People who self-diagnose gaining access to services

A major autism organisation is giving access to groups/services for adults with Asperger's and high functioning autism to adults who self-diagnose.

Those who self-diagnose are highly motivated, unlike many adults with autism where motivation can be an issue.  They are more likely to attend groups than those with significant problems. These self-diagnosed adults as service users have a say in how services are run.  In this organisation, they want groups set up that exclude those with Asperger's and high functioning autism who have more problems than they do.

This mirrors what has happened in some online groups for people with Asperger's that have been dominated by those desperately seeking a diagnosis.

What other condition allows those that self-diagnose to be given access to services?  It could be argued that everyone as some autisitic traits i.e. is on the autism spectrum.  But surely the point of diagnosis is to identify those that are in need of support services.  To be given a diagnosis, there must be 'significant impairment'.  Many of those desperate for a diagnosis do not meet the criterea.  For many 'Asperger's Syndrome' seems a trendy diagnosis - it doesn't have the baggage of many conditions linked to the mind/brain.  They have little awarenees of the many difficulties faced by those living with Asperger's/high functioning autism.

I believe allowing people who self-diagnose access to services makes diagnosis meaningless.  In the long term, it is likely to have a negative affect on funding for services for adults.

What are your thoughts?

 

Parents
  • NAS11521 said:

    [quote]I am very concerned that widening the definition to include people who are no more than 'geeks' or 'eccentrics', but who have no problems, will make the diagnosis meaningless and this will be a bad thing for people with AS who struggle with the condition.[/quote]

    What proof do you have that these 'geeks' and 'eccentrics' have no problems?

    And why should you have to have 'problems' in order to get a diagnosis anyway!?

    Surely what many of us on the spectrum seek is precisely to live in a society that accepts our differences, and would it not be the case that in such a society we, ourselves, would indeed not have any 'problems' too?

    Would that change the fact that we are Autistic?

    I think not!

    And, is it not possible, as implied by True Colours, that some sub-sections of society are already accepting of the differences caused by Autism (and therefore any autistics within that sub-section of society would not have any 'problems')?

Reply
  • NAS11521 said:

    [quote]I am very concerned that widening the definition to include people who are no more than 'geeks' or 'eccentrics', but who have no problems, will make the diagnosis meaningless and this will be a bad thing for people with AS who struggle with the condition.[/quote]

    What proof do you have that these 'geeks' and 'eccentrics' have no problems?

    And why should you have to have 'problems' in order to get a diagnosis anyway!?

    Surely what many of us on the spectrum seek is precisely to live in a society that accepts our differences, and would it not be the case that in such a society we, ourselves, would indeed not have any 'problems' too?

    Would that change the fact that we are Autistic?

    I think not!

    And, is it not possible, as implied by True Colours, that some sub-sections of society are already accepting of the differences caused by Autism (and therefore any autistics within that sub-section of society would not have any 'problems')?

Children
No Data