aghogday wrote:
Abuse in a child is not going to cause the abnormal brain growth seen specific to males with regressive autism, that lose their ability to speak, so we can likely mark that one of the list of disorders heavily influenced by the social environment of face to face human interaction.
Really? Just because most "researchers" refuse to look into the obvious?
Parental Abuse May Damage Children's Brain Thomas Idiculla, PhD
http://agapepartners.org/articles/72/1/ ... Page1.htmlMother's stress harms foetus, research shows | Science | The Guardian
http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2007/ ... eandhealthPoverty poisons the brain
http://neuroanthropology.net/2008/02/18 ... the-brain/aghogday wrote:
On the other hand we know that many of the autistic like behavioral impairments associated with autism disorder are seen in children that are abused through social isolation in childhood. The same is true for primates, studied isolated from their parents. There is the potential that these children can adapt, but many are left psychologically/emotionally scarred for life, particularly vulnerable to the disease of addiction.
Not autistic-like, but autistic.
From "DSM Diagnosing for Money and Power, Summary of the Critique of the DSM, offered by Zur Institute for Psychologists, MFTs, SWs"
http://www.zurinstitute.com/dsmcritique.htmlQuote:
The DSM tends to ignore contextual factors in the development of symptoms and disorders. Some professionals have suggested a replacement of current diagnostic labels with descriptors such as "the consequences of poverty," "the consequences of violence," "the effects of homelessness and racism" or "the damage done by interpersonal discriminatory treatment." The DSM provides an axis on which "psychosocial stressors" can be listed, but in reality, Axes I and II are the focus of diagnosis and treatment.
The DSM focuses almost exclusively on individual pathology to the dangerous minimization of social and environmental factors such as poverty, racism, sexism, classism, heterosexism, ageism, violence, etc. This limiting focus has serious ramifications:
Therapists, who uncritically follow the DSM medical model, are likely to place undue emphasis on individual emotional problems as causal factors rather than opening to the larger possibility that the individual is symptomatic due to familial, political or societal system dysfunctions.
Social psychologists call such exclusion of social factors and excessive focus on individual pathology the "fundamental attribution error."
The focus on individual pathology leads to individual based treatment, suggesting that the DSM markets the concept of individually and biologically based social discomfort.
The DSM tends to pathologize several groups whose civil rights have historically been marginalized in the culture at large. The bias is clear in regard to race, social class, age, physical disability, gender and sexual orientation. Symptoms are a call for corrected balance. Rather than labeling the symptoms of a sick society, when appropriate, the client is too often diagnosed and medicated to adapt to the disease of the system.
aghogday wrote:
The refrigerator parent theory has been refuted as the cause of autism, however it would not be reasonable to suggest that abuse either emotional, sexual, or physical would not influence autism like behavioral impairments. Emotional detachment in the parent-child relationship, would likely be considered a form of emotional abuse, depending on severity of the issue, per factors associated with social isolation.
The refrigerator parent theory was far too close to the truth.
aghogday wrote:
While there is evidence of child abuse among Somali families, there is no evidence at this point in time that child abuse is being misdiagnosed as autism spectrum disorders seen in this subgroup of individuals, including regressive autism.
Those following the DSM do not, as a rule look for social context. See above.
aghogday wrote:
The Aspie quiz measures a more extensive list of behaviors than the DSMIV, but regardless of attempts to isolate the cultural environment out of it, is entirely impossible to do. The same applies to the DSMIV.
The Aspie-quiz does a better job of doing so, while the DSM ignores culture's influence and pathologizes.
aghogday wrote:
I'm not sure you understand how well trained professionals that interact with children are in spotting abuse in children, in the US. It is not so much a fear now that the abuse will be missed, but if abuse will be identified that does not exist.
More likely both and incompetence and brainwashing is causing both missed abuse and identification of non-existent abuse.
aghogday wrote:
There are many signs associated with potential abuse of children, that has little to do with autism, that can be spotted by a trained clinician.
Those having to do with autism are missed.
aghogday wrote:
There is no question that autism disorder including the developmental issues associated in brain growth and regressive autism exists in children of Somalians in the US and Sweden. The thing that is being questioned by science is why are the rates higher than other demographics in the US and Sweden. Various ideas have been entertained, but there isn't much evidence to support them..
You and researchers ignore a scientific approach to the question: "What causes 'developmental issues associated in brain growth in regressive autism'"? Assuming that social factors are not important is bias, prejudice, incompetence and quackery, not honest scientific medical research.
When you * A S S U M E *, you make an ASS of U and ME.
aghogday wrote:
I personally can't dismiss the possibility that environment may be the major causation involved in some cases of autism spectrum disorders, particularly in light of the recent twin studies that suggest that there is a significant environmental influence, that wasn't understood before.
Finally, we are, as Bush 43 would say, "making progress."
aghogday wrote:
Autism continues to become more complex of an issue as time goes by. I'm guessing RDOS isn't likely to change his direction out of the disorder arena, per his nomenclature, but as long as it stay as is, it's going to be focused on the potential of whether or not somone is going to develop an ASD, per the nomenclature of the Quiz, and any suggestion that Neanderthals are the cause of autism, isn't going to gain much traction with the data that shows autism does exist among Subsaharan Africans who have been studied as a demographic with little to no archaic Neanderthal DNA. Very few are going to buy the idea that they all suffering the effects of abuse and are misdiagnosed with autism. Particularly among those diagnosed with Regressive Autism.
What needs to be done is separate two definitions of "autism", one being a form of complex post-traumatic stress battery that begins at an early age and the neurodiversity stuff. By creating an 11th environmental section, RDOS has done what he can.
Abnormal brain growth is not brain injury. There is a substantial amount of evidence though that non-substance environmental influences can cause brain damage that is associated with autistic-like behaviors, including and beyond the resources you list. I agree with your links, and think it is possible that prenatal stress is associated with regressive autism, but that is not part of the post-natal environmental influences associated with child abuse, that I was addressing, specific to child abuse and abnormal brain growth associated with regressive autism.
Interesting, many of your thoughts about autism reflect some of my thoughts on the issue, but in discussing the same issues with RDOS, in discussions here, his responses were more in alignment with the genetic causation of autism associated with archaic neanderthal DNA, than environmental or cultural ones, of which child abuse is a part of. He associated genetic mutations, related to archaic neanderthal DNA, as the cause for classic autism, if I remember correctly.
While we can separate aspects of Neurodiversity from Autism Spectrum Disorder, the field of psychology defines, and for all practical intents and purposes owns, the term Autism Spectrum Disorder. The term Aspergers may end up as a sub-clinical term for those outside of the the diagnosis of the DSM-5 classification for Autism Spectrum Disorder.
While I agree that the Aspie Quiz does not and cannot completely separate itself from cultural influence, RDOS suggested words to the effect that it was his intention to exclude cultural factors from the quiz to the best of his ability, per discussion here on this website.
If RDOS suspected Classic Autism was not associated with genetics and archaic Neanderthal DNA, there would have been no logical reason to title the theory the Neanderthal theory of Autism.
As I've suggested many times before, considering classic autism is not part of the registration process for the Aspie Quiz, Neurodiversity might have been better nomenclature to stick with than terms defined and owned by the field of psychology.
19 Jun 2012, 3:43 am
