Does Lori have Asperger's?

[Jon Miller]

I think you are just too internally self focused.

JM

[Jon Miller]

I think you are just too internally self focused.

JM

[Krill]

Krill, given the number of "self-diagnosed" poseurs out there, I don't know how stigmatizing it is. At this point it is more of a subset of the general nerd subculture than an actual disorder.

Think about what you just wrote.

Is every person diagnosed with Aspergers a "nerd"? Does it affect how any one particular person from that group lives their life? Having worked with multitudes of people with that label, I can say quite surely that it does affect how they perceive themselves and are perceived by others, to differing degrees based on the person. So yes, it's stigmatizing, even if you personally haven't found it so. Your experiences are not congruent with what ever other person diagnosed with Asperger's will go through. The fact that you label Asperger's in that manner shows just how inappropriate the diagnosis is.

I'd welcome the discovery of an actual biological cause, if only so I don't get mistaken for guys who just watch too damn much SyFy.

Research in statistically insignificant numbers of people have shown that there are differences in brain structure, but it has never been able to explain why that brain structure exists. Basically to prove conclusively why this happens huge studies cataloguing development of children from birth until age 5 or so is necessary, and it would have to take into account all of the other reasons children develop how they will including parenting, abuse, childhood diseases, learning disabilities and social interaction opportunities with others. Genetic studies, MRI scanners out the wazoo...it's possible, but it won't happen because of resource allocation.

I'm not sure about "objectively harmful." Plenty of "normal" behaviors are objectively harmful, albeit most are not drastically harmful--overeating, binge-drinking that doesn't . In my psych classes I was taught that there are two criteria for classifying something as a disorder: behavior differs significantly from the norm, and this difference causes significant impairment to the individual. Obviously, both of these depend heavily on what society considers to be the norm--and how much deviation from that norm it is willing to accommodate/tolerate. Hence homosexuality was a disorder for some time, because society was not willing to tolerate that deviation. It ceased to be a disorder when the prevailing values, at least in academia, shifted, and is likely to remain a non-disorder until such time as the APA starts reading MrFun posts.

Bingo. IMO Mental Health diagnoses should attempt at all points to not be influenced by societal values, because that only enables discrimination and eventually dehumanisation of those individuals labelled as mentally ill. The only problem is that that view is itself seen as unacceptable by society, because Mental Health is seen as the one final method of control of a population. Anti-Psychiatry FTW.

[Lorizael]

Anti-Psychiatry FTW.

Ugh. For completely unrelated reasons, I've been dealing with an anti-psychiatry proponent recently. While Szasz and his ilk may have made some good points, there are extremes of the anti-psychiatry movement that are bafflingly ignorant. The particular individual I've had occasion to chat with recently is convinced that all psychiatric illnesses are only labels, and that psychiatry is thus a giant fraud.

For example, if a person has so much stress in her life that she becomes catatonic, that's not a mental disorder, that's just "problems of living." And psychiatric treatment isn't the answer. If she goes catatonic at work, fire her because she's not doing her job. If she goes catatonic and has two children at home who subsequently starve to death, arrest her for negligence. If she goes catatonic and starves to death herself, then she clearly felt her "problems of living" didn't need treatment.

[Elok]

Think about what you just wrote.

Is every person diagnosed with Aspergers a "nerd"? Does it affect how any one particular person from that group lives their life? Having worked with multitudes of people with that label, I can say quite surely that it does affect how they perceive themselves and are perceived by others, to differing degrees based on the person. So yes, it's stigmatizing, even if you personally haven't found it so. Your experiences are not congruent with what ever other person diagnosed with Asperger's will go through. The fact that you label Asperger's in that manner shows just how inappropriate the diagnosis is.

I think I phrased that poorly. I meant that, when most people today think of Asperger's, they think of it as a label adopted with pride by garden-variety nerds. I think one of the characters from The Big Bang Theory is supposed to be aspie, but I never saw that show so I'm not sure. The aspie stereotype is coming from somewhere in pop culture, anyway. It's gone somewhat mainstream.

On reflection, that still counts as a stigma of sorts, in that it minimizes the actual difficulties involved in favor of HA HA WE GET REALLY INTO OUR DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS, YO. Certainly I avoid mentioning it so people don't draw such conclusions about me. When I bring it up at all--which is rare--I use "high-functioning autistic" instead, because I'd rather be thought of as Rain Man than some self-righteous turd on Wrongplanet.com.

[Lorizael]

My girlfriend predicted that "No, because there's no Asperger's Syndrome in the DSM-V" would win this poll, and I'm not surprised that it has so far. But I really expected to see some, "No, you're just an *******" votes. My real-life friends are certainly quick to point out that I'm a dick. (Not in reference to my potential diagnosis. I've told very few people about this IRL.)

[Colonâ„¢]

Well yeah, if you tell other people you're a horrible person, there's a good chance they'll pick up on that. Have you tried explaining others that you just can't help when you do X or Y and that you do mean all the best for them?

[Lorizael]

Ah, well, it's a little more complicated than that. My friends think I'm a dick because I regularly say impolite and offensive things. But they don't think I'm a horrible person. They all think that I am very sincere and genuine as far as my motivations are concerned.

[Krill]

Ugh. For completely unrelated reasons, I've been dealing with an anti-psychiatry proponent recently. While Szasz and his ilk may have made some good points, there are extremes of the anti-psychiatry movement that are bafflingly ignorant. The particular individual I've had occasion to chat with recently is convinced that all psychiatric illnesses are only labels, and that psychiatry is thus a giant fraud.

For example, if a person has so much stress in her life that she becomes catatonic, that's not a mental disorder, that's just "problems of living." And psychiatric treatment isn't the answer. If she goes catatonic at work, fire her because she's not doing her job. If she goes catatonic and has two children at home who subsequently starve to death, arrest her for negligence. If she goes catatonic and starves to death herself, then she clearly felt her "problems of living" didn't need treatment.

Yeah, that guy is retarded. Although one interesting point is that in the UK now there is (supposedly) a distinction amongst professionals, if not the general public, between psychiatric and mental health services. Psychiatric services refers to what the MDs do (Diagnosis and prescribing of medication) and what nurses do (everything else and sometimes prescribing of medication as well). The Mental Health Act 2007 even goes so far as to state that personality disorders (and orders) that can not be treated medically are still sectionable illnesses because they can be treated with nursing interventions (so psychotherapy, CBT, behavioural adjustment). So I have to question if that guy understands what psychiatric treatment really is, because I think he lacks any understanding of the area.

[Krill]

I think I phrased that poorly. I meant that, when most people today think of Asperger's, they think of it as a label adopted with pride by garden-variety nerds. I think one of the characters from The Big Bang Theory is supposed to be aspie, but I never saw that show so I'm not sure. The aspie stereotype is coming from somewhere in pop culture, anyway. It's gone somewhat mainstream.

On reflection, that still counts as a stigma of sorts, in that it minimizes the actual difficulties involved in favor of HA HA WE GET REALLY INTO OUR DUNGEONS AND DRAGONS, YO. Certainly I avoid mentioning it so people don't draw such conclusions about me. When I bring it up at all--which is rare--I use "high-functioning autistic" instead, because I'd rather be thought of as Rain Man than some self-righteous turd on Wrongplanet.com.

Bingo redux.

[Elok]

Before I came here, I checked out a place called "Aspies for Freedom," thinking, hey, it'll be nice to get in touch with people like me. Ugh. It turned out that the jerks on that site were basically indistinguishable from other jerks on the internet, except that they were perhaps a touch more arrogant and they all had a ridiculous persecution complex. Not that they were all paranoid snots like that, but the jerks tend to dominate on any forum. It was doubly depressing because I'd naively thought that my ilk were too rational to suffer from the normal-person disease of hysterical identity politics. Nuh-uh. Neurotypical society was out to screw its superiors!

[Al B. Sure!]

There's an online test.

http://www.rdos.net/eng/

I took it a while back and got this:

Your Aspie score: 28 of 200
Your neurotypical (non-autistic) score: 168 of 200
You are very likely neurotypical

So despite Apolyton (and my mother) being convinced I have Asperger's, there's something else wrong with me.

I say this to say diagnosis for Asperger's appears to be a crapshoot.

[Elok]

Yes, if by "diagnosis for Asperger's" you mean "automated test, based on self-perception, set up by some dude who has never met you in person and may or may not have relevant training." This general approach is favored by the Cosmoquizzian-Analytic school of psychologists.

[Sava]

Lori, you put the ass in asspergers

[Al B. Sure!]

Yes, if by "diagnosis for Asperger's" you mean "automated test, based on self-perception, set up by some dude who has never met you in person and may or may not have relevant training." This general approach is favored by the Cosmoquizzian-Analytic school of psychologists.

Would I be able to get through entry-level Marine Corps training and be an officer if I genuinely had Asperger's?