I wouldn't at all be surprised if you're right. Remember the days when they said schizophrenia was a result of bad mothering? I NEVER bought that crap. Made no sense to me. Now they realize it has a biological basis.
-
Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
- Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral
The Autism Spectrum is Useless: Here's why...
- Thread starter ANTHONY LAF
- Start date
I wouldn't at all be surprised if you're right. Remember the days when they said schizophrenia was a result of bad mothering? I NEVER bought that crap. Made no sense to me. Now they realize it has a biological basis.
Since you have this all figured out,care to share how you feel it should be handled?
There will still have to be guidelines with the bio markers because no two individuals will be affected the same each time.
I honestly don't believe it can be that simple,
ANTHONY LAF
Active Member
Autism can't be labelled on a straight line. For example: I conduct behavior that might seem neurotypical. Another behavior might appear very unusual and be a clear indicator of autism.
A spectrum is not a straight line...
ANTHONY LAF
Active Member
yeah it's a scale same meaning
Ok,so once again,how do you propose it be defined?
Not at all. A spectrum, unlike a scale is not necessarily a concise and quantified linear progression.
Though I can see how anything construed as "ambiguity by design" might be fundamentally objectionable to some. But then when it comes to autism I don't see much of anything that can be so properly quantified in a purely linear fashion.
Funny to think this reminds me of my struggle to learn Macromedia Flash. When I couldn't seem to get beyond "the stage" being only a linear timeline. Once I realized it was intended to move back and forth and not necessarily in a linear fashion, I began to truly understand how it all worked. Essentially I had to reorient my mind to be far less rigid to figure such a dynamic out.
Last edited:
ANTHONY LAF
Active Member
just plain autism is a better label.
some behaviors appear autistic and some appear quite normal. For example, I count how many steps I take yet, I have a hard time making ANY friends, yet I can make eye contact fairly easily.
Putting someone on a spectrum is not a good indicator on how someone acts or what signs of autism they appear to have.
I posted on here somewhere else about cakes. To me it makes more sense than a spectrum to think of autism as the cake section of a recipe book and each person in that section as a recipe for a different cake. Some may be very, very different but all cakes. And of course there will be confusion with other dessert sections in the cookbook; Boston Creme Pie and Cheesecake?
Ok,first you say they just have autism.
What's next?
How do you determine what level of support they require without some form of demarcation?
This is your thread,please show me some supporting details so I can understand it further.
ANTHONY LAF
Active Member
demarcation of autism itself is wrong, that's the point of the thread. Everyone has strengths and weaknesses. a clear cut demarcation doesn't reflect how a person really acts. Putting labels on something as complex as autism is just lazy and wrong. Not only that but a million shrinks exist that label autistic individuals incorrectly.
Demarcation of autistic people is just wrong.
Once again, everyone is different.
It's more like a graph.
Behaviorism is what's dehumanizing. If you don't believe me, google "lovaas".
I am glad to have the label. Even though help is scarce I have a reason for the way I am.
Some manifestation of demarcation is a necessary evil remaining central to where medicine collides with both law and finance. Reflecting a basic need to create practical standards relative to everything from disability payments, workers compensation, medical insurance costs and even due process involving potential incarceration of sane and insane criminal defendants. Autism as a neurological condition is no exception to such legal and fiscal considerations of society.
Though in the case of the DSM-V personally I believe there exists too much intent to limit or decline disability for insurance and political considerations. The system may be terribly flawed at present, but it doesn't change a basic need for methodologies and standards to legally assess whether support of autistic people is required or deserved. No matter how diverse we actually are.
A spectrum amounts to a method of defining and classifying something. However it doesn't require a linear process. Maybe some day there will be a new protocol that is somehow linear and quantified to some degree. However in the meantime there must be some protocol in place, rather than none at all. Even one many of us may not appreciate in whole or in part.
Though in the case of the DSM-V personally I believe there exists too much intent to limit or decline disability for insurance and political considerations. The system may be terribly flawed at present, but it doesn't change a basic need for methodologies and standards to legally assess whether support of autistic people is required or deserved. No matter how diverse we actually are.
A spectrum amounts to a method of defining and classifying something. However it doesn't require a linear process. Maybe some day there will be a new protocol that is somehow linear and quantified to some degree. However in the meantime there must be some protocol in place, rather than none at all. Even one many of us may not appreciate in whole or in part.
ANTHONY LAF
Active Member
I'm not super liberal, I just believe in most liberal ideas.
Putting people in labels based on how "autistic" they are is wrong. I understand saying someone is autistic is fine but saying someone is really autistic or slight autistic is a load of horse crap. I'm autistic in some areas other areas I appear normal.
Putting people in labels based on how "autistic" they are is wrong. I understand saying someone is autistic is fine but saying someone is really autistic or slight autistic is a load of horse crap. I'm autistic in some areas other areas I appear normal.
granolaturtle
Well-Known Member
And just to remind people here, I'm pretty sure we have a couple of members who are non or semi verbal, so it's best not to throw "nonverbal" and "low cognitive functions" into the same basket.
I can't think of a more efficient way for politicians and insurers to marginalize or outright deny autism than allow medical professionals to assess the public based on entirely individual factors pertinent to each patient examined without any standardized medical guidelines and protocols.
The best way to enable professionals to function like mindless bureaucrats is to allow them to function without any official/professional guidelines. In this context even a dysfunctional set of medical protocols in place is better than none at all.
The best way to enable professionals to function like mindless bureaucrats is to allow them to function without any official/professional guidelines. In this context even a dysfunctional set of medical protocols in place is better than none at all.
Last edited:
New Threads
-
-
-
Computer question: for help with visual sensitivities- Started by MC1Rcat
- Replies: 34
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
