Published on 12, July, 2020
I am an adult female, 48, who has just had a remote assessment funded by the NHS but carried out by a private company I think to reduce the waiting list times. I felt really lucky to be seen more quickly than waiting for a face to face assessment but the experience hasn't been satisfactory and has left me feeling low and confused. I prepared thoroughly for the assessment and have read a lot of books about autism. I feel convinced that I have autism after reading about the experiences of other adult females but I know it can be really tricky to get diagnosed unless the clinician has the right knowledge and experience dealing with adult females. My assessment was in 2 parts with a different clinician for each part. The first doctor said that she thought I was autistic and would write a report to say so. The doctor for the second part was a consultant psychiatrist who said that he wasn't convinced and that anxiety was the issue although I had autistic traits. HIs recommendation was to try different medication and a higher dose, although I've tried that before and it doesn't change anything. As he's the consultant he isn't going to take the first doctor's opinion into account and said that she was asking me leading questions! This leaves me in limbo! I have read that you are either autistic or not on a spectrum and that you can't have autistic traits unless you are autistic. Also, I don't want to be fobbed off by being called simply anxious, which is what people have told me my whole life, but I want to understand more the reasons for the anxiety, things I have worked hard over the last year with my therapist to find out and have really helped me. Sorry to rant but I'm so angry and would love to know if anyone else has had a similar experience and if they have any advice for me. Also, should I consider a second opinion but I guess I would have to pay privately for this. Many thanks.
Guinea Pig Fan said: I have read that you are either autistic or not on a spectrum and that you can't have autistic traits unless you are autistic.
That is not really true. You can have autistic traits and be sub-clinical. Autism is like tallness, and it is down to the clinical assessors to decide where the cut off point is between tall and not tall, or autistic and not quite autistic enough. Personally, I would go through the DSM V autism diagnostic criteria and for each criterion list all the traits that you have that show that you fit, with as many examples from your present and past as you can come up with. I would then submit this document to whoever the diagnostic clinician reports to, for reassessment.
I would say there is a point in ''tallness'' when the way of thinking changes. So, autistic and allistic develop different Theories of the Mind
But so called respected medical professionals can't see inside your head unless you have brain MRI
If you look at any autism-related tests where the scores are graphically represented there is always a substantial region of overlap between the autistic and allistic 'areas under the curve'. This shows that the two populations are not distinct and separate, but there is a gradation between them. For any trait there will be allistic people whose score is more typical of autistic people and vice-versa. It is the overall sum of traits that is important. It follows that there must exist people with intermediate natures, with intermediate brain types.
I know, there is many traits we have in common
but what is the true distinction between both is omitted everywhere - the way of thinking
I forgot to add monotropism is one of reasons for developing thinking that way
I would speculate that traits develop after we are born, we do not have predisposition for them from the moment of conception