Why do they diagnonse/label us?

Post Reply New Topic

1 We aren't the "ideal human being"

2 We're smart and they're jealous of it

3 They see us as a threat to their boring way of life

4 To divide society more

5 To screw us over



Many other reasons but these are all I can think of as of now.

Doctors like to label things that are out of the "norm" or in the minority. They do it to make money. Some of them are so ridiculous I just laugh at them. Eg. Gender Identity Disorder, Adult Baby syndrome, Stockholm syndrome, Lima syndrome, Shy eating, Pregnorexia, and any other conditions that are fetishes.

Also what I think is ridiculous is taking branches from a tree and making it a new condition. That is what they do with symptoms of a condition and make it a condition of its own. I think semantic Pragmatic disorder is ridiculous because think it's basically AS and it also sounded like a learning disability mixed with AS. I bet they basically rediscovered AS in 1983

1. pff
2. a doctor actually took that seriously enough to call it a disorder??
3. this is just a weird phenomenon. But a medical disorder?
4. no idea what that is (edit: just looked it up. Oh.)
5. lolwtf
6. Is that what it sounds like? XD

....just wow.
Doctors need to do something more useful than name all this crazy stuff.

That's a stupid question. If you need services or anything you need some kind of diagnosis. You need to be labeled something to get treatment and understanding for things. That's kind of saying, "why diagnose/label someone with cancer?"

I'm glad i got a dx. Nearing 50 and a life of s**t...at least now i know why things were the way they were for so long.

Complaining about a dx is a luxury for those who probably have had the benefit of an early dx and not lived a life of hell without one? (might have lived a life of hell with one also...but i can only speak from personal experience. )

Semantic-Pragmantic Disorder is now diagnosed mostly as either AS, HFA, or PDD-NOS, for the most part the diagnosis does not exist in the US anymore because of the DSM. The term was created at a time when neither AS or PDD-NOS were not in the DSM, and AS was very narrow in its criteria. Take in mind...I was diagnosed in 1985. Semantic-Pragmatic Disorder was a new concept, and so was NLD.

Both SPD and NLD were initially discovered as Learning Disorders, the links to autism are a more recent discovery. To the original people diagnosing me, they just saw learning disorders, they really struggled to link it up to my behavior, and autism was rather narrow, instead of being seen as a spectrum. These days I would probably be diagnosed with AS and NLD, or PDD-NOS and NLD...or something else. But I understand the diagnostic difficulties that were out there, largely because I lived them.

Listen, I am glad I got diagnosed when I did, because the occupational and speech therapy did help. I realize that without the diagnosis, the manifestation of the learning disorders would have never been treated.

How about so we can get the assistance we need?

I got diagnosed to get help finding a job, and that's what I'm getting. I'm glad I'm diagnosed, even if I wasn't I'd still be the same person, though I'd feel dumb and slow.

Well, it makes sense to have a few diagnoses, but I think it's just been divided into so many little ones that it's ludicrous. It's good to have "autism" and even to divide it into high and low, for the sake of being able to quickly communicate what the condition is, but more than that hardly seems necessary to me. At that point, they should be dealing with the specific traits of the individual person. Anyway, why can't they help someone WITHOUT a diagnosis? "This person has problems with speech." "Oh, well then let's send them to speech class." What's so hard about that?

Because without knowing the details regarding the assets and deficits it significantly hampers clinical understanding. I am not saying folks should be fixed ala ABA, but I am saying it does help for everything from Occupational Therapy, teaching techniques, and counseling. Diagnosis, clear and specific diagnosis, that reflects various manifestations, leads to handling these issues effectively, instead of failing to address the problems, because of lack of diagnostic clarity. Everybody manifests differently, so having a route to deal with various manifestations help.

Trust me, I came from a period when autism was just high or low, it did not help. The criteria was to narrow, and alot of people who needed help didn't get it. Also people like me, they were honestly perplexed with because we did not fit neatly into the narrow little autistic box that was around during that time. The recognition of different diagnosis and the links to the spectrum has HELPED more than it has hurt. Going back to the days of oversimplification would ultimately be harmful, because the diagnostic categories does help. Because when you get into the atypical part of the spectrum, manifestations do splinter quite a bit.

But they could just shift their idea of high and low autism to include all the little irregular splinters. Isn't autism different for everyone anyway? So couldn't they just write any specific traits in your report or whatever? I see the importance of understanding the fine details of a condition, but I still don't see a reason for the NAMES. They seem, to me, to create psychological barriers. In doctors as well as patients.

It is human nature to categorize everything.

I work in the library and information science field. You gain a great deal of respect for the importance of categorization and the importance of doing it. Oversimplification may sound good on its face, but leads to major problems when practically applied. Maybe its my logical thought process, but the diagnostic categorizations make perfect sense to me. One categorizes to gain a better understanding of the world, categorization is at the core of many sciences to explain and differentiate observable phenomenon. Psychology and medicine is no different than any other science, they are explaining observable phenomenon, that is what a diagnostic manual is for. By observing it, they can use it to assist those in need. This is not about some hidden agenda, to make people feel different, it is really about the scientific practice of medicine.

I had a young man stand in a group of Autism activists and solemnly declare that he had gone through a life of hell because he was almost TWENTY when he was DXed. Later I shook his hand and told him how f*****g lucky he was he learned when he was younger and in a time when it can really matter in his life. We chatted a bit and I felt less jealous and he felt less deprived. It was a good conversation, we made a good connection about our lives.

all we have are our 'personal experiences', Millie. Everything else is conjecture and supposition. (But it would be lovely to not feel so foolish about my understanding of life)


Merle

I think having a label can help you if you decide to go to University or College and get you the support you need.
Teachers are more likely to understand (hopefully) how you function...
it also can help, when you throw a meltdown in public places and you have an 'alert' that tells people your AS and not totally "bananas", so cops who are overeager to do their job do not taser you to death...
I wish my son had a label so I do not have to worry about him...
My brother was found dead last year in his apartment, alcohol and prescription drug over dose...he was dead for 3 days , before someone found him...
I know now he was more then likely on the spectrum, he never did...
maybe he could have get the help he really needed...
he did not deserve to die like this, nobody does.
I miss him !

A) Because they're afraid of others who behave differently.
This could be because your "non-verbal dialect" is different to theirs.

B) They have to call it something.

C) The current education system emphasises social participation; and cooperation at the expense of individual discovery and exploration of the physical environment.

Perhaps if the classrooms hadn't been as crowded and the social expectations hadn't been as high, I'd have fared better.

The only reason why I was assessed for AS at all was because I acted out when there were too many people or there was too much noise.

If I'd cooperated and not acted out, they wouldn't have seen my behaviour as a problem and they wouldn't have labeled me: simple.
Where I live, they have to perceive something as "wrong" before they can label.

Unfortunately, not in my case.

I was stigmatised and ostracised.

I received a lot of misunderstanding and the treatment I received was strange and done on a shoe-string budget.

In fact, I was treated and respected far better without than with the label.

It's help in my case. Without said label, I can't get the help that I need to survive in this modern and social world.

I wouldn't bother with a label otherwise, and I'd say I didn't have it, even if I exhibited many of the symptoms.

I'm effectively cured of OCD via CBT and medication, and I don't have it anymore, even if it's a lifelong condition, it doesn't affect me now.