Are females underdiagnosed?

I honestly don't know the answer to this. I've never considered it before. It seems like too big a subject for me to delve into because my own diagnosis takes up almost all of my attention. How would they begin to measure whether one sex is under-diagnosed or not? Would they just look a the numbers of diagnosed males and compare them with the number of diagnosed women? Or would they look up the number of women who go for assessment and do not receive a positive diagnosis? That said, I wouldn't be surprised if under-diagnosis exists across all groups in society.

Tassimo,

It's true that more females are undiagnosed and even misdiagnosed sometimes. Historically, it was assumed only men could be autistic so all the criteria is based on the observation of autistic men making it gender bias.

Thanks, Daniel, for the explanation. It's bizarre that they would only assume males could be autistic. I wonder why they thought that...  could it be that females have a different condition to males or that they don't present the same traits as males or with the same intensity?

Thanks, Daniel, for the explanation. It's bizarre that they would only assume males could be autistic. I wonder why they thought that...  could it be that females have a different condition to males or that they don't present the same traits as males or with the same intensity?

Then this is a misunderstanding, if you agree with me don't act like you disagree with me. 

The subject had nothing to do with age and you came off as aggressive as you've taken me as aggressive.

So let's leave it here.

This is a place for discussion. You're embarrassing yourself by being so defensive. I replied to your thread with Tassimo, trying to explain something to him that was related to your point.

I wasn't changing the subject, I think you're taking this a little too far. I've reported your comment anyway, no need to be so aggressive.

'Listening to Autistic people' you say? But won't even listen to a point I have to make about lived experience being a Female with late diagnosed Autism? Odd that.

If you want to join a conversation you don't suddenly change the subject, that's interference as I said.

Joining a conversation is joining them on the same subject then continue. If you were trying to explain something to someone else you respond to them. 

Excuse me? I was trying to agree with you. No need to be rude. I literally am a female with Autism and was trying to give Tassimo another perspective since he doesn't quite understand (from what I've read). That was extremely uncalled for. It was another side to your exact argument, I was not changing the subject and I think you've really read into my reply wrong.

If you see my comment below, I made a similar point to yours. I think you need to take a step back and be less defensive.

Do you think I haven't thought about that or something? I've studied Autism for over 20 years, I came to see gender effects how males and females are affected before the professionals even noticed. 

I came to know that by listening to Autistic people, while already knowing the history, by hearing subtle differences between males and females with the females sharing they were not diagnosed until their late teens or twenties. 

This conversation is about how many females are diagnosed, you don't enter conversations and change the subject, that's interference.

Also perhaps we can think about the amount of males that get an early diagnosis (and then get support in childhood) compared to the amount of females that get diagnosed in childhood. it can be harder to get an adult diagnosis for some, so many women go unsupported throughout their childhood and then in adulthood struggle to get diagnosed.

I think a better way of saying "under diagnosed" is "fewer females are diagnosed".

The ratio is approximately each time 4 males are diagnosed only 1 female is diagnosed.

So it's not a measurement of a diagnosis, it's a question of how many autistic females are undiagnosed.

What is puzzling me is how they measure under-diagnosis. How can you tell whether one group is under-diagnosed in comparison with another? It doesn't make sense to me unless it's by picking an arbitrary figure for diagnosis. 

According to neurodiversity there's another spectrum we're all on that explains so many of the behaviours like keeping things consistent.

Neuroscience shows autistic brains are like systemizers, going from an emphasizing side to a systemizing side. So many behaviours like routines, consistency, control, rules etc. are all principles of systems. 

What they see is most females are on the emphasizing side and most males are on the systemizing side. Men stood out much more compared to females, females were more willing to emphasize and blend in. Very few are near the middle having a balance systemize and emphasize. 

Because of the emphasizing they couldn't see it in females, females emphasized as far as pretending to be part of a group standing at the edge, then go to the edge of another group making it appear as if they have no social difficulties at all. Fortunately they noticed this in the end.