11 ms·

The overloading of the term autism has had a real damaging effect on some people. My cousin is profoundly autistic: he's nonverbal, and will never live independ

The overloading of the term autism has had a real damaging effect on some people. My cousin is profoundly autistic: he's nonverbal, and will never live independently. In the 90s most autism research was focused on helping people like him. He was involved in some pioneering studies at John's Hopkins University. Today most of the money and advocacy is for high-performing or moderately-performing people with autism. Not just in relative terms, the amount of funding for people like my cousin has gone down. It makes sense; they are the larger group by volume and are able to advocate better than people like my cousin. I wish it weren't a zero-sum game, and we recognized that autism is just a word for a broad series of conditions. It would be like if we called everyone with poor eyesight 'blind': yes, your vision is impaired. But the solutions you need are very different than the solutions Stevie Wonder needs. See also: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/health/autism-spectrum-neurodiversity-kennedy.html https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/01/health/autism-spectrum-ne...

MangoToupe 1y ago
> Today most of the money and advocacy is for high-performing or moderately-performing people with autism. Is this true? I think it's important to distinguish between social media (and other sorts of) discourse and where money is actually flowing.
- cogman10 1y ago
  Not really. The main difference is that we don't immediately institutionalize kids with severe autism, which does save a lot of money. For my kid with severe autism, about the only real impact of more people getting therapy is that sometimes it's harder to get an appointment (triage is more first come first serve and less needs based). Realistically, that simply translates into a month to a half year waiting for an opening.
- in_cahoots 1y ago
  Social media is not disconnected from society as a whole. Influencers are called that because they have actual influence. You only need to look at and truly understand the MAHA movement to know this. It's not a movement by RFK; it's a movement of people (often moms) who are dissatisfied with their current situation and trying to do something to change it. They may be flat out wrong, but they have influence nonetheless. Did the diagnostic criteria in DSM 5 change as a result of social media, was it the other way around, or was it hidden variables affecting both? Regardless, the money and attention tend to follow what the common people are saying. See: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  - anonym29 1y ago
    Topically relevant: the DSM 5 eliminated the distinction between what was formerly called an Asperger's Syndrome diagnosis from an Autism diagnosis, in part because the name "Asperger" came from a Nazi scientist, and therefore, per then-current political winds, the only morally correct action to take was to erase the name. Of course, this motive needed some kind of non-political justification to not come across as what it was (an example of non-medical political partisanship aimed at erasing history that was disfavored by the political partisans pushing the agenda), which is where the idea of re-categorizing what were and still are clearly at least two distinct clusters of diagnostic patterns as one grand, unified "autism spectrum" that functionally resulted in little more than muddying of waters in the field, which now need to be cleared up again - as pointed out by TFA. You're right that there are external variables, including non-medical variables, influencing the DSM-5's diagnostic shuffle, I just don't see them as particularly well "hidden".
    - cogman10 1y ago
      No. Asperger's was eliminated as a diagnosis because differentiating it from autism was hard to do. Two different evaluations could land a kid as either autistic or asperger's depending on the day and the evaluator. And, importantly, Asperger's qualified for less therapies and treatment than autism did. That meant that even though your kid likely needed more treatment, they'd be denied it because they had a good day when being evaluated. The crossover for treatment was largely the same with autism qualifying for more. Even if it was the "Nazi link" they'd simply have changed the name to something more acceptable. TFA is suggesting that there are probably multiple conditions which cluster around similar symptoms which makes it hard to identify the exact cause of autism.
      - anonym29 1y ago
        The diagnostic reliability criteria even back then painted a picture of the details of the condition space being more nuanced than what were currently being captured, not less nuanced, so the idea of reducing nuance and distinction still seems questionable by an empirical and epistemological standpoint. However, that decision remains defensible and supported by the social justice / equity / de-hierarchicalization / eponym erasure motivational drives. These, besides the eponym erasure specifically, also explain many of the other changes in the DSM-5, like the elimination of many other more-detailed diagnoses, like PDD-NOS. This isn't to assert that the clinical reasoning offered didn't have merit, just that institutional consensus-forming behavior isn't immune to the macro backdrop of the sociopolitical winds of the day. Committee member A thinks: "These diagnostic categories aren't reliable" (true, clinical concern) Committee member B thinks: "Honoring Asperger is ethically uncomfortable" (true, historical concern) Committee member C thinks: "Hierarchical categories are problematic" (true, equity concern) Committee member D thinks: "Spectrum model reflects current research better" (true, scientific concern) No single person needs a "primary political motivation." No conspiracy needed. No explicit coordination required. Yet the outcome eliminating Asperger's and collapsing categories - emerges from a system where: - Progressive ideology shapes what problems become salient - Shared epistemic frameworks determine what solutions seem natural - Professional incentives reward what can be publicly justified - Social proof operates through "everyone reasonable agrees" "The clinical rationale was legitimate" doesn't contradict "political ideology shaped the outcome."
jsbisviewtiful 1y ago
> The overloading of the term autism I have a former friend who listened to too many podcasts and self-diagnosed himself as autistic right around when his relationship was falling apart. The guy couldn't handle his girlfriend asking him to step up on some things so he decided his "out" socially was to call himself autistic to garner sympathy. The dude isn't autistic, he is simply terrible at accepting any responsibility for himself and doesn't care how that affects others. That was my first exposure to how out of control autism labeling was about to become and it's gotten a lot worse since then.
- yieldcrv 1y ago
  Tylenol catching strays over people like this
- awesome_dude 1y ago
  Can you share your qualifications that demonstrate how you are able to make any form of diagnosis on your "friend"
  - bena 1y ago
    The same qualifications his friend had when he made his self-diagnosis
    - awesome_dude 1y ago
      So you agree then that the story was rubbish
      - bena 1y ago
        No, he pointed out how over-saturation of autism awareness has resulted in people self-diagnosing as a way to absolve themselves of shitty behavior. My step-son is diagnosed. He is on the spectrum. He was non-verbal for longer than most children and low-verbal for years after that. He has fine-motor challenges and operates on an emotional level behind those of his peers. If he's being an ass, we let him know. He knows his condition is not an excuse for his behavior. He needs to know how to cope with and navigate the world around him. Autism awareness and advocacy is about not shaming people for wearing ear protection in public. It's about recognizing that texture aversion is a thing. It's about knowing to extend grace when appropriate. It's not about letting people be shitty. He may be autistic, but he does not get to interrupt us. He does not get to derail conversations into his interests. He does not get to ignore his hygiene. Instead, we try to teach him to be patient. To be polite. Strategies to make necessary things a part of his routine. The biggest difference is that we do these things with compassion and with the realization that some things are more difficult for him. Rather than what we did in the past, which was browbeat autistic people into masking.
thewebguyd 1y ago
I think one of the major mistakes in this was folding in what used to be Aspergers into the Autism Spectrum diagnosis. I received an Aspergers diagnosis back when it was still separate. To me it still doesn't feel right for my condition to also be lumped in with people like your cousin. I understand that it can still be a "spectrum" but the spectrum is far too wide now. Your cousin has very different struggles and needs compared to someone with a more high functioning autism, or even someone with (formerly known as Aspergers) like myself.
- breakingrules3 1y ago
  [dead]
- o11c 1y ago
  I disagree. The problem is that the Aspergers-vs-Autism distinction was largely "looks normal at first glance" vs "doesn't", which is almost entirely unrelated to the many axes of actual symptoms. An glaringly incorrect division is more harmful than a lack of division. If it had been a "good enough" division it could've been kept. The best-attested actual axis is "has epileptic seizures?"; partitioning by it gets rid of most of the bimodalities in the data. My estimate is that there are around 5 individual axes but many of them are continuous and it's not perfectly clear if some are actually correlated to others. And since the others are usually not bimodal it becomes difficult to choose different diagnoses based solely on symptoms, in the absence of knowing and testing actual mechanisms.
  - bagful 1y ago
    What are the other axes in your theory?
    - o11c 1y ago
      Some candidates include: sensory processing (including keen senses, overload, and undersensitivity - sometimes different for each sense!), trauma when unplanned/unexpected actions or lies occur (part of "patterns/routines" in general, but I exclude mere "pop-sci OCD"), difficulty reading facial/social cues (and the sheer terror of how people can read your mind if you meet their eyes). I'm unsure about "difficulty expressing yourself clearly even when you know exactly what you mean". Nonverbality is a possibility but I'm actually skeptical of it, though it does give a very useful hook for experiments - there are some toddlers who are initially verbal like normal, then gradually become nonverbal and can recognize "something is happening to me!". I specifically exclude intelligence-vs-retardation; though both are common, neither seems intrinsic to autism itself (though perhaps they are potential causes?). Despite their correlations, I also exclude general introversion, ADHD, special interests as being either external or secondary. And "making repetitious movements" or even "throwing tantrums" is clearly on the side of "coping strategy" rather than a part of the disease. Many autism quizzes split the questions into categories which somewhat align with the axes, but as I said before it's not clear what's actually independent and forms a meaningful difference. Two axes outside of autism are also clear: schizophrenia is the formation of the patterns too detached from the world (as opposed to autism which where internal patterns result from the real world being too strong in some way - it's quite striking that for all the comorbidities autism has, diagnosis of schizophrenia in the same individual is exceedingly rare and probably wrong in at least one of the cases, though they intermingle at the family level); dementia is when the brain fails to build enough patterns (where autism builds too many). One opinion I hold vehemently: if you're still in the "the problem is other people" phase, you aren't claim autism, you're just an asshole. Doing anything useful about autism requires recognizing: "my brain (my body?) is the reason I am suffering"; the best others can give is palliative care.
samloo 1y ago
Long before this was mainstream a misdiagnosis of ADHD and then autism led me on a decadeslong course of therapy and treatment that ultimately didn't address my issues. It was even worse since I was a child at the time labeled by people I was supposed to trust and could not comprehend the true meaning of these terms, so I grew up into an adult assuming what they told me was the truth, the whole time. Because of their actual role in my issues, I now know that nothing they could have labeled me with would have helped me and allowed them to take responsibility for my poor treatment. All to say that the map is not the territory, and leaping to conclusions at the first label that sounds like it fits the bill can have devastating consequences. And as in my case, labels can be used to shift the blame away from the caretaker responsible for trauma/etc. by medicalizing the consequences, or onto an existence that is perceived to be unchangeable/futile to address.
- bena 1y ago
  Sorry, I'm a little confused here. Are you saying you were misdiagnosed with ADHD/Autism? That you actually had a different condition that superficially presented as ADHD/Autism.
  - lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
    Their abusive caregiver(s) used an ADHD-then-autism misdiagnosis to blame/misdirect the effects of their abuse away from themself (or selves).
dayvid 1y ago
Same with my little brother. I've seen autism turn into an ignored subject to being hijacked by higher-functioning autistic people who are controlling the narrative. It's good to have more autism awareness, but they're the top 1% of people with discernable autism and can hurt large numbers of lower functioning people with autism who basically have to be taken care of by their families for the rest of their lives.
polartx 1y ago
I’d like to piggyback on your comment to get your (and broader audiences) opinion on a situation I’m facing: I’ve recently learned my 5 year old is exhibiting behavior problems in kindergarten. His teacher has put the notion in his mother’s head that he may have autism and has provided his mother a fast track referral to have him tested/diagnosed. I feel strongly that he does not have autism; aside from being disruptive in class he doesn’t have any other characteristics—-he is very verbal, social, doesn’t avoid eye contact or physical contact. I’ve spoken to his Sunday school teachers, daycare workers, etc and they were incredulous that he potentially has autism. ‘Well if he doesn’t have it what’s the harm in having him tested at a facility that specializes in pediatric autism? If you’re right they’ll easily determine he’s not autistic, right?’ Is the question I can imagine being asked at my reluctance to consent to the testing and diagnostics. Frankly, I’m suspicious of the (potential) conflict of incentives that a clinic specializing in pediatric autism may have; I positive diagnosis is only good for business in the way that a men’s clinic is incentivized to find every patient that walks through their door has low testosterone. Especially considering the subjectivity and ‘spectrum’ that falls under the blanket term ‘autism’. On a scale from likely to incredibly unlikely, how rooted in reality would you characterize my concerns? Also what harm, if any would come from a false positive diagnosis? Would it outweigh the harm of a person being an undiagnosed, high functioning person with autism?
- exolymph 1y ago
  The school system needs an Official™ medical justification to grant your kid extra accommodations for whatever his behavioral issues are. They are less interested in whether he "actually" has autism than in a rubber stamp that gives them more options for managing him. Which might indeed be a good thing for your son! It's hard to say without being closer to the situation.
  - polartx 1y ago
    Thanks. That indeed was one of the questions I had in my mind--"what changes once a diagnosis or label has been affixed?"
- in_cahoots 1y ago
quantumcotton 1y ago
But is it the profound autism or is there something else? I think we actually need to define the term a little differently for mental retardation and bring it back. Is he profoundly autistic with an average IQ? Or is he profoundly autistic and essentially incapable of communication? It's not the autism that's the problem. He might also be autistic but a lot of people started labeling retardation as autism. Which really tainted the term autistic for normal people. So I do actually agree with the shift. Not that they should take anything away from the profoundly autistic. They should offer them more. But there should be a program for that type of person. Assisting them greater than the autistic programs. Autistic help should be more about understanding the internal issues we face on a daily basis and how to deal with them. How does that help someone who can't communicate? The help he needs is probably different and more extreme than what an autistic person needs. It's like saying I can't run. My arm hurts. Then you say. What do you mean? You're a quadriplegic!! He's like oh yea that too but I can feel a tingle in my arm. Treating the arm isn't fixing the problem lol. If that person was an advocate for treating tingles in their arm. You would think it's kind of silly because if they were to treat that. It doesn't really help the quadriplegic part. But he keeps saying it will. It's not that I don't believe he has a problem with his arm. I'm sure he does. But the problem on why he can't run isn't that.

MangoToupe 1y ago

> Today most of the money and advocacy is for high-performing or moderately-performing people with autism. Is this true? I think it's important to distinguish between social media (and other sorts of) discourse and where money is actually flowing.

cogman10 1y ago
Not really. The main difference is that we don't immediately institutionalize kids with severe autism, which does save a lot of money. For my kid with severe autism, about the only real impact of more people getting therapy is that sometimes it's harder to get an appointment (triage is more first come first serve and less needs based). Realistically, that simply translates into a month to a half year waiting for an opening.
in_cahoots 1y ago
Social media is not disconnected from society as a whole. Influencers are called that because they have actual influence. You only need to look at and truly understand the MAHA movement to know this. It's not a movement by RFK; it's a movement of people (often moms) who are dissatisfied with their current situation and trying to do something to change it. They may be flat out wrong, but they have influence nonetheless. Did the diagnostic criteria in DSM 5 change as a result of social media, was it the other way around, or was it hidden variables affecting both? Regardless, the money and attention tend to follow what the common people are saying. See: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- anonym29 1y ago
  Topically relevant: the DSM 5 eliminated the distinction between what was formerly called an Asperger's Syndrome diagnosis from an Autism diagnosis, in part because the name "Asperger" came from a Nazi scientist, and therefore, per then-current political winds, the only morally correct action to take was to erase the name. Of course, this motive needed some kind of non-political justification to not come across as what it was (an example of non-medical political partisanship aimed at erasing history that was disfavored by the political partisans pushing the agenda), which is where the idea of re-categorizing what were and still are clearly at least two distinct clusters of diagnostic patterns as one grand, unified "autism spectrum" that functionally resulted in little more than muddying of waters in the field, which now need to be cleared up again - as pointed out by TFA. You're right that there are external variables, including non-medical variables, influencing the DSM-5's diagnostic shuffle, I just don't see them as particularly well "hidden".
  - cogman10 1y ago
    No. Asperger's was eliminated as a diagnosis because differentiating it from autism was hard to do. Two different evaluations could land a kid as either autistic or asperger's depending on the day and the evaluator. And, importantly, Asperger's qualified for less therapies and treatment than autism did. That meant that even though your kid likely needed more treatment, they'd be denied it because they had a good day when being evaluated. The crossover for treatment was largely the same with autism qualifying for more. Even if it was the "Nazi link" they'd simply have changed the name to something more acceptable. TFA is suggesting that there are probably multiple conditions which cluster around similar symptoms which makes it hard to identify the exact cause of autism.
    - anonym29 1y ago
      The diagnostic reliability criteria even back then painted a picture of the details of the condition space being more nuanced than what were currently being captured, not less nuanced, so the idea of reducing nuance and distinction still seems questionable by an empirical and epistemological standpoint. However, that decision remains defensible and supported by the social justice / equity / de-hierarchicalization / eponym erasure motivational drives. These, besides the eponym erasure specifically, also explain many of the other changes in the DSM-5, like the elimination of many other more-detailed diagnoses, like PDD-NOS. This isn't to assert that the clinical reasoning offered didn't have merit, just that institutional consensus-forming behavior isn't immune to the macro backdrop of the sociopolitical winds of the day. Committee member A thinks: "These diagnostic categories aren't reliable" (true, clinical concern) Committee member B thinks: "Honoring Asperger is ethically uncomfortable" (true, historical concern) Committee member C thinks: "Hierarchical categories are problematic" (true, equity concern) Committee member D thinks: "Spectrum model reflects current research better" (true, scientific concern) No single person needs a "primary political motivation." No conspiracy needed. No explicit coordination required. Yet the outcome eliminating Asperger's and collapsing categories - emerges from a system where: - Progressive ideology shapes what problems become salient - Shared epistemic frameworks determine what solutions seem natural - Professional incentives reward what can be publicly justified - Social proof operates through "everyone reasonable agrees" "The clinical rationale was legitimate" doesn't contradict "political ideology shaped the outcome."

jsbisviewtiful 1y ago

> The overloading of the term autism I have a former friend who listened to too many podcasts and self-diagnosed himself as autistic right around when his relationship was falling apart. The guy couldn't handle his girlfriend asking him to step up on some things so he decided his "out" socially was to call himself autistic to garner sympathy. The dude isn't autistic, he is simply terrible at accepting any responsibility for himself and doesn't care how that affects others. That was my first exposure to how out of control autism labeling was about to become and it's gotten a lot worse since then.

yieldcrv 1y ago
Tylenol catching strays over people like this
awesome_dude 1y ago
Can you share your qualifications that demonstrate how you are able to make any form of diagnosis on your "friend"
- bena 1y ago
  The same qualifications his friend had when he made his self-diagnosis
  - awesome_dude 1y ago
    So you agree then that the story was rubbish
    - bena 1y ago
      No, he pointed out how over-saturation of autism awareness has resulted in people self-diagnosing as a way to absolve themselves of shitty behavior. My step-son is diagnosed. He is on the spectrum. He was non-verbal for longer than most children and low-verbal for years after that. He has fine-motor challenges and operates on an emotional level behind those of his peers. If he's being an ass, we let him know. He knows his condition is not an excuse for his behavior. He needs to know how to cope with and navigate the world around him. Autism awareness and advocacy is about not shaming people for wearing ear protection in public. It's about recognizing that texture aversion is a thing. It's about knowing to extend grace when appropriate. It's not about letting people be shitty. He may be autistic, but he does not get to interrupt us. He does not get to derail conversations into his interests. He does not get to ignore his hygiene. Instead, we try to teach him to be patient. To be polite. Strategies to make necessary things a part of his routine. The biggest difference is that we do these things with compassion and with the realization that some things are more difficult for him. Rather than what we did in the past, which was browbeat autistic people into masking.

thewebguyd 1y ago

I think one of the major mistakes in this was folding in what used to be Aspergers into the Autism Spectrum diagnosis. I received an Aspergers diagnosis back when it was still separate. To me it still doesn't feel right for my condition to also be lumped in with people like your cousin. I understand that it can still be a "spectrum" but the spectrum is far too wide now. Your cousin has very different struggles and needs compared to someone with a more high functioning autism, or even someone with (formerly known as Aspergers) like myself.

breakingrules3 1y ago
[dead]
o11c 1y ago
I disagree. The problem is that the Aspergers-vs-Autism distinction was largely "looks normal at first glance" vs "doesn't", which is almost entirely unrelated to the many axes of actual symptoms. An glaringly incorrect division is more harmful than a lack of division. If it had been a "good enough" division it could've been kept. The best-attested actual axis is "has epileptic seizures?"; partitioning by it gets rid of most of the bimodalities in the data. My estimate is that there are around 5 individual axes but many of them are continuous and it's not perfectly clear if some are actually correlated to others. And since the others are usually not bimodal it becomes difficult to choose different diagnoses based solely on symptoms, in the absence of knowing and testing actual mechanisms.
- bagful 1y ago
  What are the other axes in your theory?
  - o11c 1y ago
    Some candidates include: sensory processing (including keen senses, overload, and undersensitivity - sometimes different for each sense!), trauma when unplanned/unexpected actions or lies occur (part of "patterns/routines" in general, but I exclude mere "pop-sci OCD"), difficulty reading facial/social cues (and the sheer terror of how people can read your mind if you meet their eyes). I'm unsure about "difficulty expressing yourself clearly even when you know exactly what you mean". Nonverbality is a possibility but I'm actually skeptical of it, though it does give a very useful hook for experiments - there are some toddlers who are initially verbal like normal, then gradually become nonverbal and can recognize "something is happening to me!". I specifically exclude intelligence-vs-retardation; though both are common, neither seems intrinsic to autism itself (though perhaps they are potential causes?). Despite their correlations, I also exclude general introversion, ADHD, special interests as being either external or secondary. And "making repetitious movements" or even "throwing tantrums" is clearly on the side of "coping strategy" rather than a part of the disease. Many autism quizzes split the questions into categories which somewhat align with the axes, but as I said before it's not clear what's actually independent and forms a meaningful difference. Two axes outside of autism are also clear: schizophrenia is the formation of the patterns too detached from the world (as opposed to autism which where internal patterns result from the real world being too strong in some way - it's quite striking that for all the comorbidities autism has, diagnosis of schizophrenia in the same individual is exceedingly rare and probably wrong in at least one of the cases, though they intermingle at the family level); dementia is when the brain fails to build enough patterns (where autism builds too many). One opinion I hold vehemently: if you're still in the "the problem is other people" phase, you aren't claim autism, you're just an asshole. Doing anything useful about autism requires recognizing: "my brain (my body?) is the reason I am suffering"; the best others can give is palliative care.

samloo 1y ago

Long before this was mainstream a misdiagnosis of ADHD and then autism led me on a decadeslong course of therapy and treatment that ultimately didn't address my issues. It was even worse since I was a child at the time labeled by people I was supposed to trust and could not comprehend the true meaning of these terms, so I grew up into an adult assuming what they told me was the truth, the whole time. Because of their actual role in my issues, I now know that nothing they could have labeled me with would have helped me and allowed them to take responsibility for my poor treatment. All to say that the map is not the territory, and leaping to conclusions at the first label that sounds like it fits the bill can have devastating consequences. And as in my case, labels can be used to shift the blame away from the caretaker responsible for trauma/etc. by medicalizing the consequences, or onto an existence that is perceived to be unchangeable/futile to address.

bena 1y ago
Sorry, I'm a little confused here. Are you saying you were misdiagnosed with ADHD/Autism? That you actually had a different condition that superficially presented as ADHD/Autism.
- lcnPylGDnU4H9OF 1y ago
  Their abusive caregiver(s) used an ADHD-then-autism misdiagnosis to blame/misdirect the effects of their abuse away from themself (or selves).

dayvid 1y ago

Same with my little brother. I've seen autism turn into an ignored subject to being hijacked by higher-functioning autistic people who are controlling the narrative. It's good to have more autism awareness, but they're the top 1% of people with discernable autism and can hurt large numbers of lower functioning people with autism who basically have to be taken care of by their families for the rest of their lives.

polartx 1y ago

I’d like to piggyback on your comment to get your (and broader audiences) opinion on a situation I’m facing: I’ve recently learned my 5 year old is exhibiting behavior problems in kindergarten. His teacher has put the notion in his mother’s head that he may have autism and has provided his mother a fast track referral to have him tested/diagnosed. I feel strongly that he does not have autism; aside from being disruptive in class he doesn’t have any other characteristics—-he is very verbal, social, doesn’t avoid eye contact or physical contact. I’ve spoken to his Sunday school teachers, daycare workers, etc and they were incredulous that he potentially has autism. ‘Well if he doesn’t have it what’s the harm in having him tested at a facility that specializes in pediatric autism? If you’re right they’ll easily determine he’s not autistic, right?’ Is the question I can imagine being asked at my reluctance to consent to the testing and diagnostics. Frankly, I’m suspicious of the (potential) conflict of incentives that a clinic specializing in pediatric autism may have; I positive diagnosis is only good for business in the way that a men’s clinic is incentivized to find every patient that walks through their door has low testosterone. Especially considering the subjectivity and ‘spectrum’ that falls under the blanket term ‘autism’. On a scale from likely to incredibly unlikely, how rooted in reality would you characterize my concerns? Also what harm, if any would come from a false positive diagnosis? Would it outweigh the harm of a person being an undiagnosed, high functioning person with autism?

exolymph 1y ago
The school system needs an Official™ medical justification to grant your kid extra accommodations for whatever his behavioral issues are. They are less interested in whether he "actually" has autism than in a rubber stamp that gives them more options for managing him. Which might indeed be a good thing for your son! It's hard to say without being closer to the situation.
- polartx 1y ago
  Thanks. That indeed was one of the questions I had in my mind--"what changes once a diagnosis or label has been affixed?"
in_cahoots 1y ago

quantumcotton 1y ago

But is it the profound autism or is there something else? I think we actually need to define the term a little differently for mental retardation and bring it back. Is he profoundly autistic with an average IQ? Or is he profoundly autistic and essentially incapable of communication? It's not the autism that's the problem. He might also be autistic but a lot of people started labeling retardation as autism. Which really tainted the term autistic for normal people. So I do actually agree with the shift. Not that they should take anything away from the profoundly autistic. They should offer them more. But there should be a program for that type of person. Assisting them greater than the autistic programs. Autistic help should be more about understanding the internal issues we face on a daily basis and how to deal with them. How does that help someone who can't communicate? The help he needs is probably different and more extreme than what an autistic person needs. It's like saying I can't run. My arm hurts. Then you say. What do you mean? You're a quadriplegic!! He's like oh yea that too but I can feel a tingle in my arm. Treating the arm isn't fixing the problem lol. If that person was an advocate for treating tingles in their arm. You would think it's kind of silly because if they were to treat that. It doesn't really help the quadriplegic part. But he keeps saying it will. It's not that I don't believe he has a problem with his arm. I'm sure he does. But the problem on why he can't run isn't that.