Critical of self diagnosis - you shouldn't be

Post Reply New Topic

I didn't say anything about crime and malingering.
I addressed the question about why some people can self-diagnose and others could not do so.

Yeh, basically I just want to know.
If I know, then I can get on with mylife and push forward with useful strategies to have a fulfilling life and not keep repeating mistakes and living in pain because I couldn`t understand for example why people thought I was grumpy and rude all the time. Now I have self diagnosed I am working on that and it is helping me. I git sick of hitting the same brick wall and not having any explanation why..... I was trying so hard to grow but it just didn`t work.... the reason was that I didn`t know that my traits and behaviour were symptoms of ASD.

Also, I am essentially a scientist and am fairly meticulous in analysis. I understand the scientific method of proof and counter proof... I do this to a great extent on myself all the time (too much in fact). So when I started `self-analysing` I tried to be very rigorous, this gives me more confidence in any conclusions.

Also Dianthus` point about Occams razor is true. it is the Sherlock Holmes method of deduction. ie if you exclude all the things it cannot be you are left with the truth.
Just to repeat once again the diagnosticians do this too.... in lieu of precise empiric evidence like a genetic marker it is a gestalt judgement based on a mixture of concrete observations and qualitative judgements.

Even the very best professional diagnosis will be fuzzy around the edges.

I disagree with the last statement (in italics) I actually reckon that (if they have done the background work) that there is a high probability that they are right about it.


Hi Starkid this " no need for external validation " was my own quote on the back of B19s.
I suppose you are correct in one way about my search for validation but I think you misunderstand what I mean.
I mean Internal validation; and to build that self certainty without jumping to wrong conclusions I have to collect evidence. This will include using external sources and methods to ratify this.
All I am saying is that I have (to my satisfaction) succeeded in doing that and have had no need for `official` documentary external validation...I am self-empowered... which is the point I was making when I started this thread.

Yeh, basically I just want to know.
If I know, then I can get on with mylife and push forward with useful strategies to have a fulfilling life and not keep repeating mistakes and living in pain because I couldn`t understand for example why people thought I was grumpy and rude all the time. Now I have self diagnosed I am working on that and it is helping me. I git sick of hitting the same brick wall and not having any explanation why..... I was trying so hard to grow but it just didn`t work.... the reason was that I didn`t know that my traits and behaviour were symptoms of ASD.

Also, I am essentially a scientist and am fairly meticulous in analysis. I understand the scientific method of proof and counter proof... I do this to a great extent on myself all the time (too much in fact). So when I started `self-analysing` I tried to be very rigorous, this gives me more confidence in any conclusions.

Also Dianthus` point about Occams razor is true. it is the Sherlock Holmes method of deduction. ie if you exclude all the things it cannot be you are left with the truth.
Just to repeat once again the diagnosticians do this too.... in lieu of precise empiric evidence like a genetic marker it is a gestalt judgement based on a mixture of concrete observations and qualitative judgements.

Even the very best professional diagnosis will be fuzzy around the edges.

( thie comments "this is true" and "This is a good point, and a similar scenario to the one I went through" are mine (Peejay... I`m just not very good at using the quote button yet.. soz for any confusion)

I disagree with the last statement (in italics) I actually reckon that (if they have done the background work) that there is a high probability that they are right about it.


Hi Starkid this " no need for external validation " was my own quote on the back of B19s.
I suppose you are correct in one way about my search for validation but I think you misunderstand what I mean.
I mean Internal validation; and to build that self certainty without jumping to wrong conclusions I have to collect evidence. This will include using external sources and methods to ratify this.
All I am saying is that I have (to my satisfaction) succeeded in doing that and have had no need for `official` documentary external validation...I am self-empowered... which is the point I was making when I started this thread.

Ok. Sounds shady and unprofessional to me. Maybe we are thinking of "validation" in different ways. I'm thinking of "validation" in the sense of self-worth, self-esteem, or acknowledgment of and playing to one's emotional needs in a way that has no bearing on the diagnostic process, whereas a diagnosis should involve gathering the relevant data, analyzing it, and, as objectively as possible, making an analytical decision about the patient's condition, based on said data, without regard to how it will make the patient feel.



I didn't mean validation in the sense of having one's current symptoms recognized; that's obviously necessary for any sort of diagnosis. I meant validation in the sense of a pat on the back, and a "you poor baby!", or like some sort of medal for a war veteran, regardless of whether or not the struggles are still present or clinically significant. That is the sense in which it seemed to be discussed on another thread (the Why Neurodiversity is wrong thread, if I recall), and I had that discussion in mind when I brought it up. I don't dispute that someone might want that, I'm saying that seeking a professional diagnosis for that sort of validation, or identifying with a medical condition for that sort of validation (regardless of whether that is the only reason or one of several reasons), is wrong. I can't think of a more specific term than "wrong" at the moment.

I guess I am just confused as to why people in general think such people want a bunch of extra validation...don't have real problems just 'faking' it, how will anyone get any compassion or understanding out of that mindset?I was never after a 'poor baby' categorization even before I knew what autism was. So why is it people assume self diagnoses comes out of being a dishonest liar constantly when it is not the case. I guess if a couple homeless people lost everything and told that story they'd just get dismissed and told to 'getover it' as well. F** people no compassion anymore I hope you all burn. .

On the back of Starkids thoughts:

"I'm just saying I reckon there's a high probability that (often self diagnosers)they're wrong about it"

Could WP be a good place to mount an unscientific survey?
Just a straw poll sample really.

Q1. What percentages of self diagnosers on WP went on to successfully get an official diagnosis? (first time)

Q2. What percentages of self diagnosers on WP went on to successfully get an official diagnosis after more than one attempt?

Q3. What percentages of self diagnosers on WP have not attempted to get an official diagnosis?

This are just the ideas and not a carefully worded Qs. There would obviously be validity
(yes scientific validity! ) issues arising from its lack of robustness and sample bias:
EG people who were not successfully diagnosed first time have a greater chance of leaving WP and not taking part in any survey..... I get this could skew results and other biasses too.

However this might be really nteresting, possibly enlightening and even lead to proper research (Any researchers reading this??

Is anyone here expert enough to set up a little survey?
(we would have to agree on the wording of Qs first)

Starkid. My self validation thing is useful to me to understand the universe and strategise how to be a more successful human being.
It has absoulutely nothing to do with aaah poor baby needs cuddles!

*explination, every time you post 'egg'(insert term) you are trying to put 'ex' egg does not=ex and most of the words you throw 'egg' into actually have ex not egg. It is an explanation not an eggplanation get it? Let me guess 'eggzactly' ...egg vomit, egg this egg that? And most importantly you are 'wrong' for calling it eggplantation, as people don't get special rights for having an obsession with eggs sorry to say.I could go find more examples of you putting 'egg' where ex goes in grammer....quit calling people eggs you egg.

Maybe this poster can learn to quit excessively using the term egg where it does not fit...sorry if I have offended but I am so sick of hearing this person throw the word 'egg' into any word they use...it is example not eggzample, it is egg not 'vauge'....its a bloody egg...an egg I tell you, eggzample is not a word.

i am so sorry did not want to destroy your illusion but the egg thing was used just one to many times...I mean I bet a lot of people wished their worse problem was putting egg into words it does not belong as far as grammar is concerned.

Last edited by Sweetleaf on 30 Nov 2014, 3:50 am, edited 1 time in total.

LOL, I haven't laughed at much on WP but this has made be eggsplode.

^^

If you mean a study to determine whether or not people's self-diagnosis was valid based on a subsequent professional diagnosis, that would be nearly impossible. The formal diagnosis will necessarily include things that the self-diagnosis did not. The validity of any sort of diagnosis is determined by the evidence upon which it is based; as the formal diagnosis will be based on different things, it cannot validate the self-diagnosis.

For example, a person could self-diagnose based purely on social awkwardness and an online test, then go to a doctor and find out that she actually does have ASD based on IQ test, interview, and parent questionnaire. Obviously, that professional diagnosis does not prove the validity of the crappy self-diagnosis even though the self-diagnoser and the clinician came to the same conclusion.

Last edited by starkid on 30 Nov 2014, 4:30 am, edited 2 times in total.

Just something that reminds me of this thread for sentimental purposes...


ignore whatever launguage in the subtitles if you don't know it or are not curious about it, but does anyone know what language it is? I did not pay attention to that.

I think it's Estonian.

Ok clearly you don`t get what I am saying. I clearly stated that this was nothing to do with validity.
I totally understand all the complications and lack of scientific rigour.... I clearly said that.

I just think it might be interesting and might open a path to further discussion. I feel that continually shutting down debate and maintaining a rigid point of view doesn`t aid exploration, we have to probe for ideas they may be good they may be useless, but we will never know unless we try. Growth mindset Vs fixed mindset, I don`t mind getting things wrong as that is the way to learn better.

I think a survey might be interesting and potentially be enlightening (and has probably been done before). At the moment statements like I reckon many self diagnosers may be wrongly diagnosed are pure speculation.
I would like to know ifyou have a point and not just an opinion. What is wrong with that?

sorry I keep double posting!

Last edited by Peejay on 30 Nov 2014, 5:18 am, edited 1 time in total.

Opinions are points. You aren't making any sense.