didn't have AS on the basis that I cried when my Granny died. It took over 6 years of fighting to get referred to the correct specialist. By this point I had missed out on years of therapy and help that I would have been entitled to had I got the diagnosis in the first place. Eventually I was diagnosed as having Asperger syndrome and Tourette syndrome.

So I personally have no problem with people self diagnosing because I know how difficult it can be to get it officialised (did I just make a word up there?). I just wish that people weren't so ignorant on the whole that when they meet one Aspie, they don't assume we are all like that! My Dad still can't understand why I am not a maths genius for example!


_________________
I have HFA, ADHD, OCD & Tourette syndrome. I love animals, especially my bunnies and hamster. I skate in a roller derby team (but I'll try not to bite ;) )


TPE2
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Oct 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,461

08 Jul 2011, 7:05 am

Australien wrote:
But, and correct me if I am wrong, ASDs are really about your neurological wiring, which is not context-dependant.


Although ASD are supposed to be neurological, they are diagnosed by your external behaviour.



Todesking
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,088
Location: Depew NY

09 Jul 2011, 12:58 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
I feel I am perfectly intelligent enough to look at the DSM criteria, other peoples experiances, my experiances ect......and figure out where I fit. I mean I would not mind a professional diagnosis but like I can afford it. Should I just not research any info about mental conditions I suspect I could have and hope for the best? I think not.


That's how I did it when I was just self diagnosed I read a lot and compared experiences with people on WP. Both of the psychologists I went to both said they could tell just from just talking with me I was somewhere on the spectrum. I was lucky to have medical insurance and could afford the testing.


_________________
There he goes. One of God's own prototypes. Some kind of high powered mutant never even considered for mass production. Too weird to live, and too rare to die -Hunter S. Thompson


Mysty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,762

09 Jul 2011, 7:48 am

RudolfsDad wrote:
However, I really don't think people should self diagnose.


In my mind, that's linguistic nitpicking. It's making too much of the difference between "I have traits of asperger's" and "I have asperger's". So what if someone without a diagnosis says the latter instead of the former. I've no reason to make a big deal of it, even if I wouldn't do it.

Heck, even with a diagnosis, it's still just an opinion, and without knowing who did the diagnosis, and their qualifications and experience, I've no idea how valid the diagnosis. At least with a self-diagnosis I know that the person doing the "diagnosis" has a clue about their subject.


_________________
not aspie, not NT, somewhere in between
Aspie Quiz: 110 Aspie, 103 Neurotypical.
Used to be more autistic than I am now.


Australien
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 17 May 2011
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 301

09 Jul 2011, 9:15 am

Mysty wrote:
RudolfsDad wrote:
However, I really don't think people should self diagnose.


In my mind, that's linguistic nitpicking. It's making too much of the difference between "I have traits of asperger's" and "I have asperger's". So what if someone without a diagnosis says the latter instead of the former. I've no reason to make a big deal of it, even if I wouldn't do it.

Heck, even with a diagnosis, it's still just an opinion, and without knowing who did the diagnosis, and their qualifications and experience, I've no idea how valid the diagnosis. At least with a self-diagnosis I know that the person doing the "diagnosis" has a clue about their subject.


Having thought about it a little more, I think it is important to make that distinction, whatever the appropriate labels are, and whoever makes the diagnosis, between someone who meets the diagnostic criteria including requisite severity to receive a clinical diagnosis in order to receive professional assistance, and someone who has some observable degree of an Aspergian personality who does not require professional assistance (but very possibly needs assistance from friends, colleagues, and family on occasion).

So, people like me, in the latter cateogry - what are we? Are we Aspies; do we say anyone on the AS continuum is one? Are we "mild Aspies"? Do we "have traits of Asperger's"? If so, then is there a distinction between those who have one or to and those who have most but don't need assistance?



Mysty
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Age: 55
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,762

09 Jul 2011, 10:52 am

Australien wrote:
Mysty wrote:
RudolfsDad wrote:
However, I really don't think people should self diagnose.


In my mind, that's linguistic nitpicking. It's making too much of the difference between "I have traits of asperger's" and "I have asperger's". So what if someone without a diagnosis says the latter instead of the former. I've no reason to make a big deal of it, even if I wouldn't do it.

Heck, even with a diagnosis, it's still just an opinion, and without knowing who did the diagnosis, and their qualifications and experience, I've no idea how valid the diagnosis. At least with a self-diagnosis I know that the person doing the "diagnosis" has a clue about their subject.


Having thought about it a little more, I think it is important to make that distinction, whatever the appropriate labels are, and whoever makes the diagnosis, between someone who meets the diagnostic criteria including requisite severity to receive a clinical diagnosis in order to receive professional assistance, and someone who has some observable degree of an Aspergian personality who does not require professional assistance (but very possibly needs assistance from friends, colleagues, and family on occasion).

So, people like me, in the latter cateogry - what are we? Are we Aspies; do we say anyone on the AS continuum is one? Are we "mild Aspies"? Do we "have traits of Asperger's"? If so, then is there a distinction between those who have one or to and those who have most but don't need assistance?


I believe in making appropriate distinctions and using appropriate language to describe those distinctions. But I think saying "Don't self diagnose" is nitpicking about how people word their observations about themselves. At least, it is if the person saying that is okay with someone making those self-observations. I'm not talking about the distinction between having some traits but not enough for a diagnosis, versus having enough traits for a diagnosis. I'm talking about the distinction between saying "I have traits" even when one has enough for a diagnosis when they don't have an official diagnosis, versus the same person simply saying "I have asperger's".


_________________
not aspie, not NT, somewhere in between
Aspie Quiz: 110 Aspie, 103 Neurotypical.
Used to be more autistic than I am now.


OJani
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,505
Location: Hungary

09 Jul 2011, 12:37 pm

shades720 wrote:
I feel like a self-diagnosis would almost always be correct if the person fully understands the condition. I feel this way because I don't think a neurotypical would diagnose themselves with this, due to the social stigma. Someone would most likely have to be looking for an answer to something they've had to deal with their entire life. Personally, I started as self-diagnosed and, technically, still am. It started with about a year of psychological research. However, I've spoken to professionals and had sessions with them. They agree that I am an aspie. The reason I'm not formally dx'd is that I won't benefit from any disability services requiring it. I don't need extra time on tests, and I don't desire any medications. This is because I don't think meds could make me anymore socially graceful. I merely desire a better understanding of myself so that I can self-improve, and to have some comfort in knowing why I struggle with the things I do.

This is more or less what I think about it. I'm looking for a diagnosis, or at least a professional assessment, to relieve me from the burden of being self DXd. I suppose this would be more than having sessions with professionals, but not much different.



OJani
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Feb 2011
Age: 50
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,505
Location: Hungary

09 Jul 2011, 12:52 pm

Mysty wrote:
(...)
I believe in making appropriate distinctions and using appropriate language to describe those distinctions. But I think saying "Don't self diagnose" is nitpicking about how people word their observations about themselves. At least, it is if the person saying that is okay with someone making those self-observations. I'm not talking about the distinction between having some traits but not enough for a diagnosis, versus having enough traits for a diagnosis. I'm talking about the distinction between saying "I have traits" even when one has enough for a diagnosis when they don't have an official diagnosis, versus the same person simply saying "I have asperger's".

I agree. I'd just add that a professional diagnosis is more likely to be correct than a self-diagnosis, so, if in doubt, like me, going for a professional dx is recommended. Personally, I believe that a thorough knowledge that can be acquired by participating in forums like WP, reading and comparing yourself, taking online tests and thinking the whole subject over, is sufficient for a reliable self-dx. Professionals would merely ask the same questions and make the comparison themselves, so subjectivity is inevitable in both self and pro dx.