Austism

[Ouroboros]

As per the Paddy McGuiness and his wife in the news, does it really matter to have the label for mild autism? The traits are part of being humans surely, can still live normally? Just feels like another label.

[StevieBee]

It stands to reason that as our understanding of human physiology and psychology evolves, it becomes possible to identify certain traits and conditions that wasn't possible in the past. This in turn enables more focused support, mitigation or allowances (or 'tolerances') to be applied which makes the life of the person and their families better.

I have two friends (in their late 50s) who at school were labelled 'a bit thick'. They are anything but thick. The correct label that applies to them today is Dyslexia. Same with badly behaved kids (ADHD), loner weirdos (Aspergers), etc...

We're all labelled in one way or another. In the context of the above, the term 'labelling' is one that society applies, rather than the medical profession who use behavioural categorisation as a basis on which to consider the most appropriate treatment. Having the ability to objectively determine something is, I think, highly advantageous and far better than just considering someone to be a bit odd.

[hyphen]

Ouroboros said:

As per the Paddy McGuiness and his wife in the news, does it really matter to have the label for mild autism? The traits are part of being humans surely, can still live normally? Just feels like another label.

The human brain is a complicated thing, as is the all round body. We are all unique and will have various traits. Unless any condition is severe we should stop labeling it and accept everyone has their characteristics.

[Pinkie15]

‘Labels’ as such might also be crucial in being able to access support services.

See also this thread from Hammer67 in which he have latest update:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

[hyphen]

Pinkie15 said:

‘Labels’ as such might also be crucial in being able to access support services.

All conditions are a spectrum from mild to severe. Those at the severe end of Autism are incapable of living self-supported.

[StevieBee]

hyphen said:

Ouroboros said:

As per the Paddy McGuiness and his wife in the news, does it really matter to have the label for mild autism? The traits are part of being humans surely, can still live normally? Just feels like another label.

The human brain is a complicated thing, as is the all round body. We are all unique and will have various traits. Unless any condition is severe we should stop labeling it and accept everyone has their characteristics.

Traits and characteristics are very different to conditions.

'Severity' is a vague measure of the impact of any condition and also variable person to person. As I mentioned above, it's only society that applies labels. The medical profession categorises which is subtly but critically different in that categorisation determines possible treatment.

So if we de-label or de-categorise 'mild autism', then we deny that the condition exists and remove the opportunity for measures to be applied that may help improve a person's life.

I see nothing wrong in the labelling or classification of conditions as the benefits of this approach far outweigh any negatives of which I'm struggling to think of any.

[GT03ROB]

Labelling conditions can bring one of 2 results.

It can be used as an excuse or used constructively.

Over the years people have found me a bit odd. I had been described as antisocial, a bit rude sometimes, uncommunicative, unfeeling. It never really bothered me but seem to bother others. There were times when I felt I couldn’t’t deal well with simplest situations (ordering food at a drive through for several people for example), couldn’t;’t really understand it, I then did one of these online tests, which showed I had autistic tendencies. Subsequently discussed things with somebody who was well versed in the field & over about an hour of discussion he felt the test was about right. I’ve never been formally diagnosed & I’m a functioning autistic if thats a term. However having a level of understanding now helps me both avoid certain situations, helps those close to me avoid creating those certain situations & makes me a bit more aware of how I appear to others. I’d like to think I use the knowledge constructively.

I can still come across as rude, disinterested in others and still need time away from people!

[deckster]

It can be a very personal thing. My daughter undoubtedly exhibits a lot of autistic traits, but in consultation with her psychiatrist we declined to have her formally diagnosed - firstly because she really didn't want the label (she dislikes being "different" enough as it is), and also from a practical perspective our private health insurance specifically excludes autism as a condition that they will cover.

It may be that as she gets older she will decide that actually, having a formal diagnosis will help her either mentally, or practically to access services. But for now we (and she) are happy that she doesn't have the label.

[sparkyhx]

hyphen said:

Pinkie15 said:

‘Labels’ as such might also be crucial in being able to access support services.

All conditions are a spectrum from mild to severe. Those at the severe end of Autism are incapable of living self-supported.

And even some of those can appear quite 'normal'. I have seen people give eloquent presentations in front of hundreds of people, hold a room, hold Q&A sessions, yet wear nappies and need assistance dressing themselves and generally functioning. To look and be with them you would not know.

Mild and severe are also seen from the viewer perspective, You have no idea what struggles the person has outside the public face people put on. Nobody sees me completely exhausted at the end of a work day, the price I pay for 'acting normal'.

Also those people on the spectrum who would be classed as with severe autism, low functioning, high support, classic Kanner autism, you could argue that they live in blissful ignorance, where as I am perfectly aware of my shortcomings and as a result suffer from well hidden depression and anxiety. Tell me who is 'mild' or 'severe'.

Autism is graded on level of support low to high, and not graded on how YOU experience their autism.

Cliche, but true even so. "if you've met one person with autism, you've met one person with autism"

Edited by sparkyhx on Wednesday 1st December 14:43

[BoRED S2upid]

Pinkie15 said:

‘Labels’ as such might also be crucial in being able to access support services.

See also this thread from Hammer67 in which he have latest update:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

This.

Lots of help out there for Autistic. Other disabilities not so. Also well researched teaching methods for Autistic so yes it is worthwhile clinically assessing it.

Edited by BoRED S2upid on Wednesday 1st December 14:52

[hyphen]

StevieBee said:

So if we de-label or de-categorise 'mild autism', then we deny that the condition exists and remove the opportunity for measures to be applied that may help improve a person's life.

How would it be improves? Melanie Sykes was saying last week that she had trouble listening to her in ear piece whilst also presenting, due to her autism. How would you solve it? And why would you even bother.

The sad fact is that government budgets are of a fixed amount, and in the list of priorities, measuring and researching mild end of spectrums are never going to be a useful spend when we have so many other things to be looking at, including helping those at the more serious end of spectrums. Ask the tax payer if he or she will pay more tax to fund this and they will say no.

[Ouroboros]

hyphen said:

How would it be improves? Melanie Sykes was saying last week that she had trouble listening to her in ear piece whilst also presenting, due to her autism. How would you solve it? And why would you even bother.

The sad fact is that government budgets are of a fixed amount, and in the list of priorities, measuring and researching mild end of spectrums are never going to be a useful spend when we have so many other things to be looking at, including helping those at the more serious end of spectrums. Ask the tax payer if he or she will pay more tax to fund this and they will say no.

Here's a flip, and can talk from experience. A lesser know, more severe disease/affliction etc, isn't classified/categorised so do not fit in the parameters and get zero support.

There is an obvious bias towards more mainstream afflictions, yet illnesses etc that don't correspond to a label, get overlooked.

It is similar to the gluton thing, the actual amount truly afflicted is very small, yet there is a whole industry now to cater for people who feel afflicted yet statistically aren't.

Edited by Ouroboros on Wednesday 1st December 17:42

[StevieBee]

hyphen said:

StevieBee said:

So if we de-label or de-categorise 'mild autism', then we deny that the condition exists and remove the opportunity for measures to be applied that may help improve a person's life.

How would it be improves? Melanie Sykes was saying last week that she had trouble listening to her in ear piece whilst also presenting, due to her autism. How would you solve it? And why would you even bother.

The sad fact is that government budgets are of a fixed amount, and in the list of priorities, measuring and researching mild end of spectrums are never going to be a useful spend when we have so many other things to be looking at, including helping those at the more serious end of spectrums. Ask the tax payer if he or she will pay more tax to fund this and they will say no.

It's not about solving it. It's about recognising that there's influencing cause. This alone can be exceptionally empowering to sufferers as they recognise that there's reason for the way they are and not just weird or odd. It also helps others understand the characteristics that prevail.

Take the example I gave earlier about Dyslexia. There was a time when this wasn't recognised as a thing. How much better would the lives have been of those that suffered from it but at the time were told they were just a bit dim? Do you not think Melanie Sykes would have a host of other issues if she did not understand why she couldn't hear or process in-ear direction while presenting?

All of this requires no additional funding beyond that already allocated to the research; research that is still relatively young (autism only being formally recognised as a condition in the early 80s, the spectrum of conditions being explored in the 90s and only formally recognised in the early 00's). As more is learned, the more precise the categorisations become which inevitably leads to more 'labels'. This is a good thing because it can free a great many more people from the anxieties that they may have that they cannot explain. This in turn makes those people less of a burden on society and increases their ability to contribute more to society through employment and the subsequent tax that they pay.

There is, I concede, the propensity to over-label or find labelling where there is none (some people are just weird) but that should not detract from the overall intent.

[Vasco]

It seems to me that ADHD can tend to be used for many people who then abuse the label, and seem to then act even more extremely than before. The numbers now categorised ADHD seemed to shoot up (from negligible numbers) a few years ago but I'm out of touch with the current situation.

[LosingGrip]

My sister got diagnosed a few years ago. It explains a lot and has helped her understand why she does what she does.

I’m almost certain I’ve got it, but at this time I don’t wish to do anything.

That being said, I found out I had dyslexia a few years ago. I believed I was just thick before hand. It was a weight off my shoulders when it was found out.

[sparkyhx]

BoRED S2upid said:

Pinkie15 said:

‘Labels’ as such might also be crucial in being able to access support services.

See also this thread from Hammer67 in which he have latest update:
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

This.

Lots of help out there for Autistic. Other disabilities not so. Also well researched teaching methods for Autistic so yes it is worthwhile clinically assessing it.

Edited by BoRED S2upid on Wednesday 1st December 14:52

not this - there is virtually zero help out there especially as adults, its getting better though

[sparkyhx]

hyphen said:

StevieBee said:

So if we de-label or de-categorise 'mild autism', then we deny that the condition exists and remove the opportunity for measures to be applied that may help improve a person's life.

How would it be improves? Melanie Sykes was saying last week that she had trouble listening to her in ear piece whilst also presenting, due to her autism. How would you solve it? And why would you even bother.

The sad fact is that government budgets are of a fixed amount, and in the list of priorities, measuring and researching mild end of spectrums are never going to be a useful spend when we have so many other things to be looking at, including helping those at the more serious end of spectrums. Ask the tax payer if he or she will pay more tax to fund this and they will say no.

'mild end of spectrum is as I say above a complete mis nomer - its just YOU experience THEIR autism mildly because of masking

[sparkyhx]

Vasco said:

It seems to me that ADHD can tend to be used for many people who then abuse the label, and seem to then act even more extremely than before. The numbers now categorised ADHD seemed to shoot up (from negligible numbers) a few years ago but I'm out of touch with the current situation.

:sigh:

[sparkyhx]

see also

Autism Threads
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

ADHD Thread
https://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&...

There is also a huge crossover between the two, and also co-occurring

Edited by sparkyhx on Wednesday 1st December 22:14

[sparkyhx]

hyphen said:

StevieBee said:

So if we de-label or de-categorise 'mild autism', then we deny that the condition exists and remove the opportunity for measures to be applied that may help improve a person's life.

How would it be improves? Melanie Sykes was saying last week that she had trouble listening to her in ear piece whilst also presenting, due to her autism. How would you solve it? And why would you even bother.

The sad fact is that government budgets are of a fixed amount, and in the list of priorities, measuring and researching mild end of spectrums are never going to be a useful spend when we have so many other things to be looking at, including helping those at the more serious end of spectrums. Ask the tax payer if he or she will pay more tax to fund this and they will say no.

Understanding costs nothing and lack of that is what causes most of the issues with depression, employment, mental health, anxiety.

You pay for 80% of people on the spectrum being unemployed,
you pay for the drugs and hospital/docter care, psychiatric admissions
You pay for the the 3x suicide rate
You pay for the average 54 year life expectancy

If you could treat autistic people like left handed people or dyslexic people then most of the abpove would disappear