Essay revised, Rejection and Asperger's Syndrome
From the essay:
me too...and my aunt is trying to convince/force me to see a psychiatrist..but well, i'm very good in giving excuses and I know myself much better >.< I love myself the way I am
_________________
?We are all a little weird and life's a little weird, and when we find someone whose weirdness is compatible with ours, we join up with them and fall in mutual weirdness and call it love.?
I agree with pandd in the main.
I would have liked to see some concrete examples of e.g. types of rejection and types of impact on human brain cells, or body physiology.
Plus, there are many children starting life in where they are nurtured well pre and post birth, but who are observed to have AS traits That is, no obvious trauma/rejection in their life narrative. So how do we account for these Dx with AS?
rejection is such a massive trauma to any life form: how big is the bank of evidence of its effect upon the human physiology and how does it illuminate our understanding of AS traits.??
Lastly, your essay theme being that 'rejection causes AS' begs that scientist, pyschologists, thinkers should get major involved with how any experience a human being has where they feel rejected, impacts the human physiology so much that it 'disorders' that physiology. There are studies out here on this point and it would be interesting to do a contrast and comparison with individuals affected thus and AS traits.
What I love about your essay... is all the other topics it raises.
Trauma and rejection are two issues the whole planet needs to face up to - the travesty it wrecks upon this planet's psyche is ...another essay!
An interesting piece, but I think it's wrong in some aspects.
You are correct that a person could be diagnosed with AS purely because they meet the MINIMUM number of criteria listed in the DSM, but that reflects an incomplete and likely incompetent evaluation process. The MINIMUM exists to set a boundary at which point AS can be considered as a potential diagnosis. In truth, a competent diagnosis would look for a lot more evidence that conforms to the DSM before assigning AS as the diagnosis.
If there are 15 items you could match a person to for AS and you need at least 3, the diagnosis would be fairly unconvincing with only 3 matches. If you had 8-10 matches, the diagnosis would be more compelling.
Likewise, a good diagnosis should ask, "What came first?"
A child with 0 items seems happy and normal. They enter a traumatic social environment, and as you propose, they start developing traits that match the DSM for AS. One can see that even if they have what appears to be AS, it is "curable" as the environment modeled behavior...changing it from normal to abnormal via trauma.
A child who has AS will not be "normal." They will always seem different and while they may seem happy and well-adjusted, they will immediately have social interaction problems.
A child without AS who mimics AS might be perfectly normal if you change their social environment (i.e., get rid of bullies, etc.).
A child with AS won't do much better no matter how often you try different social environments.
That said, I do 100% agree that there is a danger of psychosomatic "disease" with AS. If you have a problem and you find a medical "scapegoat" for your problem, you might begin mimicking associated behaviors as a way to subconsciously embrace your new-found identity. Rather than recognize that you do bad behaviors and that's why you are socially ostracized (because you really don't have AS), you begin mimicking expected behaviors of AS to satisfy the subconscious desire to have an explanation for why you fail to form healthy social connections.
Any AS diagnosis should not be based just on circumstances. There should be a heavy focus on behavior patterns BEFORE other people came into play. Someone with AS would have exhibited at least some signs of AS in the limited interaction they had with family and relatives BEFORE they were thrust into a more socially-intense environment (i.e., public school). There should also be an effort at "behavior modification" to see if the subject can readily change how they act, react and interact with others. If a person has AS, such modification would be difficult and have limited benefit. If a person doesn't have AS, they might find it fairly easy to improve relationships with others.
A good essay, in general. I can see why you may get criticised for a lack of formality, the ommission of reams of references and your neglect of long psychobabble words that have us scurrying for a dictionary.
However, while there still remains a lack of consistent biological evidence on the alleged 'neurological disorder' that causes all cases of AS, your speculation is as good as anyones right now.
I wouldn't be surprised if it turns out that there are 2 differenr, possibly releated ways of developing the AS traits: one from a neurological disorder and the other due to childhood rejection. If behaviour and environmental circumstances can't change the mind, how can we ever learn anything?
_________________
Circular logic is correct because it is.
I wasn't being impertinent with asking what the essay is for, as some of the other poster have pointed out, if aim is for scholarly publication references need to be cited, opposing evidence needs also to be cited etc. There is also a heck of a lot of physiological evidence of Autism and AS physiological differences, from receptor polymorphisms up to white matter volume changes, lateralisation etc. (I should know, I did an 11000 word final dissertation on exactly that, 3 years ago, so there will be more stuff on Pub Med now, it was actually 18,000 words and had to cut a lot out, so there is plenty of research out there ). In addition, journal publication is not easy as an individual unless you are already published in the field and a researcher.
However, if the essay is as an exploration of your own personal views,for publication on a blog or website of your own surely you do not need to alter it to reflect others views? From some of the posts, people agree with you on a personal level. Obviously, as statement of fact, I can't agree with your content, as it is put forward as opinion. A balanced presentation of a hypothesis, with factors for and against I would be interested in, however then the issue is have you proved a hypothesis, not whether I would "like" the essay.
I realise the points I am making are in terms of scientific essays for scholarly publications, which is the area of relevance to me. I will admit, I'm not a blog or editorial reader so this may not be the type of critiquing you want.
_________________
Other people are people too.
I'm sorry if you found my suggestion offensive, although I do write:
"I'm not at all denying that there could be differences in brain structure that lead to these traits ... I'm not saying that everyone who has Asperger's Syndrome is rejected, either -- only that rejection in particular can cause one to fulfill the criteria."
Were there any particular comments in the essay that you remember finding insulting?
_________________
Sixteen essays so far.
Like a drop of blood in a tank of flesh-eating piranhas, a new idea never fails to arouse the wrath of herd prejudice.
I'm sorry if you found my suggestion offensive, although I do write:
"I'm not at all denying that there could be differences in brain structure that lead to these traits ... I'm not saying that everyone who has Asperger's Syndrome is rejected, either -- only that rejection in particular can cause one to fulfill the criteria."
Were there any particular comments in the essay that you remember finding insulting?
You strongly present a case for AS caused by rejection and/ or diagnosis, while back handedly admiting that it’s not impossible some instances of “brain difference” AS exist. This is very unbalanced.
To be balanced, you need to give weight to issues that is representative of the balance of evidence. There is more evidence for AS as a real brain difference than for AS as the result of rejection or diagnosis itself, yet your essay presents a picture that indicates that “brain difference AS” is not even necessarily real. As someone who lives with the effects of AS every day, I find even the insinuation that it is not real, very concerning, and somewhat insulting.
In any case, you are wrong about rejection causing someone to fit the criteria. You seem to not really understand what the criteria actually consists of. Some of it is in the description at the outset of the DSM explaining how the DSM ought to be applied; these caveats and instructions form part of the criteria for all diagnoses in the DSM. The main body of the criteria is of course the expanded description text that qualifies each and every item in the “short list” section.
For someone to be diagnosed in the mode you describe, is plain malpractice in my view. Yet your article reads more as though you are explaining what most if not all instances of diagnosed AS really are about, rather than appearing to be an essay that describes how some people without AS might be misdiagnosed with AS subsequent to being rejected. This is again why I feel the article is very unbalanced to the point of being unfair. If such misdiagnoses occur, I suspect they are the minority of diagnosed instances, not the majority as your essay appears to insinuate.
I'm going to keep the essay, but if you like, you may offer suggestions about what comments I should add to it in order to reassure people that AS isn't all about rejection.
_________________
Sixteen essays so far.
Like a drop of blood in a tank of flesh-eating piranhas, a new idea never fails to arouse the wrath of herd prejudice.
I was under the impression the essay was about the idea that rejection could cause an AS diagnosis as opposed to it being the only cause for it. To me, it focused on how that was possible. I think you should add a section on a proposed idea to improve the diagnostic criteria to avoid that, and it would also reassure people that AS isn't all about rejection. In my mind, AS is a genetic thing, not a learned thing. So they'll either need a new spectrum of other ways to get autistic like symptoms outside of genetics that would be more easily treatable with therapy, or they need to create a new disorder for that. Yeah, the symptoms sound the same, but if the diagnosis is about treatment options, I would think someone displaying autistic like symptoms as a result of rejection would do better with therapy (and a different focus on therapy at that) than someone who is neurologically different (like those where AS is very dominant in the family to a point where once you know about it, you can spot it in your own kids at a really young age before a professional could). Like with my kids, my 2 year old is obvious to me, and has been for the last year (she is almost 3 now). My one year old, I don't think she's AS, but she does have a lot of AS traits that she learns from me, her dad who is very mild AS probably, and her sister. Like I see her doing the hand flapping only because she sees her sister doing it. That's something I don't think a professional would figure out. So kind of like that, I knew my 2 year old is AS. While we do experience rejection as a result of our AS in our family more so than what I would consider normal, the only real thing I think it affected on myself is that I'm more introverted now. I think I was meant to be an extrovert.
That's also something you might want to look into as well. Jung even made some correlation between introversion and autism. It might make a great sister essay to this one. Rejection can cause autistic like symptoms, and introversion can cause autistic like symptoms, but rejection is an exterior factor whereas introversion is personality. Is AS really a neurological disorder or a personality preference?
Well, at least sleep deprivation gave me some good ideas here. Well, at least they seem like good ideas for the moment. I might think they suck after getting a good night sleep. I'll probably try to comment on that when I get some sleep (don't expect it for a few days though).
_________________
"In the room the women come and go talking of Michelangelo." J. Alfred Prufrock
I'm going to keep the essay, but if you like, you may offer suggestions about what comments I should add to it in order to reassure people that AS isn't all about rejection.
If you are interested in making the essay more balanced (and to be quite blunt more plausible), you should access other essays that describe potential risks for misdiagnosis. If you access a number of such articles, you will see that it is possible to describe complicating factors that influence or cause misdiagnosis, without implying that the condition itself may not be real. Further there is more than one way to do this, and which option you might prefer would depend both on what other things you choose to communicate, and how much “essay space” you are comfortable giving to this aspect.
I'm not somebody who is offended in any way by this, but I still maintain it is a weak theory. Also as pandd pointed out, it is not altogether clear what is you are arguing. Asperger's is by defined as a neurological condition. Personally I think it is quite an arbitrary one, as they are very many possibilities for high functioning autistics. I think psychiatry is mostly flawed in its approach. So if your assertion is that the consequences of being a social reject might give the false impression that you has a neurological condition when in fact you have a physiological complex, I’ll admit that is a possibility. But is also something that is already widely known and there are countermeasures to try and be rigorous and not jump to conclusions. Nevertheless, it is very difficult to know for sure.
I disagree. You comment:
If you'll look more closely, I do address this right below the diagram:
"How can a diagnosis lead to rejection? For one, children and their parents have already expressed frustration with namecalling and bullying."
"On a side note, what else can lead to rejection? It could be anything: glasses, motor clumsiness, a slightly unusual appearance or voice characteristic, introversion, bold nonconformity, high intelligence, an interest in advanced subjects, or a willingness to challenge social norms with new ideas."
First of all you are answering a different question as secondly that isn't a why. My question was why rejection is more likely to take place, your answer was a kin to 'status quo' which is not a scientific explanation becuase way too vague. If you believe there is a neurological change (which is not that clear but I gather not), then you need to show how rejection can cause that change in the brain. You don't explain properly why it is they are rejected, or their lack of desirability. Simply saying things like bulling and glasses isn't enough.
What you have is a hypothesis. A scientific theory is backed up with some evidence.
fiddlerpianist
Veteran
Joined: 30 Apr 2009
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,821
Location: The Autistic Hinterlands
I think you are indicating that the criteria is taken as the absolute complete word on whether or not someone should be diagnosed with AS. In some cases that may be true, but, as a previous poster suggested, the diagnostician who did that would probably be fairly incompetent. Not that it doesn't happen, mind you.
It's not entirely clear what point you are trying to make. If you are trying to make the point that one can be misdiagnosed with AS very easily if one goes solely by the criteria, then you need to make that clearer. The way you put it now, it makes it sound like you don't believe that AS is real, possibly because you feel you have been misdiagnosed with AS. Well, maybe you have? Have you thought about a second opinion?
_________________
"That leap of logic should have broken his legs." - Janissy
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
Beck–Fahrner syndrome as a cause for Autism? |
18 Nov 2024, 3:05 pm |
Asperger Experts |
22 Nov 2024, 9:42 pm |
Abused Because of Asperger's? |
22 Nov 2024, 9:30 pm |
how can i handle my asperger boyfriend's anger? |
12 Nov 2024, 12:13 pm |