I would appreciate a diagnosis or classification of autism that isn't described as a disorder
I would appreciate a diagnosis or classification of autism that isn't described as a disorder
Using a social perspective to autism, I would appreciate if there were a way to classify someone as autistic without calling it a disorder. Yes, we have difficulties, but from a social perspective, a lot of them come from society being structured to meet the needs of allistics. They get guidance, acceptance, and ultimately privilege of a world that is designed for them, while we have to try to meet their expectations. From this perspective, we're not disordered, but oppressed/marginalized. How does that make us disordered?
I agree that there are different levels of functioning, and that some individuals might meet criteria for a disorder due to autism spectrum characteristics, so that would be valid. However, many individuals would function quite well in a setting that was designed to raise, educate, and accommodate autistic brains.
Anyone have any insight or ideas on this?
You're viewing a single thread.
Its a disorder, not calling it one is not making it any less of a disorder.
Asperger's was a syndrome, and they stopped calling it that, so it's no longer a syndrome. The DSM is highly culturally-based.
Asperger’s was a syndrome, and they stopped calling it that, so it’s no longer a syndrome.
Those words only have meaning to a US American. I am a Asperger. My diagnosis is Asperger and I do not want to be called ASD Level something.
But isn't this the entire point? You like to call yourself that, and that is perfectly fine, but ultimately all of these words come from psychiatric diagnosis, from the DSM. That is where the labels were defined, that is where our cultural understanding of the neurotype comes from.
Our culture has defined that you are disordered because of your way of being, you've been diagnosed as such. Another culture, a former culture will not have defined it that way. So you calling it a disorder is not based on anything absolute, it is based in a cultural understanding.
I was diagnosed with autism level 1, not aspergers, because: 1 - We now understand that describing people based on 'functioning' is extremely damaging to the individual; and 2 - Asperger tested on children for the Nazis, and I think we can all agree that's not cool.
All of this is cultural, we didn't know about the damage of functioning labeling at the time that diagnosis was accepted (or the whole Nazi thing), and so our cultural understanding of the condition has changed.
Understandings of disorder are cultural, not absolute.
I think you turn feelings over facts.
That's an extremely weak come back... Not even engaging with what I said, just a blanket statement pointing to some perceived inadequacy you see in me.
The official term in the UK is Asperger's disorder, although I've never heard it actually called that.
No it's not. From the National Autistic Society:
"Asperger's syndrome’ (often shortened to Asperger’s) is no longer used as a diagnostic term for autism and is considered controversial due to the history of Hans Asperger, which is summarised below.Historically, Asperger syndrome was used as a diagnostic term for some autistic people who did not also have a diagnosis of a learning disability. Broadly, it is now agreed that what was referred to as Asperger syndrome is part of the autism spectrum and there is no need for a separate term.
Some people who received a diagnosis of Asperger syndrome continue to use this terminology to refer to themselves. Others do not, usually for two reasons: because the term is no longer used officially; and because of revelations about the Austrian psychiatrist Hans Asperger, who Asperger syndrome was named after and who was complicit with the Nazis."
https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/what-is-autism/the-history-of-autism/asperger-syndrome
This is the NHS term database.
edit: lemmy is breaking the link for some reason, lets try this