• Replies 16 replies
  • Subscribers 81 subscribers
  • Views 220 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

Is Autism too inclusive?!

Mads

I caught the tail end of a discussion on the radio last night. It was (I think) regarding Professor Dame Uta Frith.

“The spectrum has gone on being more and more accommodating, and I think now it has come to its collapse,” said Professor Dame Uta Frith (UCL Cognitive Neuroscience) on the widening autism spectrum and the growing challenges in diagnosis.

I haven't got a definitive reference but there are online newspapers that have the story (I just don't want to sign up to them to read the full article).

All thoughts welcome. 

Joey. 

Parents

  • https://www.tes.com/magazine/teaching-learning/general/uta-frith-interview-autism-not-spectrum
    (Found one that isn't paid.)

    Basically she wants to go back to autism is only diagnosed between 3-5, mostly males, and the rest are basically making it up. 

    "It’s understandable, because they listen to the lived experiences of people who say they’ve been masking, that they spend their time imitating what neurotypical people do, and they’re exhausted every day because of this. So, the harm is not the masking, but the exhaustion afterwards. I can’t quite understand that, because exhaustion could arise from lots of other causes.

    I expect we could say we are all masking, all the time, trying to adapt to our society’s norms. So, from this point of view, I’m very critical of this idea."

    She says there are too many later diagnosed people, so the answer for her is it's not real, and we should go back in time to when it was easier for them to understand.

  • in reply to Cinnabar_wing

    Thanks  My intention was not to cause alarm. I just didn't have anyone who I could talk to about it who would actually understand. Thank you for confirming. 

  • in reply to Mads

    There is so much evidence as to why it's gone up (mainly, if you only started diagnosing it relatively recent history, and it's life long, you are going to have missed lots). But people want to look for an easy answer, and if back in the day there were less people being diagnosed, lets just go back to that. It's incredibly problematic.

    It's the same thinking we see so often, if something is getting difficult, let's go back in time and pretend knowledge and understanding hasn't increased. I am all up for studies, and greater knowledge, but just having an opinion without any science to back it up is damaging as far as I can see.

  • in reply to Cinnabar_wing
    Cinnabar_wing said:
    I mean, I am okay if they want to make changes with research, but articles like this don't help people, they create division and animosity to a group struggling as it as, simply because she sees us as inconvenient

    That’s what I feel too.

Reply Children
No Data