Extreme Love : Autism

altruistica said:

I watched a few TED videos today that I hadn't seen before. One was Temple Grandin (I learned about her 10 years ago at the Early Bird sessions...though I'd never seen her actually talk). I found this video really difficult to watch because of the pace of her talk. She obviously has incredible powers of concentration.

www.ted.com/.../temple_grandin_the_world_needs_all_kinds_of_minds.html

Apart from any that have been posted on YouTube this week, I've watched all the TEDTalks and Temple Grandin's is one of my favourites.

altruistica said:

This talk by Rebecca Saxe also got me thinking about how possibly everybody's Theory Of Mind (T.O.M.) is different. After I've re-read your post (and thought about it some more) I'll get back to you. Here's Rebecca's video:

www.ted.com/.../rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.html

And this is another - really interesting - however, I'm not really sure how much this has to do with T.O.M. as such, at least the latter parts about moral judgement, becuase it's not about judging what the other person is thinking or feeling, but rather about making a judgement about what they've done.

Thanks for those replies Scorpion. It's late and I need to re-read your answers in the morning.....I think they're fascinating.

Hi Longman,

I'm happy with the discussion.

I watched a few TED videos today that I hadn't seen before. One was Temple Grandin (I learned about her 10 years ago at the Early Bird sessions...though I'd never seen her actually talk). I found this video really difficult to watch because of the pace of her talk. She obviously has incredible powers of concentration.

www.ted.com/.../temple_grandin_the_world_needs_all_kinds_of_minds.html

This talk by Rebecca Saxe also got me thinking about how possibly everybody's Theory Of Mind (T.O.M.) is different. After I've re-read your post (and thought about it some more) I'll get back to you. Here's Rebecca's video:

www.ted.com/.../rebecca_saxe_how_brains_make_moral_judgments.html

Hi Hope,

Thanks for those replies. You mentioned that you didn't really play much with the other kids when younger (circled around them). Have you managed to build a circle of friends as you've gotten older?

Al

I'm certainly happy with it.

Fifty eight replies is an impressive level of discussion for a topic posted a week ago. However I do wonder if everything that has been raised here is towards the best intentions, or just to stir up controversy simply for the purpose of controversy.

There are many potential threads in these discussions, but I worry that respondents are being placed on the defensive all the time, which is not a balanced dialogue.

The monitors will no doubt correct me if I've acted inappropriately in expressing this view. I may be being completely out of order in expressing a sense of "aspie bashing", but would emphasise that's just my apprehension, and all participants may be quite happy with the exchanges.

altruistica said:

Hi Scorpion,

Thanks for those replies. I feel like I'm learning a whole lot more about ASC.

I started typing this sentence

'I wasn't asking Mumma about info about the jabs to reinforce my own beliefs, honestly'.

And it suddenly struck me:

If I typed that sentence, how would you interpret it?

Have a think about how you felt when you read that sentence.

Here's what I meant by it:

I meant, I wasn't asking Mumma about info about the jabs to reinforce my own beliefs, honestly (as in, 'please believe me'). If I had not explained what I meant, you could have read the word 'honestly' as if I'd typed it in an exasperated fashion, sarcastically even.

I asked her to show empathy with her situation. To show that I cared about what she thought and that I praised her courage for sharing those thoughts with the group.

Ok, I take your word for it, even if I don't entirely believe you.  

altruistica said:

I just wanted to ask you more about this thought:

'there being no sign of anything precisely does 'fit the pattern of an Asperger's toddler', because, well, there is no pattern! Asperger's, and all ASDs present differently in different people and at different points in development. So 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' is not a sign of 'no ASD before the age of 4', it's just a sign of 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' - or, in other words, just to make it absolutely clear what I'm saying, it doesn't mean her son didn't have Asperger's before that age it just means her son didn't show any signs of having Asperger's before that age.'

Does this mean that certain Asperger's individuals have been diagnosed much later in life because they never had significant difficulties to warrant their parents, teachers and other guardians being overly concerned about their development?

Again, I can't speak for others, but, in my own case is what not so much a case of 'never had significant difficulties' as 'there was never obvious enough outward signs of the significant difficults I was having'.

Or in other words, the difficulties were there, I just never made it apparent enough that I was experiencing those difficulties.

altruistica said:

This statement had me really intrigued:

we can logically deduce things like "the person that left the room won't look in the box for the object becuase it wasn't in the box when they left the room"

That to me sounds like a Theory Of Mind.....what's the difference? Is it because you're missing the words 'knowing they won't look in the box because THEY think it's still in the box'. It's a really fine distinction that I can't quite grasp (again possibly because of text).

It's even more subtle than that.

Neurotypicals have a fully developed Theory Of Mind, meaning that they instictively know things like 'they won't look in the box because THEY think it's still in the box' - it doesn't require any kind of cognitive processing, it's just built-in.

Autistics however have impared Theory Of Mind, meaning that though they do have some instinctive understanding that people have their own points of view and so see the world differently to others, it's not as well developed, and not as instinctive, so certain things, such as 'they won't look in the box because THEY think it's still in the box' don't come as naturally, and require a certain amount of cognitive processing to fully understand. And, the further down the Autistic Spectrum the more impared T.O.M. is. However, if a situation or scenario can been cognitively processed (and here high IQ helps, so it's easier for those of us at the Asperger's/HFA end to do this) it can be learnt, so, over time, aspects of T.O.M. that may initially have presented a challenge can become automated - just like any learnt skill.

altruistica said:

Or in other words, it's a really bad way to demonstrate poor theory of mind in someone with a high IQ!

Can you point me to something else that might illustrate this (or is my story about the girl at Tom's school a classic example)?

Nothing comes immediately to mind - if I think of anything I'll post it up.

altruistica said:

Your observations about conversations I found interesting. I wonder if the symptoms of difficulty in conversation (worried what the other party is thinking, no words to say) is akin to 'stuttering'? I always found it fascinating that Gareth 'whats his name' who became famous through X Factor, could sing without a stutter, but had one when he spoke. I always wondered what he might be like after having a drink (alcohol) or smoking some cannabis?

From what I understand of stuttering, no I don't think it is at all the same. And it's not so much that I worry about what the other person is thinking, more that, on top of taking in the words they're saying, processing the meanings of those words (which again, for me is not an enitrely sub-concious or automatic process), I'm also having to consciously think about what what they're saying might imply about what they might be thinking (and that generally involves lots of chains, and branches, of logical possibilites, as well as all the potential illogical possibilites (because more often than not, it seems to me at least, neurotypical thought processes appear utterly illogical)) - so there simply isn't the cognitive processing power availble to either think about, or to fetch from the language centers, the words I want to say in response.

altruistica said:

Do you practise any kind of strategies to ease (if that's the right word) these difficulties? (I've tried counting to ten before I blow my top these days, but only ever seem to get to three.....LOL)

In terms of the difficulties we've been discussing, well, with T.O.M. issues one can learn kind of 'scripts' for various scenarios, that not only include what to say, but also what the parties involved are likely to be thinking and feeling in that situation, and with the 'no words' issue, well, if you can think of some kind of strategy to ease that then I'd love to know what it is!

altruistica said:

When you say 'there are no words'....do you mean there are no words because you have nothing you want to share with that person?

 It's a little like when you know what you want to say, but you can't find the word, but worse, becuase you don't even know what you want to say, and once you start thinking about that it then becomes difficult, if not impossible to hold what the other person said in your mind.

altruistica said:

With jokes such as those you gave as examples I tend to find the fact that people find them funny funnier than the jokes themselves. And, I often don't 'get' new jokes immediately - again, I have to process them logically to figure what the joke is.

This statement also I found really interesting. The first sentence I think speaks more of people wanting to share things between each other. If a friend tells one a joke, they're hoping that you'll find it funny too. I think it is a way in which two people can share a moment. What's really interesting is when someone tells you a joke that isn't PC these days. They know because you're a friend, that you're not going to report them to the 'Thought Police', so now there's an element of danger of going against the grain. In this, the sharing of the moment seems more important than the joke itself.

That is something I don't really understand - if you're in the same place at the same time you're 'sharing a moment' anyway, so the joke is unnecessary.

Small-talk is similar - I know for neurotypicals it has some kind of functional role, but I'm always thinking "what?! why would you even want to talk about this?! if we here to discuss X, or to do Y, let's just do that!"

altruistica said:

The second sentence possibly points to two difficulties people with ASC have. First, the processing speed of language (the more complex, the more time taken to process) is something Tom has always struggled with.

This is a generalisation, but, most people on the spectrum are primarily visual and/or kinesthetic (feeling-based) thinkers, so auditory input, such as speech, require additional processing, and going back to what I was saying about having to conciously process things like T.O.M. means that this additional processing just adds yet more of a burden on the cognitive processes.

altruistica said:

Secondly, the ability to think of the shared commonalities between objects and meanings and their differences too. ie. Although a dog has four legs and a table has four legs, a table is not a dog BUT could be in a joke.....admittedly a very bad joke.

Yeah, to me a dog is a mammal, with 4 ambulatory limbs. Whereas a table is a item of furniture with X, where X is often 4, linear, or near linear, vertical, or near vertical supports, and a flat, or near flat, top.

altruistica said:

Just while mentioning humour, Tom loves 'You've Been Framed', 'TV Burp' and also Lee Evans.

Just a final quick question (and I'm in no way being judgemental in asking this, just curious).

If you have ever seen anyone run over by a car, what was your initial reaction?

If you've never witnessed anything like this, what do you think your first thought might be?

No, I have not seen anyone run over, in real life, however, the closest thing I can think of to that is in one of the Derren Brown programmes that were on last year.

(*SPOILER ALERT* for anyone who hasn't seen it and may wish to see it in the future)

In the programme he got a studio audience, who were given masks to 'anonymise' themselves, to vote on various good or bad things to happen (they had the option of one good thing and one bad thing each time and voted on which would happen) to an unsuspecting memeber of the public - the point of the programme being to examine how we behave en-masse in situations where we become de-individualised - and throughout the audience unfailingly chose the bad option - this culminated with them being presented with the choose "should he be allowed to return to his flat where he will receive a cash prize and brand new TV, or, should he be kidnapped by a gang of thugs on the street outside his flat?" - they of course chose the latter - so as he was approaching his flat this van comes screeching round the corner, stops, half a dozen people wearing balaclava bundle out, pounce on him, and try to get him into the van - he manages to struggle free, and runs up the road, to a junction, where, as he's running across the road, a car suddenly appears and smashes into him.

Now, I'd been chuckling along, all through the programme, as worse and worse things have been happening to him, but as soon that happened I literally said "OH F***!" and even now as I write this it's bringing a lump to throat to think about it.

So, there is a matter of degree to it - I of course don't find life-threatening situations at all funny, but if someone trips when walking down the street, but then gets up, clearly not too badly hurt, then I can't help but laugh.

OH, and, in case you're wondering - the ending of the Derren Brown programme was a set up - he'd got a stunt man dressed up in the same clothes as the person who'd been victim all through out the programme, the car appearing was part of the stunt, nobody was harmed - and the victim had in fact found a cash prize and brand new TV  when he returned to his flat.

I can answer you question about Asperger's in young toddlers by drawing upon my own experience.

I was diagnosed late, age 21. However, and this is important, my parents and school were concerned, including nursery school, which I attended age 3 years. As a toddler, I was slow in developing fine motor skills, and the health visitor at my 18 month check-up observed that I had a 'borderline degree of fine motor impairment' because I could not build a tower out of plastic bricks.

As a toddler, I would giggle for no reason, and was extremely energetic and prone to tantrums that could last up to two hours - they were more intense than your usual 'terrible twos' tantrums and I did not grow out of them, although I have not had one for a while now. They occurred if I was put into my pushchair, whereas my younger brother would quietly cry, but  would then get used to the situation.

I walked on tip-toes, which my mum thought was odd at the time, and I did not grow out of this, either.

Primary school were concerned that, age 5, I had no understanding of basic chronology, could not recite the alphabet until I was 7 years old, although I could read fluently, but with no comprehension.

Regarding social skills, problems in this area were not picked up until I started primary school, but my Mother recalls that, at playgroup, I did not really join in with the other kids, my only real form of interaction was to run around them in circles, giggling.

So, obvious signs of Aspergers were not there until I started primary school, but my parents had some concerns about my development when I was at nursery.

Hi Scorpion,

Thanks for those replies. I feel like I'm learning a whole lot more about ASC.

I started typing this sentence

'I wasn't asking Mumma about info about the jabs to reinforce my own beliefs, honestly'.

And it suddenly struck me:

If I typed that sentence, how would you interpret it?

Have a think about how you felt when you read that sentence.

Here's what I meant by it:

I meant, I wasn't asking Mumma about info about the jabs to reinforce my own beliefs, honestly (as in, 'please believe me'). If I had not explained what I meant, you could have read the word 'honestly' as if I'd typed it in an exasperated fashion, sarcastically even.

I asked her to show empathy with her situation. To show that I cared about what she thought and that I praised her courage for sharing those thoughts with the group. 

I just wanted to ask you more about this thought:

'there being no sign of anything precisely does 'fit the pattern of an Asperger's toddler', because, well, there is no pattern! Asperger's, and all ASDs present differently in different people and at different points in development. So 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' is not a sign of 'no ASD before the age of 4', it's just a sign of 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' - or, in other words, just to make it absolutely clear what I'm saying, it doesn't mean her son didn't have Asperger's before that age it just means her son didn't show any signs of having Asperger's before that age.'

Does this mean that certain Asperger's individuals have been diagnosed much later in life because they never had significant difficulties to warrant their parents, teachers and other guardians being overly concerned about their development? 

This statement had me really intrigued:

we can logically deduce things like "the person that left the room won't look in the box for the object becuase it wasn't in the box when they left the room"

That to me sounds like a Theory Of Mind.....what's the difference? Is it because you're missing the words 'knowing they won't look in the box because THEY think it's still in the box'. It's a really fine distinction that I can't quite grasp (again possibly because of text).

Or in other words, it's a really bad way to demonstrate poor theory of mind in someone with a high IQ!

Can you point me to something else that might illustrate this (or is my story about the girl at Tom's school a classic example)?

Your observations about conversations I found interesting. I wonder if the symptoms of difficulty in conversation (worried what the other party is thinking, no words to say) is akin to 'stuttering'? I always found it fascinating that Gareth 'whats his name' who became famous through X Factor, could sing without a stutter, but had one when he spoke. I always wondered what he might be like after having a drink (alcohol) or smoking some cannabis?

Do you practise any kind of strategies to ease (if that's the right word) these difficulties? (I've tried counting to ten before I blow my top these days, but only ever seem to get to three.....LOL) 

When you say 'there are no words'....do you mean there are no words because you have nothing you want to share with that person?

With jokes such as those you gave as examples I tend to find the fact that people find them funny funnier than the jokes themselves. And, I often don't 'get' new jokes immediately - again, I have to process them logically to figure what the joke is.

This statement also I found really interesting. The first sentence I think speaks more of people wanting to share things between each other. If a friend tells one a joke, they're hoping that you'll find it funny too. I think it is a way in which two people can share a moment. What's really interesting is when someone tells you a joke that isn't PC these days. They know because you're a friend, that you're not going to report them to the 'Thought Police', so now there's an element of danger of going against the grain. In this, the sharing of the moment seems more important than the joke itself.

The second sentence possibly points to two difficulties people with ASC have. First, the processing speed of language (the more complex, the more time taken to process) is something Tom has always struggled with. His current Speech & Language work that he does in school is however paying off, because he is without doubt getting much better at this. Secondly, the ability to think of the shared commonalities between objects and meanings and their differences too. ie. Although a dog has four legs and a table has four legs, a table is not a dog BUT could be in a joke.....admittedly a very bad joke.

Just while mentioning humour, Tom loves 'You've Been Framed', 'TV Burp' and also Lee Evans.

Just a final quick question (and I'm in no way being judgemental in asking this, just curious).

If you have ever seen anyone run over by a car, what was your initial reaction?

If you've never witnessed anything like this, what do you think your first thought might be?

I've really enjoyed our exchanges.

Al

altruistica said:

Hi Mumma Wilson,

That's an interesting story you told. Thanks for sharing it. Do I take it that your son is about seven or eight now? After the diagnosis, in retrospect, does his prior behaviour (ie. pre 4 years) fit the pattern of an Asperger's toddler? Did you have any concerns that he might be different from other children?

I've no idea what Mumma Wilson will reply to this, if she does, but let me guess your reason for asking, altruistica.

Am I right in thinking you're expecting, or hoping, her to reply saying something to the effect of "no, we had no concerns what-so-ever"?

Thereby adding weight to your Vaccines cause ASDs hypothosis.

Well, I hate to pre-empt Mumma Wilson's reply like this, and to burst your bubble before it even been inflated, as it were, but, well, there being no sign of anything precisely does 'fit the pattern of an Asperger's toddler', because, well, there is no pattern! Asperger's, and all ASDs present differently in different people and at different points in development. So 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' is not a sign of 'no ASD before the age of 4', it's just a sign of 'no ASD symptoms before the age of 4' - or, in other words, just to make it absolutely clear what I'm saying, it doesn't mean her son didn't have Asperger's before that age it just means her son didn't show any signs of having Asperger's before that age.

altruistica said:

Hey Scorpion,

I think I missed your reply, sorry.

No problem.

altruistica said:

All the best with sorting the Crohn's out. Is there a Western medical remedy for this, or is it something that alternative medicine has answers too? I know nothing about it.

There is no cure, either 'Western' or 'Alternative'. The medication I now take seems to be working though, so that's good. And I avoid food that trigger a flare up. That's about all I can do, or can be done for me, at the moment. There is a glimmer of hope for a cure, as it's believed to be a genetic disorder, so gene-therapy may become available at some stage - at the very least it may lead to better, more directed, medication (currently the only treatments available work on the 'damping the immune system down' principle, which works, but isn't ideal).

altruistica said:

I'm sorry if you understood me to mean that I thought the MMR was responsible for the increase in autism. I think all vaccinations may be implicated, either partly or wholly, in conjuction with possible environmental triggers. Whether it's because of the adjuvents, the preservatives or the virus tissue itself I have no idea.

Ok, well, there's just as little evidence for that too.

altruistica said:

There is a theory (I forget which) that kind of poo poos the idea of a 'gut feeling' about something. It says something like, just because something looks like it's linked with something else, it's only because our brains want the simplest of explanations (Is it Occum's Razor?).

Ok, couple of points about that - 1, that's not Occam's Razor (which I'll explain shortly), and 2, whilst 'gut feeling' is not a reliable source of wisdom, the idea that our brains want the simplest of explanations runs counter to evidence - quite the opposite in fact - well, it's a generalisation of course, but humans have the tendency to over complicate things, in fact - hence the pre-ponderance of conspiracy theories (and, I'm only using this as an example, by the way, see on of my previous posts for my thoughts on the matter) such as "The twin tower's could not have fallen due to weakening of the steel sub-structure (the simple explanation), so it must have been a controlled demolition, implying a conspiracy, and the planes weren't even the right type of plane, and etc, etc (the complicated explanation)".

What Occam's Razor refer's to is a principal used in science to determine which of two theorums is more likely to be true - it's the principle that the simplest theory (that is the one that involves the fewest assumptions) is the more likely. So, to take out Twin Towers example again, the given explanation that the heat from fires weakened the steel is the more likely explanation because it involves only the known facts - the controlled demolition theory assumes the presence of demolition explosives, and so is less likely (however much I agree that it most certainly did look one hell of a lot like a controlled demolition).

altruistica said:

I also think the 'fear factor' over disease has been blown out of all proportion by the group who have most to gain. Didn't Obama elevate Swine Flu to 'Pandemic Status' in 2009, but it turns out that the total deaths from Swine Flu were significantly less than ordinary flu for that year? I think it was also stated that people probably had it and didn't even realise they had it, it was that un-noticeable to them. That's how I feel about disease. Some people can deal with something and others for whatever reason, it tips them over into possible fatal scenarios.

To put it simply, a disease doesn't have to kill lots of people for it to be a pandemic - it just has to infect lots of people - which swine flu most certainly did. The worry with all animal flus that cross into humans is that they might mutate and become deadly, when that happens in something that infects lots of people then you end up with lots of dead people, which is generally considered 'not a good thing'.

altruistica said:

I've read a lot of Baron-Cohen's work. I remember actually watching an OU Programme around 1985 (this is when OU programmes used to be on BBC2 at the end of the night, or first thing in the morning) which I think Baron-Cohen was putting forward an experiment to show the age at which children usually acquire Theory Of Mind using a couple of dolls. We actually tried this out on Tom when he was about six and a half. His sister, who was about two, was talking pretty well and we thought he would get it wrong and she might get it right. It totally surprised us that he got it right, and she got it wrong, especially since he didn't understand language as well as her. I suppose he could have just guessed right.....

Or deduced. One of the biggest differences between Asperger's (and High-functioning Autsism) and ASDs 'lower' on the spectrum is IQ, and that makes all the difference - you see, and I'm guessing here about the thing with the dolls, whilst we struggle to intuit anothers point of view, we can logically deduce things like "the person that left the room won't look in the box for the object becuase it wasn't in the box when they left the room". Or in other words, it's a really bad way to demonstrate poor theory of mind in someone with a high IQ!

altruistica said:

From your paragraph, does this mean that you get 'tounge-tied' (or however you would describe the feeling) when conversing in person with someone you know well or did you mean just with strangers?

It happens in all conversation to a degree, but there's a gradient to it - I get it when speaking with my immediate family at times, more often with friends, and almost all the time with strangers.

Basically the longer I've known a person the more chance I've had to build up my internal model of that person so the less resources my brain has to use to process things like thinking about what the other person might be thinking about.

Also, I wouldn't describe it as being 'tongue tied' - it's not so much not knowing what to say, more there being no words to say. If that makes sense.

altruistica said:

Also, would you (still) find it difficult to know what another person was thinking by the tone of their voice? I used the word '(still)' to mean, has this 'skill' got better with age or with exposure to more people?

Yes, I do still find that difficult.

altruistica said:

If someone started shouting (ie. their voice was louder) would you know when this was because of excitement (say the telling of a punch-line to a joke) or possible anger?

Sometimes, but not all the time.

Again, having high IQ means I can logically deduce such things.

altruistica said:

I'm asking this because Tom has always recognised when we're angry, although he can't pre-empt this anger. An incident recently happened at school with a girl that Tom 'fancied' (and I'm sure still does). She told him over a year ago that she had a boyfriend and Tom was fine with that. They agreed thay could still be friends. One day recently, he saw this girl talking to a teacher on the corridor. He went to ask her what they were talking about, and she said 'Mind your own business' and stormed off. He didn't understand why she did this. As far as he was concerned, he was asking out of concern for her. I explained that maybe she was being told off by the teacher (probably something he'd never thought about) and she may have been embarrassed.  I said you should say that you're sorry to her the next time you see her and explain that you were worried that she was alright. He did this and everything was fine again.

That's exactly the kind of thing I still find difficult. If there's no logical way to deduce the reason for something then I can't read it from body language. He probably had the same problem there - she was probably giving off all sorts of "don't ask!" signals that he just didn't see!

altruistica said:

Actually, I mentioned jokes above.....as most jokes are built upon an element of surprise, do you now 'get jokes'.

Most jokes use a form of metaphor. Either they're saying something is like something else:

'When is a door, not a door? When it's ajar' (a jar)

or it's a play on words or phrases:

(PATIENT) 'Doctor, doctor. I feel like a pair of curtains'.

(DOCTOR) 'Oh, pull yourself together'.

Let me answer that this way - my favourite joke is:

Q: What's brown and sticky?

A: A stick!

:D

With jokes such as those you gave as examples I tend to find the fact that people find them funny funnier than the jokes themselves. And, I often don't 'get' new jokes immediately - again, I have to process them logically to figure what the joke is. But that means something like the joke I quoted above works really well - because it doesn't actually matter what you think of when asked "What's brown and sticky?" (unless you think "A stick") because "A stick" isn't the answer you'd thought of, and so it's funny (and of course the brown and sticky substance that usually comes to mind helps with the funnyness of it).

altruistica said:

Do the majority of Aspies like slapstick? I ask because the children / young adults I know who have a diagnosis of 'high functioning autism' LOVE slapstick.

I wouldn't want to talk for the majority of Aspies, but, I certainly do. In fact, I find it very difficult (and usually fail) to not laugh in situations where I know I really shouldn't laugh (when people hurt themselves, for example) because I find it so funny.

Hey Hope,

Thanks for that detailed description of your parents' thoughts. It helped.

Al

Hi Mumma Wilson,

That's an interesting story you told. Thanks for sharing it. Do I take it that your son is about seven or eight now? After the diagnosis, in retrospect, does his prior behaviour (ie. pre 4 years) fit the pattern of an Asperger's toddler? Did you have any concerns that he might be different from other children?

I wish you all the best with the future.

I just wanted to correct something Longman said. If I inadvertantly said or intimated that because someone got a degree and they have an ASC they couldn't have 'suffered', I certainly didn't mean that. I have empathy for anyone who finds society difficult to understand. I also think that there is room for this discussion (or a slightly different one) to carry on. I've tried to be a better listener since reading 'The Essential Difference' (believe it or not LOL) and to frame my arguments in a less threatening way. I still have a lot to learn.

Hey Scorpion,

I think I missed your reply, sorry.

All the best with sorting the Crohn's out. Is there a Western medical remedy for this, or is it something that alternative medicine has answers too? I know nothing about it.

I'm sorry if you understood me to mean that I thought the MMR was responsible for the increase in autism. I think all vaccinations may be implicated, either partly or wholly, in conjuction with possible environmental triggers. Whether it's because of the adjuvents, the preservatives or the virus tissue itself I have no idea. There is a theory (I forget which) that kind of poo poos the idea of a 'gut feeling' about something. It says something like, just because something looks like it's linked with something else, it's only because our brains want the simplest of explanations (Is it Occum's Razor?).

I also think the 'fear factor' over disease has been blown out of all proportion by the group who have most to gain. Didn't Obama elevate Swine Flu to 'Pandemic Status' in 2009, but it turns out that the total deaths from Swine Flu were significantly less than ordinary flu for that year? I think it was also stated that people probably had it and didn't even realise they had it, it was that un-noticeable to them. That's how I feel about disease. Some people can deal with something and others for whatever reason, it tips them over into possible fatal scenarios.

Anyway, whatever the causes of autism, whether it's totally natural or 'man-made' doesn't alter the fact that everybody should have a voice, everybody should have rights. That I guess is the NAS's raison d'etre.

Your next pharagraph intrigued me:

Do you think if we were having this conversation face to face it would be easier (easier in the sense of understanding what each party is trying to get across)?

LOL!

No. And this is partly why I think you may never have had such an in depth conversation about these matters with someone who has Asperger's before. In face to face conversations I'm so overwhelmed by sensory input that I don't have time, or the ability, to fully think through what I want to say. Also, as I said before, one of the key features of autism is an impared 'Theory of Mind' - this is the built-in mechanism that neurotypicals have to instinctively 'put themselves in someone elses shoes' and know what they're likely to be thinking and feeling - for me, and most others on the spectrum, this is very difficult, and I have to perform that task intellectually, and almost conciously - this, when combined with sensory overload, leaves very little additional cognitive capacity for processing one's own thoughts, let alone what another person is saying.

Also, we tend only to like to discuss topics which we ourselves are interested in, or ones closely to related to those.

Therefor, if the other autistic people you know are not interested in such subjects, and/or you've tried discussing the subject with them face-to-face, then it's no surprise that you've never had such an in-depth conversation with them about it.

I've read a lot of Baron-Cohen's work. I remember actually watching an OU Programme around 1985 (this is when OU programmes used to be on BBC2 at the end of the night, or first thing in the morning) which I think Baron-Cohen was putting forward an experiment to show the age at which children usually acquire Theory Of Mind using a couple of dolls. We actually tried this out on Tom when he was about six and a half. His sister, who was about two, was talking pretty well and we thought he would get it wrong and she might get it right. It totally surprised us that he got it right, and she got it wrong, especially since he didn't understand language as well as her. I suppose he could have just guessed right.....

From your paragraph, does this mean that you get 'tounge-tied' (or however you would describe the feeling) when conversing in person with someone you know well or did you mean just with strangers?

Also, would you (still) find it difficult to know what another person was thinking by the tone of their voice? I used the word '(still)' to mean, has this 'skill' got better with age or with exposure to more people?

If someone started shouting (ie. their voice was louder) would you know when this was because of excitement (say the telling of a punch-line to a joke) or possible anger?

I'm asking this because Tom has always recognised when we're angry, although he can't pre-empt this anger. An incident recently happened at school with a girl that Tom 'fancied' (and I'm sure still does). She told him over a year ago that she had a boyfriend and Tom was fine with that. They agreed thay could still be friends. One day recently, he saw this girl talking to a teacher on the corridor. He went to ask her what they were talking about, and she said 'Mind your own business' and stormed off. He didn't understand why she did this. As far as he was concerned, he was asking out of concern for her. I explained that maybe she was being told off by the teacher (probably something he'd never thought about) and she may have been embarrassed.  I said you should say that you're sorry to her the next time you see her and explain that you were worried that she was alright. He did this and everything was fine again.

Actually, I mentioned jokes above.....as most jokes are built upon an element of surprise, do you now 'get jokes'.

Most jokes use a form of metaphor. Either they're saying something is like something else:

'When is a door, not a door? When it's ajar' (a jar)

or it's a play on words or phrases:

(PATIENT) 'Doctor, doctor. I feel like a pair of curtains'.

(DOCTOR) 'Oh, pull yourself together'.

Do the majority of Aspies like slapstick? I ask because the children / young adults I know who have a diagnosis of 'high functioning autism' LOVE slapstick. 

Look forward to your replies,

Al

Hi,

I have 3 sons, and all of them have had vaccinations. My youngest son went for his pre school boosters in the June before starting in the September. Part of his booster vaccines were missing so we were told to arrange another appt for him to have the vaccine that was not available.

my son started school in the September and things were going ok. He attended an appintment in the November to have the vaccine that he was not up to date with.

Around this time the school had contacted us with regards to his behaviour. It became worse and worse over the next few weeks.

In the January we received a letter from our Doctors stating 'we have inadvertenly overdosed your son with the MMR vaccine' you can imagine our horror with this news.

We did seek legal advice and were informed that we have a case for medical negligence but would need to prove harm for any compensation.

Over the next few years our son deteriorated within his behaviour, and with no knowledge to the profesionals about this, with the schools referral he went through a core diagnostic and was diagnosed with Aspergers Syndrome.

He has speech and language difficulties, complex learning needs sensory problems, fine motor skills issues and a poor working memory.

I guess I will never really know why.But I would like to know.

I have fought for him to have Statement of Special educational needs, and wonders what the future holds for him.

I thought I would share my experience.

x

There are two perspectives here that are often "poles apart" therefore irreconcilable opposites. Hence I do think this discussion is destined to go nowhere.

Parents are indefatigable advocates of their children when they are affected by autism. I guess you can never really see the parents view when you have autism or aspergers yourself (but then some parents do have aspergers or autism themselves but are undiagnosed - which may be manifested by lack of flexibility, difficulty seeing another person's point of view or appreciating the effect of their rhetoric on others - yep mea culpa - but a point that needs to be made all the same).

We often see parents being very strongly opposed to adults getting diagnosed, whether with aspergers or high functioning autism, on the grounds Al has reiterated several times now that in his perception they haven't suffered. But just because someone got a degree or held down a job with autism doesn't deny the difficulties they faced.

I wish Al would reflect on his own perspectives before carrying on this dialogue. Because it clearly is upsetting the participants (ok mea culpa, I'm just as bad at times).

My parent's views? They think my Asperger's may have been at least partly caused by my mother's very stressful pregnancy and my failure to grow properly halfway through her gestation (my Grandmother was ill with cancer and died shortly after I was born). However, on questioning, my parents are not sure why I have AS - as they put it, 'we can never really know', and they think that what is more important is helping me now rather than worrying about causes. Yes, Maternal stress may have contributed to my AS,  but there must be a genetic element too, for things don't occur in isolation. My parents certainly do not believe that vaccines, diet, medicines etc etc are to blame. I thank my parents for getting me fully vaccinated from when I was a baby, and I had a booster MMR a year ago after there was an outbreak of mumps. My brother, who had already received the booster vaccine (the 2nd dose of MMR) as he is younger than me, did not get mumps despite being in very close contact with a non-vaccinated person who had the disease. So, vaccination obviously worked in his case, and he was very thankful not to suffer from this not very nice illness. Do you enjoy getting ill? These illnesses can not only have complications, but they  are also unpleasant, whereas vaccine is just one small *** to the arm (not even painful).

I understand fully why having a child with autism can be very difficult. My parents get stressed because of my Asperger's, so having a child with more challenging behaviour than myself must be even more difficult. But with your support, your son should face a happy life. It is not the autism he 'suffers' from, but other peoples' reactions and obstacles they put in his way. But the fact you find this, understandably, very difficult, has  nothing to do with the original causes, and the empirical data shows that vaccines cannot cause the complex developmental condition we call Autism. Vaccines may, in very rare cases, cause fits and disability - all medicines have this risk - but Autism is a condition of prenatal development, probably caused by a complicated interaction betweeen genes and  the interuterine environment.

I can understand that entirely Jim especially where possibly vulnerable people are concerned. I was only reflecting on what a headmistress (we never use the sex of a head these days do we) said to me shortly before retiring. She'd done her thesis on autism in the early 70's and retiring as she was in 2004, remarked that she was sad that little had effectively changed in all that time. She also said that she made a point of addressing each child she met during the day by their christian name as this may be the only time during the day certain children would hear their name being said. Names for me give identity (even in an anonymous way). I sign my name Al. I might not be called Al but want to be known as that. 

I also think on forums it builds some form of trust (however small that may be). I thought the way I framed the question was in a non-coersive manner. I've no doubt I shall never meet Scorpion or Hope or yourself or Susie.

Al

altruistica said:

Thanks for the reply Scorpion.

What's your real name, or do you prefer I call you Scorpion?

Call me Scorpion, please.

(and, @ Jim V - don't worry, if altruistica really wanted to find out who I am he could quite easily have done so by now - that is the nature of the internet (which does make the site's attempt at protecting people's anonimity fairly pointless, but that's that))

altruistica said:

I think this is the most in-depth conversation I've ever had with a person with Asperger's. I do know others, but the conversations always revolve around functional things (what did you watch on TV etc), rather than the more emotive, deeper subjects we're tackling here.

I'm not surprised by that, for reasons that I'll come to later.

altruistica said:

I'm sorry to hear about your illness. There's nothing more important from a subjective level than one's health. What's the chronic illness you have (if you want to share that)?

I've mentioned it in a different thread on the forums already, so I don't mind sharing it again - I have Crohn's Disease (an inflamatory (auto-immune) bowel disorder).

altruistica said:

I'm also sorry if it sounded like I was belittling you. I can tell that you're well read around the subject of autism. I do want to be wrong about Big Pharma's role in vaccination schedules. I would love there to be no evidence of anyone ever being damaged by vaccinations.

It would be wrong of me to pretend I'm any kind of expert, but, yes, after being diagnosed, a little under 3 years ago, I read around the subject. I was also aware of the whole MMR and Autism issue before that and have also read around that subject somewhat. Now, whilst it would be incorrect to state that there is 'no evidence of anyone ever being damaged by vaccinations', it is a huge leap to go from 'some people have been damaged by vaccines' to 'MMR causes autism' and one for which there is, as I've already stated, zero good solid evidence for. And, by 'good solid evidence' I don't mean conjecture based on correlation and anecdote, I mean a biochemically-based demonstration of causality, because until you have that, then all you have is conjecture.

altruistica said:

Do you think if we were having this conversation face to face it wuld be easier (easier in the sense of understanding what each party is trying to get across)?

LOL!

No. And this is partly why I think you may never have had such an in depth conversation about these matters with someone who has Asperger's before. In face to face conversations I'm so overwhelmed by sensory input that I don't have time, or the ability, to fully think through what I want to say. Also, as I said before, one of the key features of autism is an impared 'Theory of Mind' - this is the built-in mechanism that neurotypicals have to instinctively 'put themselves in someone elses shoes' and know what they're likely to be thinking and feeling - for me, and most others on the spectrum, this is very difficult, and I have to perform that task intellectually, and almost conciously - this, when combined with sensory overload, leaves very little additional cognitive capacity for processing one's own thoughts, let alone what another person is saying.

Also, we tend only to like to discuss topics which we ourselves are interested in, or ones closely to related to those.

Therefor, if the other autistic people you know are not interested in such subjects, and/or you've tried discussing the subject with them face-to-face, then it's no surprise that you've never had such an in-depth conversation with them about it.

altruistica said:

You mentioned that you feel like crying every day. Have you a plan on how this might improve in the future?

Sort of. It's not something I feel I can do by myself (I'd have already done it otherwise), so I am trying to get help from my local health authority and social services. However they're both dragging their heels somewhat, particularly given the current economic climate, so I'm still stuck with trying to cope with life on a day-to-day, minute-by-minute basis.

Hi, 

Just a quick point - this is an anonymous service and whilst the sharing of contact details is absolutely prohibited that does also mean that asking questions that may identify an individual is problematic. 

I can perfectly understand why people would want to know more about someone they are involved in a debate with but please bear in mind you shouldn't require an answer and no one should feel compelled to answer.

Further than that, I think asking people for a name may really start to blur those boundaries - I'd suggest using the name people pick when they register and respecting that unless someone wants to share a first name.

Hope that makes sense to everyone.

Thanks for the reply Scorpion.

What's your real name, or do you prefer I call you Scorpion?

I think this is the most in-depth conversation I've ever had with a person with Asperger's. I do know others, but the conversations always revolve around functional things (what did you watch on TV etc), rather than the more emotive, deeper subjects we're tackling here.

I'm sorry to hear about your illness. There's nothing more important from a subjective level than one's health. What's the chronic illness you have (if you want to share that)?

I'm also sorry if it sounded like I was belittling you. I can tell that you're well read around the subject of autism. I do want to be wrong about Big Pharma's role in vaccination schedules. I would love there to be no evidence of anyone ever being damaged by vaccinations.

Do you think if we were having this conversation face to face it wuld be easier (easier in the sense of understanding what each party is trying to get across)?

You mentioned that you feel like crying every day. Have you a plan on how this might improve in the future?

Al

Ok, I tell you what, I'll take back what I said about not continuing this further, for one reason, and one reason only, which is that I actually do detect a glimmer of your wanting to be wrong.

You state that you do not wish to belittle my views, but then go on to do exactly that.

Firstly, you are wrong in your assumption that I am framing my views based on my personal experience of how my autism affects me. I am framing them on an, admitedly limited, understanding of the wider autistic spectrum and the similarities and differences between those at different points on that spectrum. You are the one who is blinkered by your personal experience and who can not see beyond that, not me.

Secondly, you imply that I can not possibly understand your point of view, because I am not the parent of a child with autism (which is exactly what I said you would say). However, whilst it is correct that I can not possess that experiential knowledge, and that, by definition, having Asperger's means I have 'impared theory of mind', I can, however, intellectually, 'put myself in your shoes', as it were, it's just that it isn't an instinctive process for me, as it is for neurotypicals.

So, yes I can imagine what being a parent of a child with a disabilty is like. How that shatters all your hopes and dreams for that child.

I can also imagine what it is like to have your hopes and dreams for yourself put on hold, for whatever reason, precisely because I too once had hopes and dreams that I have had to put on hold. I said in my previous post that I was unemployed due to chronic illness - that's put pay to what hopes and dreams I had for myself - so, yes, the circumstances may be different, but I know exactly what that's like.

I also know what your son goes through, because I go through the exact say thing day in and day out - there is barely a day goes by in which I don't feel like crying exactly because I don't understand what's going on in the world around me!

You ask "isn't this just the same as two neuro-typicals kids, only one is very academic and the other one not so academic?"

Well, no, that is exactly the point, it isn't just the same! You see, the only real difference between myself and your son is what you see on the outside, and the degree to which we find our autism debilitating.

You're making exactly the same mistake as was made in the past - by seeing only the external manifestations of internal difficulties.

All that really seperates someone with Asperger's wth someone with more 'severe' autism is our ability to hide the problem. It doesn't mean that the problem is not there, inside, just that we're much better at masking it.

Also, I, of course, can not speak for the NAS, but I suspect it reccommends against refering to people with autism as 'suffering' precisely because autism is not a disease, and it is precisely this negative view of the condition that holds us back, not the condition itself. We 'suffer' from living in an uncaring, and ignorant, society.

And likewise, I don't believe they are taking a 'pragmatic stance' on the causes of autism. It is not pragmatic to say that there is no definitive evidence for the cause(s) of autism, if there is, as there indeed is, no definitive evidence for the causes of autism! It is just a statement of fact.

Oh and please don't presume to think you know anything about me or my path through life. Yes, I went to school, achieved reasonable grades in several GCSE subjects, went to collage, and on to university. But that does not mean my journey was in anyway 'normal'.

Hey Scorpion,

Lighten up.....if I've offended you personally, in any way, I apologise. I can't apologise for my views as they're opinion.......I'm not God so I could be wrong. I said as much in other post that I hope I am wrong.

My reason for asking what you're situation is, was not to belittle you or your views. I've read 'The Essential Difference' and it changed my life. The reason for asking is to ascertain at what level you're looking at this from. By level, I can tell by your posts you're a highly intelligent person (in the traditional aspect of intelligence...ie. academic achievement etc.). I believe in the Theory Of Multiple Intelligences' so for me, the ability to be proficient in other areas (spatial, musical, intra-personal etc) is as important.

So by level, would I be correct in suggesting that you're looking at this (meaning the discussion we're having) from a personal point of view? I'm suggesting that you (and possibly Hope?) are framing your views from the point of view at how autism affects you every day of your life. You see, for me that's the fundamental difference here. I'm looking at this as a parent of a child who I (along with my wife) have total responsibility for.

For the last ten years, upon waking Tom is the first thing I think about and usually the last thing I think about before I go to sleep. Can you imagine what that must be like? Can you imagine that as a parent, your hopes and wishes, your personal dreams for the future are put on hold as you juggle with the demands of the child. That's what every parent has to learn to do, so I'm not making a song and dance about that, but as a parent of an ASC kid the emotional toll it takes can be huge. I've taken Tom to school every day of his life and I've collected him at the end of the day when he's come out crying because he hasn't understood what's been going on. To feel helpless in situations like that, for any parent wrenches you apart. Thankfully, within a few minutes his mood has changed......but the chemical imbalance between serenity and rage that he's setup within me takes much more time to subside. 

For the last ten years, we as a family and also individually have had to 'suffer' for Tom having autism. I know that word may have triggered emotional responses that you may not like. I haven't used it to annoy you or upset you, but I know how Tom has 'suffered' over the years and also how we have suffered. I read in the NAS's notes that journalists shouldn't talk about people 'suffering' from autism...it's not a PC term to use these days.

But when you see that the mainstream education he's received so far, has met about 30-40% of his needs, or projecting into the future that he has a 12% chance of ever finding employment (that's in old money.....I don't know what it will be in the future), I'd use the word 'suffering' to describe that.

I still stand by my assertion that I think Aspergers is completely different than what Tom has, and has always been around. Look at the path my son is taking through school (not taking any GCSE, is doing a ASDAN social lifeskills course) to your own path. I'm presuming you followed a standard education route through to your degree? I mean, on the one hand isn't this just the same as two neuro-typicals kids, only one is very academic and the other one not so academic? How does an autism spectrum exist if the only thing they have in common is being widely different from one another? I'm asking this, because I no longer understand what commonalities each group has.

I think the NAS are taking a very pragmatic stance over what they can and can't say. They practically say the causes of autism could be anything. I also think that the diagnosis can be dangerous if it then begins to define the person. If it helps the person achieve a better understanding of who they are, how they can communicate and interact with others then that's brilliant.

I'm stopping here, as my posts have been far too long for effective communication.

I do welcome your thoughts.

Al

altruistica said:

Scorpion,

If I'm trying to make a point, I'm hardly going to post a link to something that runs counter to what I believe....I think it's called debate.

LOL. Like I thought - you're so closed-minded that you can't even see that you did post a link to something that runs counter to what you believe.

altruistica said:

You didn't actually say what line of work you're in? Are you married? Kids?

What difference does it make what line of work I'm in? (Currently unemployed, due to chronic illness, but I have a BEng (hons) Degree in Software Engineering for Real-Time Systems, and worked, when I did, as a Software Engineer/Software Developer/Software Programmer, as it happens)

Or whether I'm married? (which I'm not)

Or whether I have children? (which I don't)

Let me guess - not being a married parent of a child with autism, I can't possibly have an opinion on it right?

Likewise, not working in the field, I can't possibly know anything about it, right?

Wrong.

As an intelligent, independently minded, individual, who just happens to be on the Autistic spectrum himself, I can, and do, have an informed opinion on the matter.

But, anyway, you appear to be conveniently ignoring the part of my post where I stated quite clearly:

"I'm not going to bother responding to you any further. You've clearly made up your mind, and no amount of good solid evidence, is going to change that. No instead you'll cherry pick the bits that back up your beliefs, and you present straw men to incorrectly falseify anything that you disagree with.

Your mind is closed. And discussing an issue with a closed mind is pointless."

And this really is the last I have to say to you.