What could be the positives and negatives of people with ASD

Post Reply New Topic

Assessing others for ASD?

autism is the uneven development of our neurology. Not a single one of us will be the same, so we can't class or lump traits. We will all have struggles due to our individual neurologies, but we can not say "autistic people have "this" negative trait" or "autistic people have "that" positive trait". It just doesn't work like that. Is there another question behind this question?

The "headline" reads "could there be positives and negatives to...ASD"

But then in the original post it is revealed that what you're really asking is "can autistic folks be used to...diagnose other autistics?".

Its a weird question.

Are non medically trained folks with bronchitis better at diagnosing other folks with bronchitis than are non medically trained folks without bronchitis?

Ditto any other health condition (psychosis, bipolar, tennis elbow, leprosy, etc).

The question itself makes no sense.

Yes/no.

Autism IS the seems too confident in aetiology.

I keep seeing posts on social media of people saying theyre autistic and this is why, this is it. In a monolithic way. Even when people say "I do that" declaring this person from a comment to be ASD. ADHD seems "worse" for personal experience.

If this is true would a person with ASD be able to spot others better and improve misdiagnosis or would there be an increase in false positives for people sharing traits and believing them to be masked?

I saw a post stating that the ADOS is poor for women, they wouldn't provide the evidence for this and started to claim shame and denial of existence. I just want to see the evidence outside an opinion. They also went on to say that the restricted behaviours are a distinction between ASD and a personality disorder. When you look into the ADOS that would have been used for her is the Module 4 that does not score restricted behaviours so it doesnt add up.

This is an example of things I've seen repeated that clincians don't understand autism properly and its this or that and theres a collective of people whom seemingly have a better insight into it. Although when people are diagnosed by a clinician this seems quite powerful to them.

I guess the question is mulit layeredIS there some greater insight or is there a shifting of things when angry about not being diagnosed?

The DSM/ICD shows pretty good concurrent validity between diagnosing clinicians but is that a poor consensus based on limited criteria?

Who is getting it wrong? Are clincians that bad? Do people have a greater understanding? Why do so many people think they are ASD or esp ADHD? Are the figures way off? Is it a mixture? Whats actually going on?

Theres a character limit. But it appears you understood the question but chose not to. Your analogies are poor. Bronchitis is not sn observational behavioural diagnosis that is "masked" or "camoflauged"

The examples in the thread of "am I a level 1 or level 2" thread are good examples

No.

Its because you have failed to explain the question.

Why would autism be unique in that regard? Why would autistics be better at diagnosing other autistics than folks with bronchitis etc .

If it were "sociopathy" then I think "it takes one to know one" would be a factor. Sociopaths probably are good at recognizing their own and would be good on a panel diagnosis other sociopaths because sociopathy involves deliberate deception..

I can't assess or diagnose autism. I am not a medical professional. But as an autistic person I can share my traits and experiences, and help others identify who may be wondering whether they themselves are autistic.

I can't really tell you, because I'm not trained in the field of psychology. Besides, I know nothing.