Board index › General Discussion › General Autism Discussion

Is self-diagnosis okay/valid/a good thing?

Page 14 of 39 [ 615 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17 ... 39  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Is self-diagnosis okay/valid/a good thing?
Yes 68%  68%  [ 100 ]
No 32%  32%  [ 47 ]
Total votes : 147

yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

08 Dec 2014, 8:30 pm

btbnnyr wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:

Diagnostic criteria for autism are not primarily defined by introspection, but that doesn't mean that self-report can't be part of the professional diagnosis process. Self-report generally is part of the process for HFA adults. What I said was not a lie.


I did not suggest they where...also self report IS part of the diagnoses process, and considered an important part of it along side the outside observation, observation from people who have known you growing up, and then the various cognition tests and what not are all part of the diagnoses process.

So to say diagnoses is not based on introspection is a lie as that is actually a rather major part of the process.


No, I did not lie.
If you look at the autism diagnostic criteria, you can see that autism is not defined by introspection.
If it were, the criteria would be a list of how autistic people think inside their minds instead of how they behave for others to observe.
I have said many times that self-report is part of the diagnostic process, but introspection does not define autism and is unlikely to in future.


None of the things you mention define autism either...those are all just parts of the diagnostic process just like the introspection/ self report of symptoms. Though DSM criterias are basic symptom lists and not very in depth at all hence why they cannot simply check off a list of DSM symptoms to make a diagnoses.


I said that autism is currently defined by clinically observed behaviors, as they are in DSM or ICD criteria and clinical observation tests like ADOS. You can question the criteria and tests, but you cannot claim that autism is defined by introspection when it is defined by behavior.


Well... you cant have one without the other now can you? I don't believe you either.


I don't understand what you said about having one without the other. What is one, and what is the other?


It cannot be defined by behavior without introspection.



btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

08 Dec 2014, 8:34 pm

yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:

Diagnostic criteria for autism are not primarily defined by introspection, but that doesn't mean that self-report can't be part of the professional diagnosis process. Self-report generally is part of the process for HFA adults. What I said was not a lie.


I did not suggest they where...also self report IS part of the diagnoses process, and considered an important part of it along side the outside observation, observation from people who have known you growing up, and then the various cognition tests and what not are all part of the diagnoses process.

So to say diagnoses is not based on introspection is a lie as that is actually a rather major part of the process.


No, I did not lie.
If you look at the autism diagnostic criteria, you can see that autism is not defined by introspection.
If it were, the criteria would be a list of how autistic people think inside their minds instead of how they behave for others to observe.
I have said many times that self-report is part of the diagnostic process, but introspection does not define autism and is unlikely to in future.


None of the things you mention define autism either...those are all just parts of the diagnostic process just like the introspection/ self report of symptoms. Though DSM criterias are basic symptom lists and not very in depth at all hence why they cannot simply check off a list of DSM symptoms to make a diagnoses.


I said that autism is currently defined by clinically observed behaviors, as they are in DSM or ICD criteria and clinical observation tests like ADOS. You can question the criteria and tests, but you cannot claim that autism is defined by introspection when it is defined by behavior.


Well... you cant have one without the other now can you? I don't believe you either.


I don't understand what you said about having one without the other. What is one, and what is the other?


It cannot be defined by behavior without introspection.


This is becoming meaningless.
I didn't have introspection or communication of such when I was a non-verbal child.
All people had were observations of my behaviors.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

08 Dec 2014, 8:36 pm

NiceCupOfTea wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
NiceCupOfTea wrote:
And to anybody still confused by this post, the key word is define. Go to any reputable autism website and look up a list of the characteristics of autism/Asperger's. Most behaviours will be observable from the outside to astute observers. How do you think non-verbal children get diagnosed? They don't have the luxury of being able to "introspect" and go on and on about themselves at great length, unlike half the adults on WP.


A lot of non-verbal people with autism can communicate via typing, aside from that though obviously in their case outside observation has to be relied on moreso than a verbal person with autism..unless of course they are able to type out what they are thinking in which case they can go into detail.


I think you've missed out a key word in my post - "children". More specifically, very young children or older children who may or may not be verbal. Even if they are verbal, that doesn't indicate a capacity for self-reflection. Even NT children don't have much insight into their own behaviour; abstract thought doesn't properly develop until adolescence.


You people surely cannot be serious to even think for one second that anyone could believe that a child can self diagnose?



btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

08 Dec 2014, 8:40 pm

I think you missed the point about the non-verbal children.
The point is that autism is defined by behaviors, which can be observed in children and adults who can communicate or can't communicate about what goes on inside their minds.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


Adamantium
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2013
Age: 1024
Gender: Female
Posts: 5,863
Location: Erehwon

08 Dec 2014, 8:41 pm

yournamehere wrote:
It cannot be defined by behavior without introspection.


But it can--they can diagnose people without the ability to communicate their introspective experiences.
And it is in DSM 5:
Criterion A is about social communication and does not require introspection.
Criterion B is about restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests or activities and does not require introspection.
Criterion C is about the observed symptoms being present from the early stages of development and requires no introspection.
Criterion D is about significant functional impairment and requires no introspection.
Criterion E is about the symptoms not being better explained by another diagnosis, again introspection is not needed.

This is the way it is.



kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

08 Dec 2014, 9:08 pm

I wasn't able to convey any "introspection," really, until I reached adolescence. I just said what was on my mind at that moment. I didn't even have a concept of having "something on my mind" during my childhood. I didn't have what is termed "meta-awareness" whatsoever until I reached the age of about 14.



Last edited by kraftiekortie on 08 Dec 2014, 9:16 pm, edited 2 times in total.

yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

08 Dec 2014, 9:10 pm

Adamantium wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
TTRSage wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
You are authority on you, but autism specialists are authorities on autism.


Not necessarily... they only know about it by second hand information at best.


Autism is defined from the outside by behavior, not by introspection from first-person perspective.
In future, as the definitions improve, it will likely be defined by clinician-observed behavior, objectively measured behavior, and possibly patterns of brain activity.
But it is unlikely to become primarily defined by introspection.


What you just said can be easily defined as a form of manipulation. There are other words I can attatch to this psychology behavior that come right out of personality disorder traits. It could borderline a possible disorder. For one creating dependancy issues. I will stop there.

I'm going to call it PDS. Psychology Disorder Syndrome. :lol:

I do believe that these things should be primarily defined by introspection. At least in my case as an adult. It will keep the cats from playing with mice do to speak. This way it would require information, and support. It would be better than having no support, nothing to go by, and the need for the patient to provide an unreasonable amount of cash, because insurance does not provide, and psychologists have nothing to go by. Starting from scratch.


I don't understand your logic about manipulation at all.

it seems to me that there are three statements in btbnnyr's comment:
1. Autism is defined from the perspective of an outside observer.
2. It is not likely that autism will be defined by the introspective first-person perception of an autistic person.
3. In future the observation of diagnosticians may be supplemented by objective behavior measurements or brain scans.

None of these seems manipulative.

Also, your comment about knowing autism by second hand information at best is incorrect. Clinicians and researchers involved in defining and diagnosing autism know it by direct observation. This is not second hand information.

What you are saying could only make sense if you were saying "how it feels to be autistic is more important than what autistic behavior looks like" and that may be true for you--but it's answering a different question than "what is autism and how can it be identified in a person."

It's great if introspection helps you, but how would it create diagnostic criteria? And how do the criteria listed by btbnnyr constitute any kind of manipulation?


An outside observer can catagorize you, put you into a group, and tell you, and everyone else how you think, and the way that you behave. It can steer you in the wrong direction. It happens.



btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

08 Dec 2014, 9:14 pm

While introspection is unlikely to become part of autism definition, cognition is likely to become more important in autism diagnosis or classification in future. Objective behavioral measurements of specific cognitive functions will supplement clinically observed behaviors, maybe even replace some parts like ados.

Anyone can tell anyone else how they think the other person thinks and acts, professional diagnosis doesn't have a monopoly on that.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 87,510
Location: Queens, NYC

08 Dec 2014, 10:10 pm

Don't you agree that people with autism differ widely in their overall "cognition?"



yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

08 Dec 2014, 11:04 pm

Adamantium wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
It cannot be defined by behavior without introspection.


But it can--they can diagnose people without the ability to communicate their introspective experiences.
And it is in DSM 5:
Criterion A is about social communication and does not require introspection.
Criterion B is about restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests or activities and does not require introspection.
Criterion C is about the observed symptoms being present from the early stages of development and requires no introspection.
Criterion D is about significant functional impairment and requires no introspection.
Criterion E is about the symptoms not being better explained by another diagnosis, again introspection is not needed.

This is the way it is.


I was referring to any kind of self evaluation. You need to understand your behavior.



yournamehere
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Oct 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,673
Location: Roaming 150 square miles somewhere in north america

08 Dec 2014, 11:09 pm

btbnnyr wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
yournamehere wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:

Diagnostic criteria for autism are not primarily defined by introspection, but that doesn't mean that self-report can't be part of the professional diagnosis process. Self-report generally is part of the process for HFA adults. What I said was not a lie.


I did not suggest they where...also self report IS part of the diagnoses process, and considered an important part of it along side the outside observation, observation from people who have known you growing up, and then the various cognition tests and what not are all part of the diagnoses process.

So to say diagnoses is not based on introspection is a lie as that is actually a rather major part of the process.


No, I did not lie.
If you look at the autism diagnostic criteria, you can see that autism is not defined by introspection.
If it were, the criteria would be a list of how autistic people think inside their minds instead of how they behave for others to observe.
I have said many times that self-report is part of the diagnostic process, but introspection does not define autism and is unlikely to in future.


None of the things you mention define autism either...those are all just parts of the diagnostic process just like the introspection/ self report of symptoms. Though DSM criterias are basic symptom lists and not very in depth at all hence why they cannot simply check off a list of DSM symptoms to make a diagnoses.


I said that autism is currently defined by clinically observed behaviors, as they are in DSM or ICD criteria and clinical observation tests like ADOS. You can question the criteria and tests, but you cannot claim that autism is defined by introspection when it is defined by behavior.


Well... you cant have one without the other now can you? I don't believe you either.


I don't understand what you said about having one without the other. What is one, and what is the other?


It cannot be defined by behavior without introspection.


This is becoming meaningless.
I didn't have introspection or communication of such when I was a non-verbal child.
All people had were observations of my behaviors.


You were an easy read. Some others are complicated. People figured you out right away I'm sure. I am sorry it was soo difficult for you. I was torn between two sides if nobody knows what. And that has not changed. It is extremely unnerving.



Rocket123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2012
Age: 61
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,188
Location: Lost in Space

08 Dec 2014, 11:20 pm

Persimmonpudding wrote:
Well, your mentality is very dangerous and could potentially be lethal. You need to understand that there are disreputable psychiatric practices out there that go to strong antipsychotic medications without detour or put children on strong stimulant medication without performing empirical tests to make sure they don't have a condition for which strong stimulant medication is contraindicated. Your kind of thinking could actually get someone killed.

I insist that interim self-assessment, combined with seeking out a reputable clinic that is equipped to use appropriate diagnostic instruments, is the safest route.

I am somewhat confused. Who is going to perform that interim self-assessment on the children you are trying to protect? The parents? Or the children themselves?



Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,829
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

08 Dec 2014, 11:59 pm

btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
btbnnyr wrote:

Diagnostic criteria for autism are not primarily defined by introspection, but that doesn't mean that self-report can't be part of the professional diagnosis process. Self-report generally is part of the process for HFA adults. What I said was not a lie.


I did not suggest they where...also self report IS part of the diagnoses process, and considered an important part of it along side the outside observation, observation from people who have known you growing up, and then the various cognition tests and what not are all part of the diagnoses process.

So to say diagnoses is not based on introspection is a lie as that is actually a rather major part of the process.


No, I did not lie.
If you look at the autism diagnostic criteria, you can see that autism is not defined by introspection.
If it were, the criteria would be a list of how autistic people think inside their minds instead of how they behave for others to observe.
I have said many times that self-report is part of the diagnostic process, but introspection does not define autism and is unlikely to in future.


None of the things you mention define autism either...those are all just parts of the diagnostic process just like the introspection/ self report of symptoms. Though DSM criterias are basic symptom lists and not very in depth at all hence why they cannot simply check off a list of DSM symptoms to make a diagnoses.


I said that autism is currently defined by clinically observed behaviors, as they are in DSM or ICD criteria and clinical observation tests like ADOS. You can question the criteria and tests, but you cannot claim that autism is defined by introspection when it is defined by behavior.


But it is not defined by behavior, autistic behavior is defined as autism if it exists to a significant enough degree for a diagnoses...introspection also does not define it. But self report/introspection as well as clinically observed behaviors are both important parts of the diagnoses process...I am not claiming it is defined by introspection. If you read back I already explained I worded that bit wrong .


_________________
We won't go back.


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,829
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

09 Dec 2014, 12:02 am

NiceCupOfTea wrote:

I think you've missed out a key word in my post - "children". More specifically, very young children or older children who may or may not be verbal. Even if they are verbal, that doesn't indicate a capacity for self-reflection. Even NT children don't have much insight into their own behaviour; abstract thought doesn't properly develop until adolescence.


Even so getting some kind of feedback from the individual receiving the diagnoses is certainly a valid and important part of the process. I don't get how I missed any key words even when the diagnoses is for a child their input is also important not just observed behaviors.


_________________
We won't go back.


btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

09 Dec 2014, 1:20 am

I have to clarify the following:
Autism is defined by behaviors, which is why clinical observation is required to diagnose autism.
Introspection by self-report questionnaires is usually a part of the diagnostic process for HFA adults/adolescents who can do self-report questionnaires, but not for children.
Autism is not defined primarily by introspection, and it is not diagnosed primarily based on introspection either.

Anything else that anyone makes up as being defined or diagnosed by introspection and not behavior and called autism is not autism as it is defined and diagnosed by clinicians and researchers.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


ChangelingGirl
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Sep 2007
Age: 38
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,640
Location: Netherlands

09 Dec 2014, 1:28 am

Just sayin', introspection was removed from diagnosis in 1980 because it isn't scientifically useful. I agree that cognition is, as insofar it is measureable by such things a s neuropsych tests.

When I was professionally diagnosed, I had been self-diagnosed for a few years but still the diagnositcian said I didn't have insight in my condition.