Is Autism too inclusive?!

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
  • As I said(/ranted) recently to more than one loved one, what is there to possibly gain from being (diagnosed as) autistic? It's 95% awful and maybe 5% gain tops (gain in a sense that I actually like to be alone and am never bored pursuing my own interests, not in an I actually get something kind of way - quite the opposite!) .

    Is the spectrum too inclusive? I'm not even sure the spectrum is a valid reference any more. 

    I find the Asburgers (and UK based need thing) thing a bit odd to be honest - while I agree the former is part of ASD, I'm not sure it needs to be assessed in quite the same way and think the levels definition is potentially more useful than just needs based: both is probably better, ie where you fit in the levels definitions and what support (lol!) is needed as a result.

    That said, perhaps the diagnosis process needs a good look at across the board - it's crazy I can see a psychiatrist who can tell me I am 'highly likely' to be autistic because while he can and is qualified to diagnose he can't in the setting that he made the judgement in. There's clearly streamlining to be had. 

    Of course, I come at this from a pov of someone who would like to see it work/benefit people. There's an increasing amount of people who won't want that... 

    The worry is, ultimately I think we'll become the next immigrant/trans/race group where people/groups with an additional need are targeted due to their perceived 'drain' by whichever extremist group stands to benefit the most. 

    And Autism costs money - it would be far more convenient for the state if it (and all the other disabilities) didn't exist, so why not remove it or make it so derided that it would be seen as better off not having due to stigmatisation or whatever. And then there's the reforms to send in schools - you can see what's happening here and it's not nice. Not that it will actually work - it exists and people will pull together and come through it as they always do, on way or another. 

    So yeah, to the original question nope, and right now I absolutely hate whatever it is that is 'wrong' with me, because it's mostly very ***.

    (Talking of schools we have a huge amount of people I'm schools who wouldn't have been able to get a diagnosis because schools knew nothing about ASD back then, and in my experience cared even less.)

Reply
  • As I said(/ranted) recently to more than one loved one, what is there to possibly gain from being (diagnosed as) autistic? It's 95% awful and maybe 5% gain tops (gain in a sense that I actually like to be alone and am never bored pursuing my own interests, not in an I actually get something kind of way - quite the opposite!) .

    Is the spectrum too inclusive? I'm not even sure the spectrum is a valid reference any more. 

    I find the Asburgers (and UK based need thing) thing a bit odd to be honest - while I agree the former is part of ASD, I'm not sure it needs to be assessed in quite the same way and think the levels definition is potentially more useful than just needs based: both is probably better, ie where you fit in the levels definitions and what support (lol!) is needed as a result.

    That said, perhaps the diagnosis process needs a good look at across the board - it's crazy I can see a psychiatrist who can tell me I am 'highly likely' to be autistic because while he can and is qualified to diagnose he can't in the setting that he made the judgement in. There's clearly streamlining to be had. 

    Of course, I come at this from a pov of someone who would like to see it work/benefit people. There's an increasing amount of people who won't want that... 

    The worry is, ultimately I think we'll become the next immigrant/trans/race group where people/groups with an additional need are targeted due to their perceived 'drain' by whichever extremist group stands to benefit the most. 

    And Autism costs money - it would be far more convenient for the state if it (and all the other disabilities) didn't exist, so why not remove it or make it so derided that it would be seen as better off not having due to stigmatisation or whatever. And then there's the reforms to send in schools - you can see what's happening here and it's not nice. Not that it will actually work - it exists and people will pull together and come through it as they always do, on way or another. 

    So yeah, to the original question nope, and right now I absolutely hate whatever it is that is 'wrong' with me, because it's mostly very ***.

    (Talking of schools we have a huge amount of people I'm schools who wouldn't have been able to get a diagnosis because schools knew nothing about ASD back then, and in my experience cared even less.)

Children
No Data