slate "journalist" diagnoses herself as autistic

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:An autism diagnosis is extremely subjective. I have gone to multiple psychologists and gotten wildly divergent opinions about whether or not my DC has it. The idea that psychologists do or should have some magic gate-keeping authority about who gets to call themselves autistic is absurd. Anyone can google the DSM-5 criteria, and having a psychology or psychiatry degree might give you some unique knowledge and perspective, but it does not make you somehow objective in opining about whether the criteria of autism diagnoses apply to a particular person.

Same goes for virtually everything else in the DSM.

What? No, it's not "gatekeeping" to say that autism is a medical diagnosis. It's not an "identity." It's a condition, defined by medicine. Yes, the instruments and definitions are imperfect, but it's not something you can declare yourself to have or not have just because you "feel" you are autistic. The idea that you can just declare yourself autistic hopelessly muddles the diagnostic clarity that you yourself were seeking.

Plus, you're incorrect about how autism is diagnosed. It's not diagnosed by "googling the DSM-5 criteria" and applying them to yourself (or a historical figure, or someone's kid on the intstrument). It's diagnosed with normed instruments like ADOS and ADI-R, applied by, you know, trained professionals.

If for some reason you or other people feel the need for an identity similar to autism, seriously, make up another word. To call yourself autistic and then claim that all of psychological diagnostics is bunk is an obviously self-referential piece of nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:An autism diagnosis is extremely subjective. I have gone to multiple psychologists and gotten wildly divergent opinions about whether or not my DC has it. The idea that psychologists do or should have some magic gate-keeping authority about who gets to call themselves autistic is absurd. Anyone can google the DSM-5 criteria, and having a psychology or psychiatry degree might give you some unique knowledge and perspective, but it does not make you somehow objective in opining about whether the criteria of autism diagnoses apply to a particular person.

Same goes for virtually everything else in the DSM.

What? No, it's not "gatekeeping" to say that autism is a medical diagnosis. It's not an "identity." It's a condition, defined by medicine. Yes, the instruments and definitions are imperfect, but it's not something you can declare yourself to have or not have just because you "feel" you are autistic. The idea that you can just declare yourself autistic hopelessly muddles the diagnostic clarity that you yourself were seeking.

Plus, you're incorrect about how autism is diagnosed. It's not diagnosed by "googling the DSM-5 criteria" and applying them to yourself (or a historical figure, or someone's kid on the intstrument). It's diagnosed with normed instruments like ADOS and ADI-R, applied by, you know, trained professionals.

If for some reason you or other people feel the need for an identity similar to autism, seriously, make up another word. To call yourself autistic and then claim that all of psychological diagnostics is bunk is an obviously self-referential piece of nonsense.

PS: The ADOS an ADI-R actually have strong inter-rater reliability, and autism diagnoses are very stable (ie don't change over time). So just because your child is a difficult case does not mean that it's difficult in general for clinicians to diagnose most cases.