If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Medical Xpress)   Asperger's dropped from revised diagnosis manual... SO STOP LOOKING AT ME LIKE THAT, GEEZ   (medicalxpress.com) divider line 100
    More: PSA, Asperger's, diagnostic, mental disorders, gender dysphoria, spectrum disorders, dyslexic, psychiatric medication, Battle Creek  
•       •       •

3861 clicks; posted to Geek » on 02 Dec 2012 at 4:26 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



100 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-02 10:24:09 PM
...Why would they have been considering dropping Dyslexia? Is there a dyslexia controversy I wasn't aware of?

/had to retype that kick three times so I'm getting a sentence.
 
2012-12-02 11:07:59 PM

Methadone Girls: milsorgen: And are you going to be there when the time comes to shove your little snowflake out the door to unload him on the public school or community college systems so that those of us who are paying attention to (or paying for) our classes (they are teachers not babysitters you see) won't have to deal with outbursts and disruptions.

my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.

As for my son disrupting your life for a short period of time each day you go to class. Man the fark up. I'll bet the "normal" smart ass kid disrupts your class even more than the autistic kids, but that's okay with you because you get to laugh at the smart ass's jokes. The autistic kids are shuffled out of the classroom when they're having an outburst as quick as the teachers aide can move them. Try to have some compassion for their situation. You might even grow as a human being.


Off your child will never be able to function in society without a massive amount of supervision and assistance, you eventually need to admit, at least to yourself, that you don't have a child: you have a hobby. One that you hold on to because it makes you feel special and you get off on the martyrdom. But don't kid yourself for a minute that your child ifs anything but a burden on society.
 
2012-12-02 11:35:09 PM

Lusiphur: Methadone Girls: milsorgen: And are you going to be there when the time comes to shove your little snowflake out the door to unload him on the public school or community college systems so that those of us who are paying attention to (or paying for) our classes (they are teachers not babysitters you see) won't have to deal with outbursts and disruptions.

my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.

As for my son disrupting your life for a short period of time each day you go to class. Man the fark up. I'll bet the "normal" smart ass kid disrupts your class even more than the autistic kids, but that's okay with you because you get to laugh at the smart ass's jokes. The autistic kids are shuffled out of the classroom when they're having an outburst as quick as the teachers aide can move them. Try to have some compassion for their situation. You might even grow as a human being.

Off your child will never be able to function in society without a massive amount of supervision and assistance, you eventually need to admit, at least to yourself, that you don't have a child: you have a hobby. One that you hold on to because it makes you feel special and you get off on the martyrdom. But don't kid yourself for a minute that your child ifs anything but a burden on society.


Wow.
 
2012-12-02 11:36:15 PM

BronyMedic: To be fair, Aspergers' Syndrome is used by a lot of Internet Doctors to diagnose themselves so they can have an excuse to continue to act like complete asses to everyone.


True, but it's also used the opposite way: by people who can't think of any reason you wouldn't like them or be fascinated by every little thing you say... unless of course you have some kind of mental disorder.

Yeah, thanks, you figured me out, friend-of-my-wife-who-I-met-twenty-minutes-ago. I especially appreciate the way you blurted it out in a large group of our mutual friends at a party, and took the fact that I wasn't amused as further evidence that I just don't understand how normal people like you see things.

Still more thanks for following up with my wife with that valuable tip: that she could just take an online quiz as though she were me and that would confirm your diagnosis once and for all.

Am I doing this "sarcasm" thing right? Your human speech patterns and rhetorical devices are so difficult for me, since as an Aspie I am (to hear you tell it) somewhere between a pocket calculator and a sociopath in terms of my mental development. For instance, if I want to sarcastically suggest that your master's degree in art does not really qualify you to diagnose me, I should say that I think it does, right? Likewise, if you're basing your diagnosis on things you observed in your one boyfriend who you're pretty sure also had Asperger's--you know, the one who gravitated to that most traditional of Aspie careers, elementary school teacher--and I want to suggest that I think you're full of shiat, I should just nod my head and say, "sounds legit." Right?

/I never said I didn't have rage issues
 
2012-12-02 11:44:50 PM

Lusiphur: Off your child will never be able to function in society without a massive amount of supervision and assistance, you eventually need to admit, at least to yourself, that you don't have a child: you have a hobby. One that you hold on to because it makes you feel special and you get off on the martyrdom. But don't kid yourself for a minute that your child ifs anything but a burden on society.


Freudian slip or sekret eugenicist?

Either way an utter WOB and a total POS. 

Grow a soul, dickweed.
 
2012-12-02 11:59:23 PM

BronyMedic: That's a huge thing for the transgender community. It means it's one step closer to treating transgenderism as a birth defect or medical condition, and not as a mental illness.


Assuming that the only issue is gender (in contrast to the slew of intersexed conditions), how is it not a mental illness? The bigger issue here is not the stigmatization of gender identity disorders, but the continued stigmatization of mental disorders as something that's not a medical issue. How is this chemical/wiring disorder any different than the other chemical/wiring disorders covered my the DSM?
 
2012-12-03 12:02:05 AM

Methadone Girls: my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.


You know, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who thinks mental health care services need to be wrapped up in the same single-payer package we ought as a society be giving to everyone.

I also strongly feel that "Asperger syndrome" is a problem. No, not straight-up high-functioning autism or anything stronger than it on the spectrum...especially considering that unlike high-functioning autism, Asperger syndrome has no identifiable neurological, neurochemical, or genetic basis. For that, in combination with the extremely ad hoc, high rates of diagnosis, it does trip my BS detector as something dreamed up to sell designer drugs and excuse poor behavior or even worse socialization. It wouldn't be the first time psychiatrists have done that, nor am I convinced it will be the last.

Especially in light of the asspie phenomenon. No, I don't use that term in reference to actual people with high-functioning autism. I use it in reference to the "self diagnosed" people who use it as a convenient excuse to attention whore and act like complete farkwits, while trying to avoid any sense of accountability or responsibility. Yes, they are out there in spades, they are very obnoxious, absolutely detract from the trials and difficulties people who actually have autism face on a daily basis, and for that quite offensive and not to be tolerated.

I had to deal with that shiat all the way through my school years when the dumbshiat rednecks who constitute the overwhelming majority of where I live figger'd 'cuz I ain't into sports, drinkin' till I puked myself, and screwin' ever-thin' that moved, I must be one 'o them auties. I can't count the number of times my school system tried to have me diagnosed with some mental disorder, and put me in special education and on all kinds of drugs, on one hand. The year I graduated was the year Columbine happened, and I couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting two mush-brained teachers or administrators who assumed that because I was a quiet little bastard I was going to pack homemade ANFO and a TEC-9 to school instead of my books. Nope, turned out I was just a bookish little misanthrope who preferred to spend his time not acting like a complete idiot.

Honestly, ending "Asperger syndrome" as a disorder and rolling it into autism spectrum formally can only be a good thing. That way, there will be a formal basis for diagnosis beyond "well, you're just a little weird" (which is what the DSM V criteria for all practical purposes was), and a clear distinction between people who actually have autism, who need to be treated for it, and just people who suffer from poor socialization or other behavioral problems who may end up misdiagnosed thanks to utter lack of proper criteria. Moreover, there will be heightened accountability for psychiatrists to not make hasty diagnoses for the purposes of selling designer drugs or cater to parents' (or hell, schools') whim. Not to mention curtailing asspies, who detract from and are an insult to people who actually have autism.
 
2012-12-03 12:02:22 AM
Towards the end of the article, it mentions that its unfair that kids with pure autism get more special attention than those with aspergers ... Really? Don't suppose it has anything to do with classic autism being much more severe than aspergers, where most cases cant function independently, eh? Stereotypically speaking, anyway. It struck me as an odd statement. No offense to our ASD crowd. Just seemed like an apple-to-oranges thing.

Unrelated note - I wonder if I'll need to get my 8 year old re-evaluated. He has classic mostly nonverbal autism. From what I hear they're changing to a dual sliding scale method of classifying cases. I have a feeling people will expect me to know where he rests on it later down the line.
 
2012-12-03 12:03:05 AM

BronyMedic: To be fair, Aspergers' Syndrome is used by a lot of Internet Doctors to diagnose themselves so they can have an excuse to continue to act like complete asses to everyone.


If they were smart, they'd claim they were just INTJ.
 
2012-12-03 12:26:09 AM

JPINFV: BronyMedic: To be fair, Aspergers' Syndrome is used by a lot of Internet Doctors to diagnose themselves so they can have an excuse to continue to act like complete asses to everyone.

If they were smart, they'd claim they were just INTJ.


Hey, as an INTJ, I resemble those implications.
 
2012-12-03 12:26:27 AM

BronyMedic: In other news, there's this:

FTFA: -Eliminating the term "gender identity disorder." It has been used for children or adults who strongly believe that they were born the wrong gender. But many activists believe the condition isn't a disorder and say calling it one is stigmatizing. The term would be replaced with "gender dysphoria," which means emotional distress over one's gender. Supporters equated the change with removing homosexuality as a mental illness in the diagnostic manual, which happened decades ago.

That's a huge thing for the transgender community. It means it's one step closer to treating transgenderism as a birth defect or medical condition, and not as a mental illness.


But it is a mental illness because it affects their brain chemistry. Doesn't mean they're crazy. It still is what it is just not in an offensive stigma. Renaming it is entirely the right thing to do, and it is not just a mental disorder, but also, as you said, a birth defect or medical condition. Thing is, mental conditions are medical conditions as well. I still see what you mean.
 
2012-12-03 12:27:57 AM

BronyMedic: In other news, there's this:

FTFA: -Eliminating the term "gender identity disorder." It has been used for children or adults who strongly believe that they were born the wrong gender. But many activists believe the condition isn't a disorder and say calling it one is stigmatizing. The term would be replaced with "gender dysphoria," which means emotional distress over one's gender. Supporters equated the change with removing homosexuality as a mental illness in the diagnostic manual, which happened decades ago.

That's a huge thing for the transgender community. It means it's one step closer to treating transgenderism as a birth defect or medical condition, and not as a mental illness.


No, it doesn't put it one step closer. It's one step in the direction of getting help becoming more difficult. It'll be back to paying some dude $250 to do the surgery in his garage, stapling the spare parts to a piece of plywood until he can cut and reshape them with a boxcutter.

That's what you get when a real condition is removed from the DSM altogether. It is not partnered with an equivalent change / addition to the medical sciences, it's just left hanging. Precisely the fear described about aspergers people being no longer covered(which in reality were just re-classified).

There is no such re-classification in this case. Just a dropping of it altogether.

Whether it's a mental or physical thing, there is a real condition there, a condition that can cause self mutilation in private to suicide and a thousand lesser stresses and ostracism. Let's not eradicate what little understanding we do have of that, and help that we can get people, in the name of a few people who are upset that their image is tarnished by the millions that read the DSM because they'll latch onto anything to stir the outrage pot.

At least until it is covered fully by the medical fields, which, good luck with that.

That's what happens when the ignorant campaign for a change that is petty in the long run. Most of society does not even know what a DSM is, so the "stigmatizing" argument is dubious. Some few got offended, and want that offense removed. Coverage is coverage to those in need.

The condition, whatever it's root cause, leaves much of the medical community struggling in the dark, it becomes an undefined illness again, which makes getting help for it much more of a crapshoot and removes some of the actual protections that it would have, and does have, had under the DSM. As it stands now it covers mental help and physical change, sometimes that and more are needed.

Sure, the government in the US sucks, but you don't simply get rid of it, you need some replacement or something to serve in the interim, or gradual change in the right direction.

If the treatment remains the same, and coverage is offered, whatever, class it however the hell you want. Until then, you're taking opportunity from the mouths that need it the most.

Of course, coming from a brony, I do understand your happy go lucky ignorance.

Here's a newsflash. Health insurance companies are not nice people, and will do whatever they can in order to not cover something. Now, the US is just now getting around to even thinking about covering it's whole populace in some manner, and stumbling along badly. In this environment, you have a guy who "feels" he's the wrong gender; classing that as a mental problem is much better for the individual than not classing it at all.

When you get down to it, psychology has a better understanding of all of the ins and outs and patients needs when it comes to a condition that can cause ten kinds of depression and a thousand other emotional problems fairly unique to GID. It needs a mention in the DSM.

Classing transgender people who become suicidal as mentally healthy, because those who are not all that suicidal feel sleighted....

Yeah, that makes a lot of sense. Good luck in life pal, but man do I seriously fear for anyone falling under your "care".
 
2012-12-03 12:29:15 AM

Methadone Girls: milsorgen: And are you going to be there when the time comes to shove your little snowflake out the door to unload him on the public school or community college systems so that those of us who are paying attention to (or paying for) our classes (they are teachers not babysitters you see) won't have to deal with outbursts and disruptions.

my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.

As for my son disrupting your life for a short period of time each day you go to class. Man the fark up. I'll bet the "normal" smart ass kid disrupts your class even more than the autistic kids, but that's okay with you because you get to laugh at the smart ass's jokes. The autistic kids are shuffled out of the classroom when they're having an outburst as quick as the teachers aide can move them. Try to have some compassion for their situation. You might even grow as a human being.


That's because the autistic kids are more of a loose cannon than your average everyday failure of humanity. They get them the hell out ASAP, because they don't know their strength, or what they're going to do. That's the way it should be. I wouldn't want an autistic kid to lose his shiat in my nephew's 6th grade classroom and hurt someone just because you wanted him to feel more normal. No, it isn't fair for your kid, but life already hasn't been fair. It sucks, but that's how it is.
 
2012-12-03 12:49:15 AM

ParagonComplex: Thing is, mental conditions are medical conditions as well.


I wouldn't call them the same thing, but inextricably intertwined. Psychology, Psychiatry, and neurosurgery, etc. they're all part of a whole understanding, and woefully underdeveloped.

That's why it's a bum argument, this "stigmatism".

"Sick" is just sick. Doesn't imply fault, dirtiness, etc. Sure, some people stray really far from the norm and avoid anything they consider "sick". Calling it any other name is not going to change that.

The people who have serious issues with queers, retards, and coloreds, always will. You'll never change them(barring advances in science), it's time to maybe focus on getting help for those that need it. Sure, keep shunning the bigots, can't make it look accepted.

What's entertaining to me, is that being that much of a bigot is as much of a condition as anything else. Those are hyper active evolutionary tools surfacing, part of survival and breeding instincts. Can't blame them for how they feel all of the time, some of them are born that way.

If we worked harder on studying the sciences of the brain instead of bickering over the classifications used, we might, someday, be able to help the bigots and the transgendered in ways not thought possible.

/and before the claim is made
//not talking about the barbaric wishful thinking of brainwashing

Seriously, if we were to figure out the brain to such an extent that a 40 minute session with a therapist could make deep seated feelings of being in the wrong body(or distrust of those different from you) go away completely with no side effects(and no tricks, no shock therapy, etc), what's wrong with that if it were on a voluntary only basis?

A treatment that could benefit bigots that don't want to dwell on that as well as people with gender dysphoria... Isn't non-invasive, or least invasive, treatment sort of a highly sought after goal for the medical and psychological sciences?
 
2012-12-03 01:26:05 AM

semiotix: BronyMedic: To be fair, Aspergers' Syndrome is used by a lot of Internet Doctors to diagnose themselves so they can have an excuse to continue to act like complete asses to everyone.

True, but it's also used the opposite way: by people who can't think of any reason you wouldn't like them or be fascinated by every little thing you say... unless of course you have some kind of mental disorder.

Yeah, thanks, you figured me out, friend-of-my-wife-who-I-met-twenty-minutes-ago. I especially appreciate the way you blurted it out in a large group of our mutual friends at a party, and took the fact that I wasn't amused as further evidence that I just don't understand how normal people like you see things.

Still more thanks for following up with my wife with that valuable tip: that she could just take an online quiz as though she were me and that would confirm your diagnosis once and for all.

Am I doing this "sarcasm" thing right? Your human speech patterns and rhetorical devices are so difficult for me, since as an Aspie I am (to hear you tell it) somewhere between a pocket calculator and a sociopath in terms of my mental development. For instance, if I want to sarcastically suggest that your master's degree in art does not really qualify you to diagnose me, I should say that I think it does, right? Likewise, if you're basing your diagnosis on things you observed in your one boyfriend who you're pretty sure also had Asperger's--you know, the one who gravitated to that most traditional of Aspie careers, elementary school teacher--and I want to suggest that I think you're full of shiat, I should just nod my head and say, "sounds legit." Right?

/I never said I didn't have rage issues


Are you Mitt Romney?
 
2012-12-03 02:12:10 AM

that bosnian sniper: Methadone Girls: my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.

You know, I'm a bleeding heart liberal who thinks mental health care services need to be wrapped up in the same single-payer package we ought as a society be giving to everyone.

I also strongly feel that "Asperger syndrome" is a problem. No, not straight-up high-functioning autism or anything stronger than it on the spectrum...especially considering that unlike high-functioning autism, Asperger syndrome has no identifiable neurological, neurochemical, or genetic basis. For that, in combination with the extremely ad hoc, high rates of diagnosis, it does trip my BS detector as something dreamed up to sell designer drugs and excuse poor behavior or even worse socialization. It wouldn't be the first time psychiatrists have done that, nor am I convinced it will be the last.

Especially in light of the asspie phenomenon. No, I don't use that term in reference to actual people with high-functioning autism. I use it in reference to the "self diagnosed" people who use it as a convenient excuse to attention whore and act like complete farkwits, while trying to avoid any sense of accountability or responsibility. Yes, they are out there in spades, they are very obnoxious, absolutely detract from the trials and difficulties people who actually have autism face on a daily basis, and for that quite offensive and not to be tolerated.

I had to deal with that shiat all the way through my school years when the dumbshiat rednecks who constitute the overwhelming majority of where I live figger'd 'cuz I ain't into sports, drinkin' till I puked myself, and screwin' ever-thin' that moved, I must be one 'o them auties. I can't count the number of times my school system tried to have me diagnosed with some mental disorder, and put me in specia ...


What leads people like you to assume that they have encountered accurate samplings of the population such that they can skip looking at statistics and jump straight to deciding how things are based on the chip on their shoulder from their childhoods?

Why don't you deal with your own issues before judging thousands of people you've never met? You are upset that people who knew you made judgments about you and told you who/what you were, and now you judge large swaths of the population you've never met and have no real basis to judge except your hunches.

Bonus points for believing it may not exist because we haven't linked it to a gene or used what I can only assume you believe to be accurate real-time measuring of brain chemicals in the living. Psychologists may be wrong about the autism spectrum or aspergers, but your argument holds about as much weight as McCarthy biatching about vaccines.
 
2012-12-03 02:39:03 AM

BronyMedic: Are you Mitt Romney?


I get that a lot. We share a love of car elevators and slow-dancing with horses.

No, but seriously, the part you bolded was what makes me still rage-ful about this asshole. She was so goddamn sure of herself, and so patronizing about it ("It's okay! It's just how you are!"), and yet had obviously based her understanding of Asperger's entirely on fictional characters on TV. And not even cool ones like Abed from Community.

/cool cool cool
 
2012-12-03 03:34:42 AM

AlgertMan: Asperger's is slang for parents did shiat job raising you and you play Magic: The Gathering. You're probably a brony.


I Guffaw at your notion of what we are like.

My parents were the most merciless people in the world, and gave me no special treatment whatsoever, they figured that my disability was no excuse to not be a functioning, productive member of society, and I just had to deal with the fact that I got dealt a bad hand.

Also, Magic: The Gathering is a flawed, fun-sucker of a game where you buy your victories, See: Warhammer.

Also, Also, I've met enough bronies to know the deepest irony of bronydom, which is the incredible hypocrisy of the MLP fandom. they can be the most closed-minded, intolerant, selfish, self-centred, unsympathetic people...you know, everything the damn show purportedly teaches people about life?

so facts wise, you're 0/3

/but troll wise, you're 8/10, I bit...
 
2012-12-03 07:24:52 AM

cman: Why do we have to rename everything every other year?


Because the government is run by Kender?
 
2012-12-03 08:00:19 AM

cman: Why do we have to rename everything every other year?


The answer to all your questions is money.
 
2012-12-03 08:17:32 AM

cman: Why do we have to rename everything every other year?


Trolling medical students.
 
2012-12-03 08:57:42 AM

Lusiphur: Methadone Girls: milsorgen: And are you going to be there when the time comes to shove your little snowflake out the door to unload him on the public school or community college systems so that those of us who are paying attention to (or paying for) our classes (they are teachers not babysitters you see) won't have to deal with outbursts and disruptions.

my autistic snowflake is 14. He's made it through so far. He might even be able to work one day if I can find an employer that would take him and a helper to do whatever. He won't ever go to college. I don't have that hope for him.

As for my son disrupting your life for a short period of time each day you go to class. Man the fark up. I'll bet the "normal" smart ass kid disrupts your class even more than the autistic kids, but that's okay with you because you get to laugh at the smart ass's jokes. The autistic kids are shuffled out of the classroom when they're having an outburst as quick as the teachers aide can move them. Try to have some compassion for their situation. You might even grow as a human being.

Off your child will never be able to function in society without a massive amount of supervision and assistance, you eventually need to admit, at least to yourself, that you don't have a child: you have a hobby. One that you hold on to because it makes you feel special and you get off on the martyrdom. But don't kid yourself for a minute that your child ifs anything but a burden on society.


Favourited in red, marked "asshole".
 
2012-12-03 10:26:40 AM

Smackledorfer: What leads people like you to assume that they have encountered accurate samplings of the population such that they can skip looking at statistics and jump straight to deciding how things are based on the chip on their shoulder from their childhoods?


You'll notice I made no presumption to guess how many asspies are out there compared to the number of people with high-functioning autism. All that I need to do is to make the point they exist, and in enough numbers and activity to be highly visible, and on the back of that alone argue the ones who do detract from people who are actually ill.

Why do you jump to the conclusion I'm saying all people with high-functioning autism are asspies, and attack me on that basis? As I recall correctly, I explicitly made a distinction between people who actually have high-functioning autism, and people who are otherwise fine but misdiagnosed, or are fine but claim to be autistic for self-interest?

Why don't you deal with your own issues before judging thousands of people you've never met? You are upset that people who knew you made judgments about you and told you who/what you were, and now you judge large swaths of the population you've never met and have no real basis to judge except your hunches.

How about reading my post and seeing what I actually had to say before attacking me?
 
2012-12-03 10:55:26 AM
That last sentence in your post is humorous given your second paragragh.

How about you just don't judge ANY people you've never met and know nothing about?

I know more about you, with nothing but fark to go by, than you do about the asperger's population. You have zero basis for comments. You have no statistics to support your criticism of "aspies" whatsoever. You are just using your imagination to attack people you know nothing about.
 
2012-12-03 12:22:24 PM
This does not really change anything for the parents, caregivers, or the kids who have any of the disorders, whether it is Asperger, PDD-NOS, or any other form of autism. The parents and caregivers just want to do their best to help ensure their kids are not a burden to society: Early intervention is key.

DSM-V eliminating Asperger (and PDD-NOS) and putting it under a spectrum disorder recognizes what any parent/caregiver (and even some sufferers) already know: There are people worse-off and better-off along the disease continuum.

In order to have insurance companies help with the therapy that can truly make a difference requires consistent diagnostic criteria and classification along the spectrum. This DSM change will really help those individuals and caregivers that have a chance to be productive members of society.


/currently watching son have regression in behavior
//going through evaluation process, wait-lists now
///sucks
 
2012-12-03 12:27:59 PM

Smackledorfer: I know more about you, with nothing but fark to go by, than you do about the asperger's population. You have zero basis for comments. You have no statistics to support your criticism of "aspies" whatsoever. You are just using your imagination to attack people you know nothing about.


Are you categorically denying there are people out there who "self diagnose" and use it as an excuse for poor behavior, or as a tool to get attention?
 
2012-12-03 12:40:06 PM

discordium: This does not really change anything for the parents, caregivers, or the kids who have any of the disorders, whether it is Asperger, PDD-NOS, or any other form of autism. The parents and caregivers just want to do their best to help ensure their kids are not a burden to society: Early intervention is key.

DSM-V eliminating Asperger (and PDD-NOS) and putting it under a spectrum disorder recognizes what any parent/caregiver (and even some sufferers) already know: There are people worse-off and better-off along the disease continuum.

In order to have insurance companies help with the therapy that can truly make a difference requires consistent diagnostic criteria and classification along the spectrum. This DSM change will really help those individuals and caregivers that have a chance to be productive members of society.


/currently watching son have regression in behavior
//going through evaluation process, wait-lists now
///sucks


I understand, best of luck.

/Got a 3.5 year old on the spectrum
//Good days, bad days
 
2012-12-03 01:06:07 PM
Gotta almost posthumously feel for Dr. Asperg. I mean, sure he's a houseInternethold name for the time being, but if DMDD becomes the new common term, what's that mean for his legacy? After years of, what I can only imagine, to be intensely awkward conversations, we ought to at least give credit where credit is due.
 
2012-12-03 01:16:20 PM
And, just to be clear, to what I was drawing attention in regards to sharing my personal experience is the tendency of people to assume that because someone doesn't quite fit into social norms, there must be something wrong with them. Which feeds perfectly well into the concept of vaguely-defined disorders that lack so much as clearly-defined social or mental criteria, let alone physiological.

In my case, it was "that bosnian sniper doesn't socialize well with other students or pay attention in class, he must be autistic and have ADD." No, that bosnian sniper was merely bored as hell with his class load and is happier reading the books that are three years' ahead of what the rest of the class is studying, and that bosnian sniper was bullied to the point he gave up trying to socialize with his fellow students. Because, god forbid schools acknowledge smart kids are smart, and discipline kids who actually have disciplinary problems.
 
2012-12-03 01:38:39 PM

that bosnian sniper: No, that bosnian sniper was merely bored as hell with his class load and is happier reading the books that are three years' ahead of what the rest of the class is studying, and that bosnian sniper was bullied to the point he gave up trying to socialize with his fellow students. Because, god forbid schools acknowledge smart kids are smart, and discipline kids who actually have disciplinary problems.


I'm glad you put all that unappreciated intelligence to work getting your history degree. Now I can sleep at night.
 
2012-12-03 01:41:25 PM
I'll just leave this here: Tripod - Autistic

YouTube link.
 
2012-12-03 01:51:02 PM

that bosnian sniper: Smackledorfer: I know more about you, with nothing but fark to go by, than you do about the asperger's population. You have zero basis for comments. You have no statistics to support your criticism of "aspies" whatsoever. You are just using your imagination to attack people you know nothing about.

Are you categorically denying there are people out there who "self diagnose" and use it as an excuse for poor behavior, or as a tool to get attention?


Are there people out there who do this? Sure. Is it any reason to go off on a stupid rant about about asperger's in general and jump to all sorts of conclusions, ESPECIALLY when you have a clear personal experience chip on your shoulder clouding your judgement? No.

Stupid phrases like this don't help:

that bosnian sniper: Asperger syndrome has no identifiable neurological, neurochemical, or genetic basis. For that, in combination with the extremely ad hoc, high rates of diagnosis, it does trip my BS detector as something dreamed up to sell designer drugs and excuse poor behavior or even worse socialization. It wouldn't be the first time psychiatrists have done that, nor am I convinced it will be the last.


Which I already called you out on and you deliberately skipped.

So to resummarize since you seem confused: you are ranting about "people out there in spades" one moment, then walking it back to play an innocent 'oh dear me, I'm not trying to judge these people' in your next post. You have no statistics to back up your claims, you show a lack of understanding about how mental disorders work (setting a bar at physical proof is your first mistake), and are clearly influenced by personal issues.

that bosnian sniper: You'll notice I made no presumption to guess how many asspies are out there compared to the number of people with high-functioning autism. All that I need to do is to make the point they exist, and in enough numbers and activity to be highly visible, and on the back of that alone argue the ones who do detract from people who are actually ill.


How many exist? What is "highly visible"? And how do they detract from people who are actually ill? And I should point out that self-diagnosers really have no effect on beyond public perception (a perception you are feeding into with your rant). Psychologists diagnosing their patients could give two shiats about a handful of idiots on the internet.

For that matter, who are YOU to make a diagnosis based on literally having no knowledge about the people you are complaining about?

And finally, if we applied your attitude toward aspergers you would be making the same complaints about pretty much every page of the DSM: you will always have hangers-on who misdiagnose themselves and attention whore. Without any evidence of how many there are, what damage they are causing, and the ability to actually KNOW anything about the individuals that make the group you are complaining about all you have is ignorant ranting.


that bosnian sniper: And, just to be clear, to what I was drawing attention in regards to sharing my personal experience is the tendency of people to assume that because someone doesn't quite fit into social norms, there must be something wrong with them.


Great. Now take a page out of your own book: you didn't like people who had insufficient information about you telling you what was wrong with you, so don't do it to others. It is too bad that people misdiagnose themselves for various reasons. It is worse that you, who knows far less about them than they do, is making the same mistake while complaining about people making diagnosis errors.

The "asspies" know far more about themselves than you know about them, but you classify them and tell us all about what is wrong with them and why.

Your school knew far more about you than you know about the "asspies" but you clearly still harbor a grudge (and probably justifiably so) for them trying to make those judgements about you.

How can you not see the problem with those two things?
 
2012-12-03 02:38:07 PM

Motrin and water cures cancer: that bosnian sniper: No, that bosnian sniper was merely bored as hell with his class load and is happier reading the books that are three years' ahead of what the rest of the class is studying, and that bosnian sniper was bullied to the point he gave up trying to socialize with his fellow students. Because, god forbid schools acknowledge smart kids are smart, and discipline kids who actually have disciplinary problems.

I'm glad you put all that unappreciated intelligence to work getting your history degree. Now I can sleep at night.


That earned a reaction .gif, but it was too big. Suffice it to say "ohsnap.gif"
 
2012-12-03 04:52:10 PM

Smackledorfer: Are there people out there who do this? Sure..you will always have hangers-on who misdiagnose themselves and attention whore...It is too bad that people misdiagnose themselves for various reasons...


Good then, I'm glad we at least have some common ground that you've admitted this is an actual thing. As I said, my point stands alone on the fact they exist, not in how many there are (of which you're right, I have no hard information on that) or how visible they are (which is "visible enough to damage public perception" -- something you just ceded). Those people give a bad name to those who genuinely suffer from mental or neurological problems -- whatever those problems may be since you've decided to open the scope of this discussion to beyond Asperger's -- distract, give a perception those disorders don't "actually" exist, and siphon money and time from the people who do suffer.

And yes, public perception very much is a point to be made, here. The USA already suffers from poor mental health services, not the least cause of which is the (albeit weakening) presumption that somehow mental health problems aren't "real" medical problems. That's fed and informed by people you admitted aren't actually ill, but rather claim to be for whatever reason -- to what extent has no bearing on that it is. Now, how do you suspect funding for research on these problems, treatment or therapy, or god forbid government support, be given to those suffer from them, when out there exist people who aren't helping an already poor situation?

And, yet you wonder what is the harm?

Which, I'd like to point out, never did I say Asperger's, HFA, and PDD-NOS don't exist. In fact, I pointed out high-functioning autism along a greater spectrum does exist, it just happens to be the category of individuals you just admitted exist who don't have those disorders but claim they do that are the problem. Case in point, the final paragraph of my original post to which you responded, that you didn't seem to read before going on the offensive:

that bosnian sniper: Honestly, ending "Asperger syndrome" as a disorder and rolling it into autism spectrum formally can only be a good thing. That way, there will be a formal basis for diagnosis beyond "well, you're just a little weird" (which is what the DSM V criteria for all practical purposes was), and a clear distinction between people who actually have autism, who need to be treated for it, and just people who suffer from poor socialization or other behavioral problems who may end up misdiagnosed thanks to utter lack of proper criteria. Moreover, there will be heightened accountability for psychiatrists to not make hasty diagnoses for the purposes of selling designer drugs or cater to parents' (or hell, schools') whim. Not to mention curtailing asspies, who detract from and are an insult to people who actually have autism.


And yes, vague disorders with wide criteria do trip my BS detector. Especially for the fact while "idiots on the internet" may not influence psychiatrists, pharmaceutical companies who give kickbacks to health providers for proscribing designer drugs and therapies, and the ever-increasing number of prescription drug abusers who change personal care managers as quickly as they can get drugs do. Where there's money to be made, there is very healthy skepticism to be practiced.

If someone has seen a medical health professional and been diagnosed formally, I'm okay with that if not a bit skeptical -- which, my opinions and my thoughts are my right. I'm not going to argue outright with it. If someone cannot afford to seek the aid of a medical professional, I'll be the first person to stand up for their right as a human being to have health care. If someone has made a good faith effort to seek diagnosis and/or help, I'll support them wholeheartedly. However, if someone refuses to see a medical health professional, or chosen to not, and self-diagnoses and/or remains stubborn in their self-diagnosis, that's where I call "bullshiat".

I don't personally tolerate someone claiming to be ill when they are not, or have not at least made a good faith effort to learn if they are. Which is why I speak directly about the latter category, explicitly disclaim that I am not speaking about the former, without calling individuals out or naming names.
 
2012-12-03 05:07:20 PM

cman: Why do we have to rename everything every other year?


because everyone has short attention spans ADD ADHD?
 
2012-12-03 06:43:16 PM
I have to admit, I'm a bit worried. It took me a while to get diagnosed with Asperger's (mostly due to my mother's belief that I could "just get over it" if she yelled at me enough), but now that I have, I've been able to get my insurance to cover the therapy I so desperately need (and could no way afford without insurance). If I'm ever going to be able to hold down a steady job, it requires dealing with people. In 6 months, my therapist has helped me so much, but I still need help if I'm going to be able to contribute to society. I want to get my doctorate, and I'm really good at research, but I can't just be the mad scientist stuck away in a lab somewhere and still find a job - I have to figure out how to deal with people, and that's really difficult for me. So I hope I can still get the therapy I need, even with this change. I don't know how I'd function otherwise.
 
2012-12-03 06:47:20 PM

that bosnian sniper: Smackledorfer: Are there people out there who do this? Sure..you will always have hangers-on who misdiagnose themselves and attention whore...It is too bad that people misdiagnose themselves for various reasons...

Good then, I'm glad we at least have some common ground that you've admitted this is an actual thing. As I said, my point stands alone on the fact they exist, not in how many there are (of which you're right, I have no hard information on that) or how visible they are (which is "visible enough to damage public perception" -- something you just ceded). Those people give a bad name to those who genuinely suffer from mental or neurological problems -- whatever those problems may be since you've decided to open the scope of this discussion to beyond Asperger's -- distract, give a perception those disorders don't "actually" exist, and siphon money and time from the people who do suffer.

And yes, public perception very much is a point to be made, here. The USA already suffers from poor mental health services, not the least cause of which is the (albeit weakening) presumption that somehow mental health problems aren't "real" medical problems. That's fed and informed by people you admitted aren't actually ill, but rather claim to be for whatever reason -- to what extent has no bearing on that it is. Now, how do you suspect funding for research on these problems, treatment or therapy, or god forbid government support, be given to those suffer from them, when out there exist people who aren't helping an already poor situation?

And, yet you wonder what is the harm?

Which, I'd like to point out, never did I say Asperger's, HFA, and PDD-NOS don't exist. In fact, I pointed out high-functioning autism along a greater spectrum does exist, it just happens to be the category of individuals you just admitted exist who don't have those disorders but claim they do that are the problem. Case in point, the final paragraph of my original post to which you responded, that you didn't seem to read before going on the offensive:

that bosnian sniper: Honestly, ending "Asperger syndrome" as a disorder and rolling it into autism spectrum formally can only be a good thing. That way, there will be a formal basis for diagnosis beyond "well, you're just a little weird" (which is what the DSM V criteria for all practical purposes was), and a clear distinction between people who actually have autism, who need to be treated for it, and just people who suffer from poor socialization or other behavioral problems who may end up misdiagnosed thanks to utter lack of proper criteria. Moreover, there will be heightened accountability for psychiatrists to not make hasty diagnoses for the purposes of selling designer drugs or cater to parents' (or hell, schools') whim. Not to mention curtailing asspies, who detract from and are an insult to people who actually have autism.

And yes, vague disorders with wide criteria do trip my BS detector. Especially for the fact while "idiots on the internet" may not influence psychiatrists, pharmaceutical companies who give kickbacks to health providers for proscribing designer drugs and therapies, and the ever-increasing number of prescription drug abusers who change personal care managers as quickly as they can get drugs do. Where there's money to be made, there is very healthy skepticism to be practiced.

If someone has seen a medical health professional and been diagnosed formally, I'm okay with that if not a bit skeptical -- which, my opinions and my thoughts are my right. I'm not going to argue outright with it. If someone cannot afford to seek the aid of a medical professional, I'll be the first person to stand up for their right as a human being to have health care. If someone has made a good faith effort to seek diagnosis and/or help, I'll support them wholeheartedly. However, if someone refuses to see a medical health professional, or chosen to not, and self-diagnoses and/or remains stubborn in their self-diagnosis, that's where I call "bullshiat".

I don't personally tolerate someone claiming to be ill when they are not, or have not at least made a good faith effort to learn if they are. Which is why I speak directly about the latter category, explicitly disclaim that I am not speaking about the former, without calling individuals out or naming names.


You are correct on one thing: you have the right to whatever ignorant and biased thoughts you want.

Judge away, but when you run your mouth foolishly others have the same right to mock you for it.
 
2012-12-03 08:12:19 PM

omeganuepsilon: ParagonComplex: Thing is, mental conditions are medical conditions as well.

I wouldn't call them the same thing, but inextricably intertwined. Psychology, Psychiatry, and neurosurgery, etc. they're all part of a whole understanding, and woefully underdeveloped.

That's why it's a bum argument, this "stigmatism".

"Sick" is just sick. Doesn't imply fault, dirtiness, etc. Sure, some people stray really far from the norm and avoid anything they consider "sick". Calling it any other name is not going to change that.

The people who have serious issues with queers, retards, and coloreds, always will. You'll never change them(barring advances in science), it's time to maybe focus on getting help for those that need it. Sure, keep shunning the bigots, can't make it look accepted.

What's entertaining to me, is that being that much of a bigot is as much of a condition as anything else. Those are hyper active evolutionary tools surfacing, part of survival and breeding instincts. Can't blame them for how they feel all of the time, some of them are born that way.

If we worked harder on studying the sciences of the brain instead of bickering over the classifications used, we might, someday, be able to help the bigots and the transgendered in ways not thought possible.

/and before the claim is made
//not talking about the barbaric wishful thinking of brainwashing

Seriously, if we were to figure out the brain to such an extent that a 40 minute session with a therapist could make deep seated feelings of being in the wrong body(or distrust of those different from you) go away completely with no side effects(and no tricks, no shock therapy, etc), what's wrong with that if it were on a voluntary only basis?

A treatment that could benefit bigots that don't want to dwell on that as well as people with gender dysphoria... Isn't non-invasive, or least invasive, treatment sort of a highly sought after goal for the medical and psychological sciences?


Racism, biggotry, and blind hatred is something I've never been able to fully understand. I'm kind of glad of that. I'd like to think it's just an environmental thing, but it could very well be a deep-seeded psychological ordeal. I was raised around racism with people on my mother's side of the family. My mother was fine, but some of her people were pretty out there. Kind of funny since the family is part Native American. I understood at a very young age how idiotic it was not to like someone because of the color of their skin. Hopefully a lot of other kids in the same environment realize how idiotic it is as well. Kids not born with that ability that are continuously around such idiocy is the closest thing I can come to understanding those people.

I don't dig the brainwashing either, but I do believe there could be a point in our lifetime where a small noninvasive chip in the brain could curb such behavior. A friend of mine is in a group that's working on a chip in the brain that can essentially turn people "good". It's just with things like homosexuality, transgenderedness, etc; they're probably more of a genetics thing as well so I'm not sure how well the chip could work. I certainly wouldn't want such a thing, but I wouldn't think negatively of people who would want such a thing. With something such as that chip I think of all the angles, and I think about insidious people using it for evil. If you can make an "evil" person "good" then the reverse should be true. Same goes for if they find a way to block homosexuality, etc.

But yeah, it would be nice if people would evolve to the point of realizing how simple-minded it is to dislike someone because of something superficial.
 
2012-12-03 09:18:59 PM

that bosnian sniper: Smackledorfer: What leads people like you to assume that they have encountered accurate samplings of the population such that they can skip looking at statistics and jump straight to deciding how things are based on the chip on their shoulder from their childhoods?

You'll notice I made no presumption to guess how many asspies are out there compared to the number of people with high-functioning autism. All that I need to do is to make the point they exist, and in enough numbers and activity to be highly visible, and on the back of that alone argue the ones who do detract from people who are actually ill.

Why do you jump to the conclusion I'm saying all people with high-functioning autism are asspies, and attack me on that basis? As I recall correctly, I explicitly made a distinction between people who actually have high-functioning autism, and people who are otherwise fine but misdiagnosed, or are fine but claim to be autistic for self-interest?



How do you tell them apart? Or do you just assume that some claiming to have an ASD is an "asspie" by default?

UnCSB: My wife is post-stroke, and when she got a new doctor I felt that it was important for him to know that I had autism/Asperger's (first self-diagnosed, later confirmed). My thinking was that, since I have a long history of being misinterpreted/misunderstood, I wanted to make sure that my wife's care was not in any way compromised by miscommunication. All went well, or so I thought, until she started showing new changes in mental status.

Would you consider this attention-whoring?

It took ten farking months of family hell before the doctor acknowledged my concerns and ordered a neuropsychiatric evaluation for my wife. In the meantime, I got to hear autism jokes (you say you walked with your wife yesterday for a mile and a half? are you sure it wasn't 1 mile, 814 yards, 3.6 inches?). The neuropsych results? "Your wife should have been placed in a care facility months ago."

A neurology consultation was suggested to rule out dementia (and may be required to get my younger-than-retirement-age wife into an age-appropriate setting, for some reason). That was a month ago, and I'm still waiting for the good doctor to set it up.

I've had to put my voc rehab on hold (originally for hearing loss, but the assessment confirmed the ASD as well), and our son is on the verge of failing his senior year of high school due to stress.

Would not disclosing my condition to the doctor have changed this outcome?

/uncsb
//not entirely sure where I was going with that, just pissed as hell about being ostracized for making an apparently accurate self-diagnosis
 
2012-12-03 09:57:30 PM

ParagonComplex: Racism, biggotry, and blind hatred is something I've never been able to fully understand. I'm kind of glad of that.


While the behavior is ugly, modern science has some theories that aren't quite so..sinister?

There's a popular theory that it's an evolutionary/survival mechanism. Very young kids will tend to segregate themselves by color, the study has made the news a time or three, even on fark.

When people bond, that bond can be strengthened by any given sort of ostracizing those different from them. Jocks bond over the experience of picking on the dweebs. Unification in the face of adversity(even if fabricated), is a useful societal tool.

Another aspect of bigotry, is the physical disgust at those who are different. The theory that explains the internal reaction(but not allowing for outward action, obviously), is that it is breeding instinct. We don't get turned on by babies, sick people, retardation, or whatever else we view as alien.

This is further supported by wild animals that will maul and kill offspring that are not their own(polar bears?), so that their own offspring with that mate will not have competition. It's not sinister or evil, just cold. Sure, it's ugly and unattractive on a societal level, but it's natural to a point.

Further support are the studies around oxytocin(if I spelled it right, the bonding hormone). It can influence levels of trust in strangers and rid people of that uncomfortable reaction.(it has in studies where people who are "afraid" of retarded people are given the hormone and then exposed socially, iirc)

The human race has come to a point where their society has risen above and adapted faster than his instincts and base drives. We also have the failing as a collective to admit to still being animal creatures.

We take choice of action for granted, but many people are not consciously able to make the best in the face of a racing heart and an unexplainable feeling of being uncomfortable in the presence of X. That's the point where our euphoric fantasies of utopia obtain a large divergence with reality. We tell ourselves, ignorantly, that everyone should be able to consciously control their reactions, and rule out those that can't restrain from a sneer or a comment as less than human. Doesn't that sound exactly like what bigots do to people who are unlike them?

How are they less human than someone who is transgendered? Both are at the mercy of the functions of their brain and body, not consciously controllable.

We are all flawed to some extent in that way. We ALL have our tastes and preferences as to how people should look and act, and those that fall outside of our tastes can make us furious, nervous, or just repulsed.

But no, most groups of people, even victims of bigotry, develop a false sense of superiority and become bigots themselves. It's in our nature to do what we can to feel better about ourselves, even if we have to make shiat up.

It's not evil or sinister, it's just the way we are. It would be awesome if we could find some way to control ourselves better.
 
2012-12-03 11:33:57 PM

common sense is an oxymoron: ...just pissed as hell about being ostracized for making an apparently accurate self-diagnosis


...which you had the good sense to speak with confirm by a health care professional. Good, that's what anyone who suspects they may have some form of mental problem ought to do. It's their right, and they owe it to themselves and their loved ones.

Yes, I have my own skepticism towards Asperger's. It is my belief it is quite vague and easy to mis- or hastily-diagnosed, especially in light that there is a clear financial interest to do so. I also acknowledge there are people who exploit this circumstance. What I don't do, contrary to what some in this thread would have you believe based upon a misreading of my commentary, is outright deny high-functioning autism exists. Likewise, nor do I operate from a position that anyone who claims to have any form of high-functioning autism is lying or seeking attention; I reserve judgment for people who do not seek help.

In other words, if someone says to me "I have Asperger's" or some iteration of that statement, my first question is "have you been diagnosed by a professional?". If they say "no", I ask "why". If the answer to that question in turn fails the smell test ("it wouldn't help"/"there's no point"/"I don't need to"/"I know I have it"/etc.), I conclude the person is probably an "asspie" if I have no other reason to take what they say at face value -- and for them, I can do nothing more than to urge them to seek help. If they have been diagnosed by a professional, or have a compelling reason as to why they haven't sought medical help (like for example, not being able to afford it), then that person has my trust, sympathy, and support.

Why is that my business? Well, if someone makes an assertion to me I feel perfectly within my rights to seek clarity. I don't just ask people if they're autistic, it's not my business, and it's just rude. If they tell me, it's because they've volunteered that information, and as such the burden lies on them to support that assertion. If that proposition is offensive, the answer is simple: don't volunteer information that's not another's business in the first place.

In the end, I feel that yes, for that this change to the DSM is a net positive.
 
2012-12-04 12:18:11 AM

that bosnian sniper: Yes, I have my own skepticism towards Asperger's.


I have skepticism towards people(though I think this is what you're getting at) who are attention seekers and self label / diagnose for the pity factor / status. Similar to a hypocondriac. I'm not sure of the exact definition(though I'll go look it up), but I make two distinctions when it comes to that.

1. People that honestly believe they have illness x, a condition that is based on genuine fear
2. People that make false claims due to other attention seeking complexes or a sort of professional malingerer

It can be hard to tell the two apart, but the distinction can be very ... enlightening... as to how that person functions on a deeper level. That second category can lie to itself so often that it ends up nearly indistinguishable from the first if not examined closely. In that case it is still a symptom of other disorders, and not the original disorder itself.

The willingness to seek help(if it's available) can be a good indicator as to which type that person is. the second type, while they do seek help, will tend to stop after a certain amount of time, you can only take so much ...what amounts to ridicule ... from doctors and such.

The more honestly come by complex can be distinctly the opposite, many people who are genuine just don't like to go to the doctor, but the genuine fear of the impending illness will cause them to.

Of the second variety, as it applies to Aspergers, well, a lot of dumb people want to find some redeeming quality in themselves and will attribute their dullness / laziness to such a condition, and then brag about it. Self justification.

*shrugs*

I dislike going to the doctor myself, and am driven to by fear of a condition worsening, not that I'm a hypocondriac. If sick I'll throw up and run a fever for days before going to the hospital. Sure, we all like being pampered or have people show concern, but most of us don't fake it for the attention, or have the paranoia that we are actually sick when we're not.

I have a sister that LOVES the attention. She'll place calls immediately upon waking to sound more pitiful, and talk for hours about her various conditions to anyone that will listen. She's got some actual health problems, but no where near as much as she claims. She fabricates a lot of things, to include arguments and past events, and dwells on them, and really, because of her hijinks has pretty much alienated herself from most of the family. The self fulfilling prophecy, she dwells on shiat that didn't happen and causes people to dislike her.

/csb
 
2012-12-04 08:24:56 AM

omeganuepsilon: I have a sister that LOVES the attention. She'll place calls immediately upon waking to sound more pitiful, and talk for hours about her various conditions to anyone that will listen. She's got some actual health problems, but no where near as much as she claims. She fabricates a lot of things, to include arguments and past events, and dwells on them, and really, because of her hijinks has pretty much alienated herself from most of the family. The self fulfilling prophecy, she dwells on shiat that didn't happen and causes people to dislike her.


many people are unwilling to maintain a healthy level of the very delicate balance between mind-body

and ultimately the ones that suffer the most are the ones that actually have a condition that get overlooked because of the all the false claims made by those that don't
 
2012-12-04 08:40:27 AM

albuquerquehalsey: Methadone Girls: ecmoRandomNumbers: And some Asperger's families opposed any change, fearing their kids would lose a diagnosis and no longer be eligible for special services exempted from any type of accountability or responsibility.

awwwwwww...bless your heart. You don't know what you're talking about but you keep trying.

Someone pass this guy an autistic kid to take care of for a month so he can find out for himself...anyone?

I have been meet people with mild and severe autism, and I think I understand, at least to a very small extent, the difficulties caregiver go through. However, the reason people (myself included) make comments like ecmoRandomNumbers did is because of the phenomenon of self-diagnosed ass-burgers:

http://www.cracked.com/blog/6-real-diseases-that-have-somehow-become-t rendy/


Having worked around Engineers my whole life, one man's "mild autism" is another's "requirement for the job." There are many professions that require a delicate strangeness. Artists need to be a moderately to severely obsessive compulsive. Anyone in a position of leadership has to exist in one of two camps: The overly compassionate, or the dispassionate asshole. There really isn't any middle ground. (And yes, I model human behavior for a living.)

There is no "normal." We need people with all sorts of interests and quirks to do all sorts of jobs.

Where diagnosis is helpful is for those whose interests run completely counter to a functional society (serial killers) those who can't function (the psychotic) and those who need a little guidance to find what they are better suited at (The risk taker who thinks he wants to be a bus driver, but would make a better stunt pilot instead.)
 
2012-12-04 08:51:09 AM

common sense is an oxymoron: ...


Nah, I'd say that falls under the heading of temet nosce. The label doesn't help though. In fact, I find that labels don't help at all.

For my part, following a car accident, I lost a good chunk of my short term memory. There really isn't a good label for it, and if there was, I wouldn't use it. But when it comes up, I let people know "hey, if I write things down, it's because I don't remember."

The other day I had to explain to my wife that I don't forget things because I don't care. I generally forget them because she asks me to do something while I'm in the middle of doing something else. And the maddening thing is that I will respond, and carry on an entire conversation. And five minutes later, have absolutely no memory of it.
 
2012-12-04 03:09:00 PM

that bosnian sniper: And, just to be clear, to what I was drawing attention in regards to sharing my personal experience is the tendency of people to assume that because someone doesn't quite fit into social norms, there must be something wrong with them. Which feeds perfectly well into the concept of vaguely-defined disorders that lack so much as clearly-defined social or mental criteria, let alone physiological.

In my case, it was "that bosnian sniper doesn't socialize well with other students or pay attention in class, he must be autistic and have ADD." No, that bosnian sniper was merely bored as hell with his class load and is happier reading the books that are three years' ahead of what the rest of the class is studying, and that bosnian sniper was bullied to the point he gave up trying to socialize with his fellow students. Because, god forbid schools acknowledge smart kids are smart, and discipline kids who actually have disciplinary problems.


I'm afraid that as a child I would have been labeled as Aspie for similar reasons you described. I'm lucky my Elementary school teachers took a shine to me because I was well-behaved and parents who gave a damn about my education, unlike many of my fellow students (sadly).

The big difference between myself and a "true Aspie", I could learn social cues and mores to the point to where it became natural, now I'm a social butterfly. My brother on the other had, well I might as well try to explain the color blue to a blind man. He's had hours of therapy and practice but to only moderate success and social situations are physically draining to him.

I personally feeling like we keep on trying to stuff everyone in a very narrow definition of "normal" and anyone outside that label is "sick" and "needs fixing". There's a whole host of reasons why this is happening, some good, some bad.
 
2012-12-04 03:23:25 PM

that bosnian sniper: Smackledorfer: Are there people out there who do this? Sure..you will always have hangers-on who misdiagnose themselves and attention whore...It is too bad that people misdiagnose themselves for various reasons...

Good then, I'm glad we at least have some common ground that you've admitted this is an actual thing. As I said, my point stands alone on the fact they exist, not in how many there are (of which you're right, I have no hard information on that) or how visible they are (which is "visible enough to damage public perception" -- something you just ceded). Those people give a bad name to those who genuinely suffer from mental or neurological problems -- whatever those problems may be since you've decided to open the scope of this discussion to beyond Asperger's -- distract, give a perception those disorders don't "actually" exist, and siphon money and time from the people who do suffer.

And yes, public perception very much is a point to be made, here. The USA already suffers from poor mental health services, not the least cause of which is the (albeit weakening) presumption that somehow mental health problems aren't "real" medical problems. That's fed and informed by people you admitted aren't actually ill, but rather claim to be for whatever reason -- to what extent has no bearing on that it is. Now, how do you suspect funding for research on these problems, treatment or therapy, or god forbid government support, be given to those suffer from them, when out there exist people who aren't helping an already poor situation?

And, yet you wonder what is the harm?

Which, I'd like to point out, never did I say Asperger's, HFA, and PDD-NOS don't exist. In fact, I pointed out high-functioning autism along a greater spectrum does exist, it just happens to be the category of individuals you just admitted exist who don't have those disorders but claim they do that are the problem. Case in point, the final paragraph of my original post to which you responded, that you ...


You forget school districts that love the extra government money that they get for every kid labeled "disabled" regardless of how severe the condition. Kid gets time and a half on tests and school gets extra money. Parents also get Medicare and SSL benefits for having a disabled kid win-win.
 
2012-12-04 09:20:55 PM

Evil Twin Skippy: common sense is an oxymoron: ...

Nah, I'd say that falls under the heading of temet nosce. The label doesn't help though. In fact, I find that labels don't help at all.



Labels can help, and they can hurt.

I've known since early grade school that I'm "different" from just about everyone else, but it wasn't until I discovered the "label" some 40-odd years later that a wide variety of seemingly unrelated traits came into focus as having something in common. The "autism/Asperger's" label would have been greatly appreciated, especially since the "gifted" label I actually had has turned out to be something of a mixed blessing in terms of innate ability versus expected results (today, I'd be labeled as both gifted and learning-disabled).
 
2012-12-04 10:19:01 PM

that bosnian sniper: Why is that my business? Well, if someone makes an assertion to me I feel perfectly within my rights to seek clarity. I don't just ask people if they're autistic, it's not my business, and it's just rude. If they tell me, it's because they've volunteered that information, and as such the burden lies on them to support that assertion. If that proposition is offensive, the answer is simple: don't volunteer information that's not another's business in the first place.



I'm not "volunteering that information" to just anyone, just for shiats and giggles. It simply occurred to me that, since I was responsible for accurately communicating my wife's condition to her physician, said physician should be aware that any communication might be subject to misinterpretation due to factors entirely beyond my control; but that if said physician were aware of these factors, he might perhaps be able to ask for clarification instead of dismissing me as a jerk.


In the end, I feel that yes, for that this change to the DSM is a net positive.


It's a net positive for consistency's sake, not for the removal of a label which you seem to think of as an asshole license.
 
2012-12-05 01:23:50 AM

common sense is an oxymoron: It's a net positive for consistency's sake, not for the removal of a label which you seem to think of as an asshole license.


Well put, and if the Sniper thinks he will see any fewer "asspies" than he does now, he is in for a surprise. If they lied to themselves and others to shoehorn their way into the DSM IV version, they'll be perfectly capable of doing so in the DSM V. All pointing a flashlight on these folks, however few or many there may be, does is detract from the people with real problems - which these "asspies" may well have, whether it is asperger's or something else that they could use help with.

All he really wants to do is feel better about the world by labeling people as assholes, the same as he complains of when people pidgeonhole him in a similar manner. Sad really.
 
Displayed 50 of 100 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report