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

Post Reply New Topic

I'm not sure this is a good idea (sorry if it isn't) because I really don't want to cause any trouble, but after reading the last few posts in the thread "Critical of self diagnosis - You shouldn't be" I just wanted to make this poll to see what you all really think. It's a simple yes or no question: do you think self-diagnosis is okay/valid/a good thing?

Feel free to discuss it and explain why you voted the way you did, but please refrain from any kind of bashing. Be kind. Everyone's welcome here.

Thank you.

No. Only appropriately-trained and licensed mental-health professionals can make a valid diagnosis of an ASD. Online tests can not provide an objective ASD diagnosis, either.

Also, there may be other existing conditions that could mask symptoms or alter subjective perceptions and cause the person to render an incorrect self-diagnosis.

Finally, if any institution, corporation, or government grants special treatment or benefits to a person on the Autistic spectrum, then official documentation from the aforementioned mental-health professionals may be required.

So, while you may suspect that you are on the Spectrum, it is better for you to obtain an official diagnosis than to give the impression to employers, teachers, and legal authorities that you are just pretending to be Autistic to fraudulently obtain those benefits that officially-diagnosed people both need and deserve.

I suppose it's down to the individual. Personally, I take no offence to it. Why should I?

For me, I didn't self diagnose because it wouldn't have felt right for me, and I didn't know there was such a thing as self diagnosis.

I did suspect but it would never have sat well with me to declare I had it without an official diagnosis. But that's just me.

Self-diagnosis is not ok, it is invalid, and a bad thing.

This is good enough for me. Not every individual with an ASD needs the stamp of approval that a professional diagnosis provides. Many, including myself, find satisfaction in screening tests. Now that this study affirms the validity such tests, why not use them? Unless an individual needs certain benefits or supports that only a professional diagnosis provides, the only other difference between a professional diagnosis and a self diagnosis based on a screening test is the cost and time involved with a professional. And, as I have written elsewhere, for every psychology professional who graduated first in his or her class, there is another who graduated last. But, the last-in-the-class professional probably charges as much as the first-in-the-class despite the wide disparity of knowledge and qualifications.

I believe that self diagnoses should include a detailed list of lifelong characteristics and a few factor diagnoses with the screening and factor tests, but with the NEO PI-R screening test showing accurate results compared to professional diagnoses, my desired evidence would probably be more than enough to match the conclusion of a professional.

I basically agree with everything above. It's always better to get an actual diagnosis if you think you have it to a degree where you might need paperwork to cover yourself. Otherwise, it's just self-speculation.

While I generally agree that it's most helpful for an individual to get a proper diagnosis, I cannot criticize those without one, because I was self-diagnosed for two years, and know how hard it can be to find the time, money, or a properly qualified individual to do the testing with; it's never as simple as turning around and saying, "I want a diagnosis". Those diagnosed in childhood don't realise how lucky they are.

I would also point out that, as long as a person isn't trying to obtain services or other legal/government support, what does it really matter whether or not they have a piece of paper that declares them to be officially autistic? Aside from the attention seekers who would use their self diagnosis as a means of exploiting others for undeserved sympathy and support (individuals, I would point out, whom I have yet to come across, even online), I don't really see who it's hurting. I would also point out that diagnosed people could use their official label in the same manner, so it has little to do with self diagnosers "muddying the pool" and making autistics look bad, as the media seems to claim.

It's not really a yes/no answer as there are too many variables.

But its good to remember that no one knows what's going on in a person's head as well as that person. And sometimes getting a diagnosis is not always a practical option (ie. it would mean losing your job/career).

Last edited by Toy_Soldier on 30 Nov 2014, 3:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

As I state on a different thread yesterday:

I have had the good fortune of having a good psychiatrist who knows something about ASD and who listens. If a person can have a professional diagnoses from a mental healthcare professional - I would suggest they should. But from what I am hearing there are three major problems that people run into with that:

1. Many psychologist, psychiatrist or therapist don't know ANYTHING about ASD

2. Many psychologist, psychiatrist or therapist don't listen - they make assumptions.

3. For many people it is expensive and the cost is prohibitive.

I am very lucky that I have a psychiatrist who does listen and knows something about ASD and I have the coverage to pay for it. Not everyone is so fortunate. I understand that. Not everyone here does, unfortunately.

However, for those who are as fortunate as me and many others here - if you have access to a good psychiatrist, psychologist or therapist who knows something about ASD and who listens and if you have the means to afford it or means to obtain coverage for it - by all means I think one should get a professional diagnosis.

But since there is no autism bacteria that can be observed under the microscope or no x-ray or brain scan that can give a 100% absolutely neutral confirmation, I would say that unless one is profoundly and obviously classic autistic or a living Asperger's stereotype like the character in the movie, "Adam" - neither a professional of self-diagnosis is an absolute. I believe I have Autism because my shrink says I do and has diagnosed me preliminarily as such and is preparing for a final assessment. I fit the criteria as described in the DSM IV and V. Multiple tests say I am. All the people who have observed me the most over a long period of time who also know something about autism think I do. But we are not talking about a condition that in its more mild forms has an absolutely neutral criteria like diagnosing malaria or small pox.

Maybe. Perhaps I should've added a "not sure" option. Oh well, too late now.

Short version of my other threads on this topic

I recommend for older adults in the USA
If you have access (meaning both money and location wise) to a expert in Adult Autism, get the diagnosis.
I realize for a person who is doing well and does not have a psychologically need for professional validation and with no adult services a diagnosis is useless now. But do it as insurance. You don't know that the constant "passing" won't suddenly get to you in a really bad way one day. You will be stuck with 2 kids in college, no job and now have to first start a months or years long process.

No access to expert
Self diagnose rather them take a chance that you will be likely be wrongly or not diagnosed by generalists. You might get lucky the first time and get someone who has a clue, but most likely will be misdiagnosed and may have to go through several people before you get somebody with a clue. If that happens it might be very damaging to be repeatedly denied If you somehow have the money and time to get to the third or fourth person a diagnoses probably won't feel legitimate because you "diagnosis shopped"

No, it's a bad thing, invalid. Only a professional diagnosis is good, and valid.

What about for those who cannot afford it or don't have access to a proper professional? Praise the Lord - Al hum dallah - I do. But many do not.

I agree with this. Professional diagnosis is obviously good. Self diagnosis is legally invalid and has a high degree of uncertainty.

But if someone comes to suspect very strongly that they are autistic and there are obstacles to obtaining a diagnosis, I do not see that there is harm in proceeding as if they were autistic, in terms of self-awareness about limitations and developing work-arounds and so on. I don't see any positive aspect to telling such a person, "you must assume that you are not autistic until such time as you are professionally diagnosed." There is potential for harm in that and no benefit, so what's the point.

In my own case, I could not have been satisfied without a professional diagnosis. The self questioning and continual uncertainty and the way my mind kept going over things that seemed to point to autism and to the reality that others saw me very differently than I saw myself created an intolerable internal pressure that could only be relieved by professional diagnosis.

I don't see the muddying the waters thing at all if only because in my experience it isn't cool and no one discloses it. The only time a person told me about her own autism, it was in a closed room in a private meeting. I did not understand the motivation behind this disclosure until I began to expect that I was also autistic and then it occurred to me that she was trying to tell me that she suspected this in me, which she later confirmed.

The idea that people lie about this for attention or to be cool is alien to my experience. It isn't cool in the places I go and no one discloses in public or is an "out" autistic. There is no support group for autistic people at work, though there is one for parents of autistic children. There is zero gain.

The whole idea that people would do this for social advantage of some kind seems childish to me, in that it only seems to make sense in the weird social context of school. Adult life is just not like that, in my experience.

I don't like it, I am sure people can be almost certain in themselves that they are autistic, but I don't like the idea of them saying they are self diagnosed, because people cannot know or be diagnosed properly until they get professionally tested, that's why I could never call myself self diagnosed, because regardless of how certain I am that I have it, I can't say that I am diagnosed via my own observations because its too subjective, even professional psychologists can't diagnose themselves. I don't really know how anyone can say they do have it without a professional opinion.

that's not to say that they cannot be certain but objectively they can't be diagnosed via themselves its just not possible

I voted yes, but I think it's more complicated than that. I think it's OK, but it needs to be taken very seriously. You need to educate yourself a lot on the issue and be aware of areas where your own perspective is limited or potentially biased.

I'd say you also shoulder a bit more responsibility about how you use that DX than if it's done by a professional (ie probably not a good idea to blast the news out on FB).

Ultimately I think self DX and professional DX work best as compliments to each other rather than replacements. I understand there are often obstacles to getting a professional DX, but I think people should always keep that door open and seek out an informed third party perspective if ever becomes feasible.