Misdiagnosis the other way: someone actually without ASD diagnosed as being on the spectrum

Thanks for the replies. It seems to me that it would be a lot of trouble to go to in order to get a diagnosis for the purpose of receiving benefits, for example. For one thing, it takes a long time to get a diagnosis. For another thing, once you have a diagnosis, you aren't entitled to anything unless you can prove that your condition amounts to a disability under the law. To seek a diagnosis and get benefits, you would have to be seen by at least a GP, the specialist to whom the GP refers you, and the person who evaluates you for the purpose of determining whether you are entitled to benefits. You would take the risk that any of those people could be so ignorant that they won't accept that you have the condition unless you are hand-flapping or completely incoherent, or so astute that they would notice mannerisms indicating that you are putting it on. Moreover, the process can take several years.

Let me put it another way:

How likely do you think it would be that someone who is highly trained and educated, and who has not previously shown any inclination to take advantage of the system, would want to falsely seek a diagnosis of autism or ASD? Does anyone know of someone who fits that description?

I'm not even sure that I've ever met another autistic person, although the odds are that I probably have at some point in my life I just wasn't aware of it. So, I certainly haven't met anyone claiming fraudulently to be autistic. 

As others have said though, aside from hoping to fraudulently claim benefits, why would anyone want to pretend to have AS? Do you mean in terms of Munchausen Syndrome? (To gain attention for being unwell in some way?) I can't think of any other reason for anyone to do this. 

People generally commit fraud for a gain of some kind and I can't think of any gain for someone to pretend to have AS other than those two. Can you? Do you know or suspect someone who fits that description? I'd be genuinely interested to know what their motivation was! 

Endymion said:

Do you know or suspect someone who fits that description?

No I don't, but I have been essentially accused of this in an Employment Tribunal. I have an ASD diagnosis and I have read many many written accounts of how it is to be on the spectrum, and I could have written them myself, so I am fairly confident my diagnosis is accurate. I actually told the psychiatrist who diagnosed me that if he had determined otherwise, I would have told him he was wrong. He told me I'm not a borderline case, i.e. that I am well into the spectrum, even though I have no learning disabilities, etc.

Yet, my former employer has claimed that I am not only not disabled, but that I don't even have ASD, as I was diagnosed to have. For their reasons, they say only that I have not provided proof of diagnosis from an "independent expert", and they are demanding that I see such a person who is chosen by them, to check whether I really have ASD. It seems to me that someone chosen by them would not come even close to qualifying as "independent", and I risk having my personal information handled in an indiscreet manner (as my former employer previously did).

I just don't understand on what basis they are making their claim, so I wondered whether this is something that happens often (either that someone manages to get an undeserved ASD diagnosis, or that someone is accused of doing so). I guess I would simply like some assurance that these ridiculous accusations will be treated in the way they deserve. It is very difficult because I cannot find any record of this type of behaviour in the online archives, and I can't be sure that I will be treated fairly in this regard, given all the unfair treatment I have had to endure up to this point. I have to wait months and months between hearings, because the other side keeps requesting and being granted time extensions, so it's really causing me a lot of anxiety wondering how things will turn out.

I asked the question the way I did because I wanted some stats without any bias as to the purpose for my question (i.e. on which side of the issue I stand), but I guess there is no real concrete answer.

Thanks.

DragonCat16 said:

I just don't understand on what basis they are making their claim, so I wondered whether this is something that happens often (either that someone manages to get an undeserved ASD diagnosis, or that someone is accused of doing so).

My response to this would be that your former employer is making their claim on no basis whatsoever, it’s just a legal tactic that is used to tried and get them out of the claim made against them. You see, if someone isn’t disabled then you can’t claim disability discrimination and the like against them.

As for evidence from an independent expert, they are entitled to ask for this even if you have already provided medical evidence of your disability. It seems mad, but it’s just how the system works.

Try not to worry about all of this game playing too much. At the end of the day, if you have all of the relevant evidence then it is unlikely that the Tribunal would accept that you are not disabled. Also, remember that Judges aren’t stupid and they know exactly what tactics are used by both Claimants and Respondents, so they can often see straight through any ridiculous arguments forwarded from either side.

DragonCat16 said:

I just don't understand on what basis they are making their claim, so I wondered whether this is something that happens often (either that someone manages to get an undeserved ASD diagnosis, or that someone is accused of doing so).

My response to this would be that your former employer is making their claim on no basis whatsoever, it’s just a legal tactic that is used to tried and get them out of the claim made against them. You see, if someone isn’t disabled then you can’t claim disability discrimination and the like against them.

As for evidence from an independent expert, they are entitled to ask for this even if you have already provided medical evidence of your disability. It seems mad, but it’s just how the system works.

Try not to worry about all of this game playing too much. At the end of the day, if you have all of the relevant evidence then it is unlikely that the Tribunal would accept that you are not disabled. Also, remember that Judges aren’t stupid and they know exactly what tactics are used by both Claimants and Respondents, so they can often see straight through any ridiculous arguments forwarded from either side.