Myths about autism • Hacker News Board

Re: Myths about autism

#31

Post by VLM » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 7:08 PM UTC

seiji wrote: post #3

ap22213 wrote: post #2

I only had time to skim, but is the first myth really false? When I was a kid in the 70s - 80s, I had never met another child with autistic like behavior. Yet, of my son's friends, two of them are clearly autistic (and diagnosed), and several of them seem on the spectrum (including my son). I also have several friends with autistic children. How could it be that it was just under diagnosed previously? On the other ha…

but is the first myth really true? Does anybody take into account more modern business practices of putting tens of thousands of smart people in a small geographic area? That leads to smart people breeding with smart people which seems to be a known catalyst for spectrum disorders. Before the mid 1900s, we didn't have mass service/technical employment (read: companies requiring "smart" employees instead of interchang…

There does exist a mythology that we were all hunter gatherers until the first internet bubble, however, Harvard was founded in 1636, I have an ancestor who was an English prof there in the early 1800s, ancestors who were "in the area" for the last 400 years. We should have plenty of data from other ivies vs nearby similar sized towns without higher ed.

Re: Myths about autism

#32

Post by UhUhUhUh » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 7:19 PM UTC

My take as a psychologist.

Myth #1: It is partly a diagnosis issue but that will not be solved by waving a spectrum wild-card. Strictly all mental-health disorders are present in a normal state in the general population. That goes for mania, depression, oscillations between the two, lack of empathy, anxiety, and even psychosis (e.g. it would be very unhealthy to not be somewhat paranoid these days, dreams are necessary hallucinations). The inability to fluidly shift among these many ways of dealing with reality, following the circumstances is, in my own personal book, the problem. Past a certain degree of rigidity, that itself fosters behaviors, we have a problem and often the person is aware of that. That ties in with Myth #2.

In my experience, it's not lack of empathy but a deficit in the ability to intuitively project into an other. A very large proportion of our interactions and behaviors rests on intuition and subconscious processing. I often compare autism to flying instruments. Try it and you'll very quickly get a clue of what it feels like to lack this intuitive processing.

The sad and hard thing is that autistic people do suffer from that and are often driven crazy not by the autistic thing but by the, secondary, suffering.

For adolescents. it's even worse: they fly instruments in a storm.

Myth #3: So it really isn't about normalizing but about increasing flexibility. And reducing suffering is pretty much a pre-requisite towards that. Even in Aspies, this suffering is sometimes so great that it reminds me of homosexuals before the invention of the "coming out".

Re: Myths about autism

#33

Post by fecak » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 9:00 PM UTC

hoopism wrote: post #29

fecak wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That article and a recent social media debate prompted the comment. The debate was with a well-educated adult woman saying she'd "rather have autism than $CURABLEDISEASE", and she referenced the adorable children of her friends that had an autism diagnosis that were delightful to be around. She recounted a recent conversation via communication device where a little girl expressed how she felt (and liked) her own auti…

"she referenced the adorable children of her friends that had an autism diagnosis that were delightful to be around" We've gotten better at understanding where people are coming from with statements like this... the first statement ("rather have autism") is just bizarre. It's pretty common that when someone learns our daughter has autism they say "She's so beautiful, she won't have any trouble". I'm still not sure wh…

>It's pretty common that when someone learns our daughter has autism they say "She's so beautiful, she won't have any trouble". I'm still not sure what that means.

We get the "she's beautiful" thing often as well. If I had to guess, I think it's a reference to the fact that her disability may be harder to recognize than some others (Downs Syndrome or a prominent physical disability come to mind) and she'll be able to blend in when she's not exhibiting more noticeable and negative autistic behaviors (stimming, vocal stimming, self-injurious behavior, aggression). She has a friend with Downs and I like to watch how other children and adults react to the them when we're in public together.

The other thought I get when I hear "beautiful" is, in basic terms,"her looks are a good quality that helps balance the less attractive aspects of her behavior". We're very conscious of keeping up her appearance (hygiene, clothes) primarily for the purposes of the school and others who take care of her. Since she doesn't speak, keeping her looking cared for at least lets caretakers know that she is loved and we expect her to be treated as a human being. I imagine parents of typical children might have that same philosophy, but I can only speak to my experience.

Re: Myths about autism

#34

Post by fecak » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 9:05 PM UTC

cwbrandsma wrote: post #27

Kenji wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

All I'm saying is that we pathologize people who could lead a normal, happy life. By pathologizing them, we reinforce the perception in them that something is wrong with them. Which in turn reinforces worries and social paralysis. A vicious cycle. Please be aware that almost all diagnoses of psychological disorders are entirely symptom-based and thus extremely subjective. The trend of giving young kids strong psychoa…

It isn't pathologizing people, it is diagnosing. With diagnosis comes acceptance and coping stratagies (read as: "Yes I'm different, and that is ok"). The coping stratagies are there to help someone with those issues lead a happy, healthy life. But what it really takes is people like you to stop thinking that being different is bad. Being different is good. I'm dyslexic, I have a daughter being tested for autism this…

I couldn't help but notice your words. You ask the commenter to "stop thinking that being different is bad", but then say your daughter "isn't even that bad, she has cousins that are far worse".

Are her cousins just "more different" in your mind, or do you think perhaps that certain "differences" are indeed bad?

Re: Myths about autism

#35

Post by Gibbon1 » Tue, Oct 06, 2015, 9:25 PM UTC

Kenji wrote: post #11

danharaj wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You also probably know plenty of depressed people who cope with their daily lives; that there are people who suffer from catatonic depression does not invalidate their depression. I don't think you know what you're talking about, which is confusing because you have expressed a very strong opinion about the subject.

All I'm saying is that we pathologize people who could lead a normal, happy life. By pathologizing them, we reinforce the perception in them that something is wrong with them. Which in turn reinforces worries and social paralysis. A vicious cycle. Please be aware that almost all diagnoses of psychological disorders are entirely symptom-based and thus extremely subjective. The trend of giving young kids strong psychoa…

You are arguing against a wall dude. I mean you are 100% correct. Human brains are very complex, and there many many thing that can go sideways. Lumping a mass amount of those under the term Autism makes everyone feel good because they think it means 'understanding' and 'progress' but really it's bullocks.

Seriously the mess that is psychiatry is going to take another 50 years to clean up+. It's problems are part of the academic madness that took hold after WWII when every field decided it needed to be 'a science' and tossed out all the ad-hoc knowledge and went straight to theory.

+ Like all fields that ran amuck the current guardians of the truth in psychiatry ain't going to change their minds. So progress is measured in funerals.

Re: Myths about autism

#36

Post by gnur » Wed, Oct 07, 2015, 6:24 AM UTC

ap22213 wrote: post #2

I only had time to skim, but is the first myth really false? When I was a kid in the 70s - 80s, I had never met another child with autistic like behavior. Yet, of my son's friends, two of them are clearly autistic (and diagnosed), and several of them seem on the spectrum (including my son). I also have several friends with autistic children. How could it be that it was just under diagnosed previously? On the other ha…

Apparently, diagnoses of autism has become much more valuable for parents. (at least in the Netherlands). If you don't have a the label autism, you'll have to pay for everything yourself, but with a diagnosis the (local) government will help you out with certain things. (like schooling)

Something somewhat related, the diagnosis a child gets is highly dependent on the educational level of the mother. Higher educated mothers are more likely to have a child with Aspergers then "regular" autism. The cause is probably not genetic but more likely that a "smarter" mother will try to get a better (Aspergers) diagnosis then a mother with less intellect.