Pros/Cons of Diagnosis

I was diagnosed late in life as an adult. It does worry me whether I would have managed the career I've had (albeit with great struggle" if I had been diagnosed when young. That's not because the consequences of diagnosis in those days was devastating. I'm looking at it hypothetically, as if what applies now applied then.

I understand that intervention is supposed to avoid the pressures on people on the spectrum during childhood and teens, and while at school, I've said on other threads I don't think there's much preparation for coping in later life. It seems to me to be all about forcing conformity with being NT, regardless of whether that's feasible, rather than addressing ways the people can manage effectively, by other application of their resources.

There still seems to be a lot of "quackery" around, magical cures to tempt parents at great cost, when the perpetrators will be long gone by the time the child becomes an adult and discovers the mumbo jumbo doesn't work.

The medical profession and social services can dismiss our diagnoses if we dress OK, appear to have eye contact, and can string a sentence together. No-one in these institutions seems to have the foggiest notion about the realities we have to face.

I suffered terribly in the long term from the demoralising and undermining effects of bullying at school. It happened largely because I could easily be induced to have a meltdown for the entertainment of my peers. My understanding of intervention in childhood is that it is supposed to prevent such damage. Does it? Has bullying been prevented where people on the spectrum are in mainstream schools? The anti-bullying charities, which I wrote to several years ago, didn't know about autism as a factor in bullying. I doubt if this has changed much.

What I do know is the job situation hasn't changed much. I've watched some people on the spectrum thrive at university, only to find they cannot get a job afterwards. And all the benefits of going to university, with heightened self esteem, are lost.

Equally I've seen a lot of people in the spectrum wrongly advised to go into university, who suffer worse as a result. A common illusion is that people with an aptitude for maths or computing should go on a degree course in these subjects. But narrow interest in computer games or number patterns often isn't enough to complete a degree that requires demonstratred proficiency across a range of mathematical or computing skills these people cannot hope to address. Yet the illusion continues.

Frankly I cannot see much sign of progress anywhere in realistic HELPFUL treatment of people on the spectrum.

All I can offer is hope. That somehow soon some sensible strategy will evolve.

In the meantime I fully appreciate diagnose or not diagnose - its a lottery.

I was diagnosed late in life as an adult. It does worry me whether I would have managed the career I've had (albeit with great struggle" if I had been diagnosed when young. That's not because the consequences of diagnosis in those days was devastating. I'm looking at it hypothetically, as if what applies now applied then.

I understand that intervention is supposed to avoid the pressures on people on the spectrum during childhood and teens, and while at school, I've said on other threads I don't think there's much preparation for coping in later life. It seems to me to be all about forcing conformity with being NT, regardless of whether that's feasible, rather than addressing ways the people can manage effectively, by other application of their resources.

There still seems to be a lot of "quackery" around, magical cures to tempt parents at great cost, when the perpetrators will be long gone by the time the child becomes an adult and discovers the mumbo jumbo doesn't work.

The medical profession and social services can dismiss our diagnoses if we dress OK, appear to have eye contact, and can string a sentence together. No-one in these institutions seems to have the foggiest notion about the realities we have to face.

I suffered terribly in the long term from the demoralising and undermining effects of bullying at school. It happened largely because I could easily be induced to have a meltdown for the entertainment of my peers. My understanding of intervention in childhood is that it is supposed to prevent such damage. Does it? Has bullying been prevented where people on the spectrum are in mainstream schools? The anti-bullying charities, which I wrote to several years ago, didn't know about autism as a factor in bullying. I doubt if this has changed much.

What I do know is the job situation hasn't changed much. I've watched some people on the spectrum thrive at university, only to find they cannot get a job afterwards. And all the benefits of going to university, with heightened self esteem, are lost.

Equally I've seen a lot of people in the spectrum wrongly advised to go into university, who suffer worse as a result. A common illusion is that people with an aptitude for maths or computing should go on a degree course in these subjects. But narrow interest in computer games or number patterns often isn't enough to complete a degree that requires demonstratred proficiency across a range of mathematical or computing skills these people cannot hope to address. Yet the illusion continues.

Frankly I cannot see much sign of progress anywhere in realistic HELPFUL treatment of people on the spectrum.

All I can offer is hope. That somehow soon some sensible strategy will evolve.

In the meantime I fully appreciate diagnose or not diagnose - its a lottery.