Published on 12, July, 2020
This might be one for the Moderators to look into, but I wonder if others have insight on this.
I've had several conversations recently with professionals dealing with adults on the spectrum who've just spouted the triad of impairments, or who've said its all in the triad of impairments.
With all the literature on theories about autism and various interpretations, and approaches to treatment, I could quite understand professionals looking for the easiest synthesis to hand. But what is to hand? Is it just too easy to read up on the triad and related summaries? Or is there nothing else to hand for professionals to use.
The Triad of Impairments, as far as I can see, is of no more value than for diagnosing children. It has little relevance to the everyday lives and experiences of adults, and is hardly appropriate to helping professionals understand adult needs.
It doesn't explain a lot of issues facing adults.
But just what are the main texts used by professionals? And how useful are these texts for supporting adults?
Thanks for your insights openheart. I agree with you it looks that way. I just reckon it comes about through normal (mostly NT) behaviours rather than conspiracy theory.
Yes its about players and most people ending up as chips in these bigger games. But you are, I feel too fatalistic. There are ways around it - slow I grant you - but more importantly we need to have hope and with those absolutes you describe why am I even trying?
My concern with the NAS, as I've already said, they have to be sure they are being taken seriously. All these initiatives are good. But if organisations like the Royal Society of Psychiatrists, and particularly those who stand to gain financially from preserving the status quo, choose to ignore NAS, or sideline NAS, or advise their members/followers not to listen to NAS....then nothing is achieved.
Thanks also IntenseWorld. I've survived by having narrow intense specialisms. This means I've always had to move across disciplines, often putting me "on the wrong foot" (if the metaphor is OK) with people who see me as an interloper. I've also developed a knack for synthesising and acquiring new knowledge fast. That can really impact on academic cliques if you suddenly outrun them. Believe me I've had my share of storming and hate mail because I've crossed boundaries and "stepped on toes" (good metaphor I think).
But it has to be done for science to evolve. Academic cells do get incredibly isolated and superior, but I think its down to NT phenomena - group identity, survival as a pack etc. Also having come in to academia late, from industry R&D, I was horrified by the thoroughly odious, toady, bitchy unhelpful world I found myself in and it took years to cope - being both vulnerable (AS wise) but somehow smarter since I survived (AS attributes too).
What I've been saying in these postings is intentionally provocative. I do hope the Royal Society of Psychiatrists gets to hear. They won't like me for it. But I really don't care. Their profession should be more accountable, even if they don't want it, and to progress on helping adults with autism the Royal Society of Psychiatrists and other such organisations need to bend.