Are most self-diagnoses correct?

Post Reply New Topic

I'm sorry you interpret this as some sort of war - I'm simply trying to understand what you mean in the words you're using.

You did call a self-diagnosis a claim.

I'll leave your thread now

I don't know of any studies that estimate the proportion of correct self-diagnoses.
Individual clinicians have stated that amongst the people they have assessed for autism, self-diagnoses are mostly correct, 50/50, or mostly incorrect.
On this issue, anecdotal reports are contradictory, and systematic studies are absent.
In my opinion, it not good to state that one is autistic or has autism if one is not officially diagnosed with autism, but recognizing that one has autistic traits, stating that one has autistic traits, and discussing one's autistic traits with others is good.

Listen, it needs expert to diagnose properly because there are few symptoms what seem autistic but it may not be part of autism. But if you very eager to know of self diagnosis, then there are several apps to identify yourself.

You may go through this bolg to know detail of it, though I don't know how effective it is.
http://www.hbot-therapy.com/search-engi ... ps-autism/

But there are clinicians to diagnose autism with symptoms like,
# Non verbal communication
# Lack of eye contact
# Repetitive behavior
# Cognitive disabilities
# Motor skill disorder
etc.

But early diagnosis on or before the age of three is better to reduce the autistic affects, before it turns into adult autism.

Unless a cure is found and current understanding undergoes radical change all or at least 98%+ of autistics (won't discount the possibility of outliers) will remain autistic until the day they die. It is just a matter of how much an individual autistic is taught, forced, or chooses to act not autistic and the "severity" of the autism in the individual.

In a perfect world all clinicians would be competent, convenient and affordable and benefits, help and lack of stigma would be afforded. We are far far from that, besides lack of affordability, in many areas forums, blogs mare the only support for adults, or the help is based on childhood presentations or antiquated notions. A person in these situations has two basic choices. Say self diagnoses is invalid continue to proceed as neurotypical and likely continue whatever difficulties that brought the person to the idea of self diagnosis. Self diagnose try and overcome the stigma and invalidation associated with that decision. Even if the person is not Autistic at least some positive may be gained because commonalities with Autism (be it solutions or just the idea I am not alone with these issues).

A person in that situation choices are not optimal. Stay stalled in their life or try and move forward knowing the possibility as with any decision it might be wrong.

Your link is to an organization that is trying to sell a therapy that is far from proven http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3472266/ and call Autism a disease a definition of Autism not used in any reliable source current or past. Your a doctor, find better sources.

That depends. Do you suspect you're a table?

A person who recognizes autistic traits and problems caused by autistic traits in themselves does not need to proceed as always, ignore their traits, or continue doing whatever they are doing that are causing their problems. Instead, they may seek to understand their traits, such as by discussing them with others who have similar traits, and they may learn to adapt with their traits. They don't need to claim that they have a disorder that they have not been diagnosed with to do these things. For eggsample, I don't need to claim that I have ADHD that I have not been diagnosed with to deal with some of my problems that are similar to some problems that people with ADHD have. I can seek to understand my traits and learn to adapt with my traits without self-diagnosing with ADHD and claiming that I have ADHD without a diagnosis of ADHD.

This is logical and sensible.

I would extend this slightly by saying that if one has notice that one has autistic traits, and they are having a negative impact on one's life, seeking professional diagnosis from a competent diagnostician is also good.

If one is affordable and available I would ADVISE a person to do that . An option also is to seek an informal diagnosis. Have the competent clinician say you are are Autistic but have no diagnostic report written. This is for a person who fears the diagnostic report getting in the wrong hands. I know there is no requirement to pass on information but in the society and technology of 2015 people do fear this. Since no report is to be written I would assume the price is less.

If that solves the problem of affordability, that makes sense. I don't get how availability is a factor-surely if an informal diagnosis by a qualified diagnostician is available then a formal one would be too? (maybe I am just failing to imagine the right alternative scenarios, here?)



I don't really understand the fear there--well, maybe I do, but is it rational?

I had a nightmare about this the other night, fueled by an elevated state of anxiety, I suspect. In the dream I was living in a dystopian future. There was a Sino-American super state in which an oligarchy of genetically approved people ruled absolutely over everyone else--something like Gattaca, but the civilization was part US, part chinese. I had a job cleaning filth from between mechanized cargo gantries in huge automated port facility. My job was to remove filth and debris the robot systems couldn't get to. I was dirty, cold and miserable and I watched the superior people living lives of comfort and pleasure in a world from which I was cast out and cut off.

It was a pretty horrible dream. But it was just a dream. Is there any evidence that a diagnosis (rather than symptoms) results in real world discrimination of some kind or is this just a fear?

Diagnosis requires impairments in functioning, so for someone dealing with impairments, it doesn't make a lot of sense to have a clinician say that they have autism without documentation of autism. Documentation of autism provides a basis for schools and employers to make accommodations, and small accommodations may greatly support an autistic person in pursuing what they want to pursue in life.

This really makes sense and is a very strong counter to any theoretical disadvantage or stigma attached to diagnosis.

In passing, I think stigma is more attached to unexplained symptoms than to a diagnosis. I was told that I would never advance or gain promotion at a certain employer because, "you are not one of the cool kids" --In light of the diagnosis, which came years later, this makes sense. The stigma was about atypical behavior, not the diagnosis. You may conceal or avoid getting the diagnosis, but you can only go so far in concealing the behavior. People notice.

I agree.

I think that a diagnosis can actually reduce the stigma.

The other obvious issue being that this kind of request is at odds with medical confidentiality.

If anything your school reports would be a far less biased source.
Even recent "eyewitness testimony" from a neutral third party can unreliable. Whereas in this case this would be a possibly non neutral party being questioned on events years to decades ago.

Rational or not not the fear is there (see vaccines). Availability of competent clinicians is a big issue. We live in the biggest megalopolis in the world where there are competent clinicians within reach by public transit. Many Autistic's live in third world countries or rural America where the nearest competent clinicians are hundreds or thousands miles away. If you have a job or a family you just cannot make a bunch of long trips to find the right person and get diagnosed.

False. Depends on the insurance policy.

I actually fit the criteria for "Childhood Disintegrative Disorder" (In F84. 3 of ICD10) because I had a regression that was fast and quite dramatic after 2 and a half years of perfectly normal nuerotypical development. And after the regression I was totally in my an "ocean world" of autism completely locked away from society. My parents thought I went deaf. I was putting toy cars around my ears instead of playing with them like I used to do. Because the regression happened before my 3rd birthday, I also met the criteria for "Autistic Disorder" (F84.0). Despite the regression which caused my delay in speaking (I did not speak again until I was 4 years old), I was diagnosed with "Aspergers Syndrome" (299.80 of DSM IV) when I was 6 years old because from that point on, I became high functioning thanks to early intervention.And you can see what my signature is on that. If it were to more based on my current symtponalogy, I would fit the criteria for "Atypical Autism" (F84.1 of ICD10). So the possibilities of the real diagnostic labels I could actually have are either "Atypical Autism", "Autistic Disorder", or "Childhood Disintegrative Disorder". But no matter which label I really have, I am considered a high functioning ASD individual so when the term "High Functioning Autism" , an informal diagnostic label is used to label any ASD individual that is adaptively higher functioning, I would perfectly fit that informal label regardless if I have an official diagnosis of "Childhood Disintegrative Disorder", "Autistic Disorder", or "Atypical Autism". But to play it safe, I officially self diagnosed myself with an official ASD of "Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Unspecified" (F84.9 of ICD10), which is literally the same as "PDD(NOS)" because it is used as a "catch all" term for those exhibiting behaviors on the spectrum. My family, doctors, and I all agree that I have some sort of autism, but to me it would be impossible for me to find out what I really have. So since NOS is used as a general term for a family of disorders like "ED(NOS)" for the Eating Disorders Spectrum, my self diagnosis is sure correct 100% in this area.