Talk:Autism spectrum/Archive 4

message: In the last paragraph of this section it is mentioned "Due to the recent publicity surrounding autism and autistic spectrum disorders, an increasing number of adults are choosing to seek diagnoses of high-functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome in light of symptoms they currently experience or experienced during childhood. Since the cause of autism is thought to be at least partly genetic, a proportion of these adults seek their own diagnosis specifically as follow-up to their children's diagnoses."
This is the case with myself, although I have not sought a professional diagnosis. As part of the diagnosis of my sons condition it was remarked that some of his behaviours had not been considered by his parents and grandparents as unusual, as I had done similiar at the same age and that it was simply considered part of a family trait. The care worker assigned to my son considered it inappropriate that I should test for autism, as my "coping strategies" or whatever behaviour models I now expressed would render any result meaningless. However, other adults having a child (or that of a relative) diagnosed with an Autism Spectrum Disorder may also find a familiar pattern of behaviour in their own development. Again, this may be a subjective self assesment as they have learned to interact within society to an extent that some behaviours may have been (publicly) suppressed or unlearned - so much so that a diagnosis is not possible.LessHeard vanU 14:04, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increase in diagnoses of autism 

message: Somebody inserted links to CAN and the AGRE project. I would favor both of them to be removed. If people disagree, I would at least suggest that the AGRE link be moved to Causes of autism or Heritability of autism. There are also some remaining links to ABA, which I would favor to move to Autism therapies. --Rdos 07:13, 23 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  CAN and AGRE 

message: I would like to point out a single word on a line that may or may not belong to the article. Moreover appears just prior the subheading DSM definition. Could be the start of a paragraph or a stray word! I started to scroll back through the edits hoping to discover the reason why it is there but soon discovered it could take a long time for me to do that. HJKeats 21:53, 2 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Missing paragraph (maybe) 

message: I would be against the merging of the above article with this, as I do not believe that it adheres to NPOV policy/practice. LessHeard vanU 20:54, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Definately agree 100% with Bluejay --Zeraeph 14:13, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suggested merge with "Autism Mercury" article 

message: There is a very strange statement that appears suddenly in this section, and is never mentioned later.
:There is little public research on the effects of in vitro fertilization on the number of incidences of autism.
Well, why should there be? What about eating bananas and autism - has anyone investigated that?
Since this doesn't seem to be related in any way to the rest of the article, and there's no argument why it's relevant, it just looks like someone pushing an anti in-vitro campaign. Getting ready to delete it... Deuar 14:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Increase in diagnoses 

message: This term, under the "Autistic adults" subheading, comes across as derogatory, suggesting that autistic people never grow up; that autistic adults are characteristically immature. Rephrasing... --GregE 06:43, 27 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It may not have meant it the way you think; it may have meant child as in son of rather than little person. Regardless, 'adult child' (little person) is an accurate description of an autistic person. Skinnyweed 01:07, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Um... before you commit to that, you might want to have a look at this... --Bluejay Young 22:15, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes.. the eternal child myth, which is applied wrongly to both autistic people and other disabled people, especially cognitively disabled people of all sorts.  It comes in part from the assignment of "developmental ages" to people whose development is different from the norm, such that, for instance, someone could try to claim that I had the developmental age of a small child in terms of self-care skills.  Which is more about comparing a skill to a particular norm than about anything else.  Unfortunately, that is how we are portrayed and viewed by most people, and we are treated as if we are children, even though we are not.  "Adult child" was probably used in terms that it would be used even for non-disabled people, but to suggest that the other interpretation (of 'little person') would be okay, is kind of like saying that a high quad is really an infant because they require constant physical assistance for most things.  It's just an abstract analogy gone really bad, and used to justify all kinds of awful policies.  Silentmiaow 15:34, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Adult child?" 

message: I'm not saying the link doesn't belong, just that the story is disturbingly delusional.  Its an uncritical puff piece about self delusion, aspergers and autism is something to be proud of?  Thats just absurd, having social deficits making navigation through society and life much harder is not something to be proud of or to shield from treatments.  you can't put a positive spin on just anything. (comment added by User:71.141.107.4 11:12 29 June 2006)
::I'm autistic and I would gladly kill anyone who attempted to "cure" me.--Ensrifraff 03:58, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It is a journalistic piece, rather than a debate, so it is always likely to be mildly biased. It is also using a very small example of individuals. I am surprised about the title, as one persons celebration of his condition is just one paragraph in the piece - but that is a question for the journalist.LessHeard vanU 20:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: User:71.141.107.4 must be autistic as he thinks he knows how autistics should feel about themselves. And he further seems to think that shame and not pride is the appropriate feeling. There's a reason why the vast majority of autistics you find on the internet are anti-cure. And people who want to learn about autism would do well to listen to autistics. They instead prefer to take in the unsubstantiated interpretations of outsiders looking in. Neurodivergent 13:15, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Eh? I do not see how this adds to the debate. Who decides what is "appropriate"?LessHeard vanU 23:50, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Use whatever term you prefer. The question is: Psychologically, is it preferable for an autistic to feel pride or shame? These are the kinds of questions psychology professionals should ask, but suprisingly, they don't. Neurodivergent 01:15, 2 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  "Celebrating Autism"(npr) 

message: Article:  "As a consequence, many "high-functioning" autistic persons, and autistic people with a relatively high IQ, are underdiagnosed"
That has enough things wrong with it that I can't see how one would fix it...  Is there anything citeable and possible to replace it with?  Midgley 19:49, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: That's something obvious that might nevertheless be OR. Clearly, autism will be missed more often among those with high IQ than among those with low IQ. Neurodivergent 18:39, 25 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Actually, when it's missed among people with "low IQ", it's usually been missed in favor of a straight-out diagnosis of mental retardation, or deafness, or childhood psychosis.  When it's missed among people with "high IQ", it's missed in different ways.  I know that I actually have seen scholarly papers on this kind of thing that could be cited, I'd just have to find them.  Silentmiaow 15:36, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  OR?  Uncited and illogical - what should it say? 

message: A recent edit in this section proclaims "These are rules of thumb and may not necessarily apply to all diagnosed autistics." I was originally inclined to strike this comment out as not germaine to the section, which is only concerned with the definition, but hesitated since I am not familiar with the DSM. Is this a particularly US publication, or a western one? Is it an authorative text? Can this distinction be made within the article, and an indication whether the definition is then the legal/medical basis of the diagnosis. I apologise if the distinction(s) is made elsewhere in the article.LessHeard vanU 21:43, 15 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Individual autistics vary greatly from one other, so it's important to note that the DMS definition isn't perfect. Noneofyourbusiness 21:47, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The DSM is intended to be an authoritative, consensus statement of the medical community about how to diagnose various conditions in mental health.  Many underlying conditions produce a variety of symptoms, but not every person with the underlying condition will experience all the symptoms.  For mental conditions where the underlying cause is not known, diagnosis requires looking at symptoms and comparing the results with the "rules of thumb" in the DSM. -- Beland 17:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you, on the basis of the above the edit I mentioned appears germaine.LessHeard vanU 21:50, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  DSM definition 

message: I added the merge tag to this article due to the discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Autism and blindness. If you feel there's anything useful on the article in question that can be merged here, please do so and then change that article to a redirect here. Thanks. - Bobet 14:05, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge from [[Autism and blindness]] 

message: The cite given by Falconleaf (btw, a much shorter URL would have been   http://www.unlockingautism.org/testimonies/index.asp?action=14 ) for bullying and poverty doesn't mention bullying, and barely mentions poverty, so I removed it.  Probably the sentence shold be changed as well.  -- ArglebargleIV 22:44, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cite for bullying and poverty 

message: Can we have an intelligent discussion about what statment you did not like and why instead of scrapping the entire entry? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Aspie7 (talk • contribs).
: The revision in question is  unsourced and original research. Furthermore, it's not written in an encyclopedic tone. If you're going to add any new information about treatment options, you're going to need to identify/cite the sources that prescribe that treatment, as there are many schools of thought on the subject. OhNoitsJamie Talk 02:52, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry, Wikipedia doesn't work like that. Notice that anytime you contribute, the message under the edit box states "Encyclopedic content must be verifiable." Other pertinent policies include 
***Original research
***Reliable sources. Thanks, OhNoitsJamie Talk 03:01, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

text: The autism rights issue should be highlighted in the article, and I believe it is. The section we keep deleting violates Wikipedia policy and guidelines on WP:NPOV, WP:OR, and on general style. Wikipedia is not intended to be a forum to debate or resolve contentious issues, only to frame and describe them. --Leifern 12:51, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

text: That's fine if you can find a source that meets the criteria described above. Generally speaking, personal testimony is not considered to be a reliable source. (For this reason, blogs are almost always discounted as reliable sources as well). OhNoitsJamie Talk 18:36, 18 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  As a person with high functioning autism diagnosed at age 4, I can share a few of my own experiences. I believe educational therapies like playing music with teachers involved in the activity, picture cards attached with words to pinpoint what the items are, and behavioral correction methods (i.e. rewards for proper behaviors at school and in society) has worked most of the time for me. 20 years ago, My mother co-founded the Riverside/San Bernardino area (Cal. US) chapter, originally 6 to 20 members, in at time when no reliable services available to autistic children. Today, the chapter is divided into six local/regional chapters with each nearly 100 members. I never allowed my autism to overwhelm me, such as I've graduated high school despite the fact my psychiatric doctor told my parents I won't be able to do that. But it's true autism has put me in a difficult position from the entire world, then I feel this is a big part of me and cannot be cured of autism. I encountered a degree of social isolation at school or work, struggled with behavioral issues in a younger age, and used to self-stimulate...until recent medication for anxiety/ depression might put an end to that. I manage to communicate like "regular" or neurotypical people, manage to hold a part-time job, attend some college courses, have my own apartment through income subsizided housing, able to ride a bicycle and can purchase foods/necessities in a nearby grocery store. I dealt with other minority identities like ethnoracial (white/AmerIndian with a French father), income status (lower-middle class, but managed to attend a mainly "preppie" high school) and generational (it ain't easy to be in generation X/Y when to be young puts me in a hard place). Also to note I wasn't able to have a strong romantic relationship, so I've remained single most of the time, but had a number of love interests and they knew what autism is. I admit to stay within social boundaries in that too much, at other times my lovers had to turn me away. But as a 26-year old man with autism and other behavioral disorders, the strongest identity I hold myself in is the autistic community. I truly hope my post on personal experiences with autism can inspire and bring hope for millions of autistic children/adults and for parents today with autistic children, whom grow up in a more kinder/gentler and tolerant world with more advanced educational-behavioral therapies. +Mike D 26 15:32, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Treatment Options

message: If you find anything in this article that you're not sure is valid, ask me here. My younger brother has autism, and I should be able to help on that. *goes to search the article for inaccuracies* --MaXiMiUS 15:41, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks, MaXiMiUS, but just be careful about verifying information based only on your experiences with your brother! For people who don't have access to university databases, a good place to start for fact-checking would be scholar.google.com -- Tim D 16:52, 11 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Verification of facts 

message: I reverted an edit tonight that referred to the occurrence of synesthesia and micropsy in autism. I have no idea about either of these, or the prevalence, etc. - mainly because I haven't seen anything anecdotally or in the academic literature. I reverted it because it was uncited, had messed up formatting, was in the wrong section, and needed a good amount of writing work. I'm skeptical, but if someone has information out there, the topic might be able to sustain in the article (or an offshoot) in some form. -- Tim D 02:30, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think there is any. The only place I've read extensive speculations about a connection between autism and synaesthesia was in Paul Collins' Not Even Wrong, which I regard as well-researched but anecdotal. There has been no formal scientific study on this supposed connection, to the best of my knowledge, and nothing published in any peer-reviewed journal.  Just because a few autistics report synaesthesia doesn't mean there is a connection. A handful of people who display a certain set of behaviors and/or excel in mathematics, music, or art, and are thus speculated to be autistic, also report synaesthesia, but again that does not mean there really is a connection. I'd say wait to put it in until there is something more formal about it. --Bluejay Young 21:38, 12 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Synesthesia? 

message: Really!  This article is obfuscation not enlightenment.  1st sentence:  Of course it's "abnormal" otherwise it wouldn't be a "condition" and would not have an article.  The point is "abnormal how?"  And it takes a very furrowed brow to make sense of this article.  If that is possible.  There must be a  in WP somewhere for articles of mostly .  I mean, please, just say what autism is, early on in the article, in plain language, before going on about etiology.  Paul Beardsell 08:40, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Regarding that first sentence, I think it's a perfect short summary of what autism is. "Abnormal" is the only word that works there, too - the really important words are the ones that follow it. Then the rest of the article provides an operational definition. I do think that there should be some better organization to the article in general, though. How about someone start working on that? -- Tim D 22:12, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I disagree:  The quick and easy point to make is this:  "Abnormal" can mean "better than normal" but that is not what was meant.  But the new opening to the article is a *lot* more accessible.  Thanks.  Paul Beardsell 06:54, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  After looking at the introduction more closely, it really did seem bad. You could definitely tell that it was written over multiple instances by people of different levels of knowledge, organizational skills, and writing styles. The rest of the article needs similar work, but I just don't have the energy or focus for that right now :) -- Tim D 02:34, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gobbledygook 

message: Over on a third culture kids talk page a discussion has arisen that relates to Autism.  Somebody made an uncited reference that people who have Autism are also known as Third Culture Kids.  Before we deleted this, I wanted to check with you guys to see if this was a known use?  If this is something you've heard or can validate, could you respond on Talk:Third Culture Kids ThanksBalloonman 20:26, 4 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: [[Third Culture Kids]]

message: I'm of the beleif that this aricle is no longer up to featured aticle status and have nominated it for a review Feel free to post your comments and opinions here, or improve it to try to get it back to its former glory--Acebrock 02:34, 17 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Maybe someone more than me is curious about this former glory. This is the version of the article where  was added to it. This is a version of the article around the time when the FAC was voted on. /skagedal... 10:58, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Featured article status?

message: First, people have inserted *single gene* causes in the intro, just on the basis of a doubled frequence in some (probably minor) study.
Second, people are *persistent* with inserting CAN-links, and affiliated sites all over the article.
Third, there are no indications that autism is multigenetic (very likely because of CANs beliefs of simple "fixes").
Fourth, and no citation for the claims of the efficacy of ABA made in the beginning elmindreda 05:40, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes, but the [sick] notion on Wikipedia is that "notable" things provided by professionals can be included even if there is no evidence if they are efficient or not. As long as they are published they are notable. --Rdos 05:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Then perhaps we should correct the claims instead, as they seem to lack any mention of the slapping and cattle prods held to be essential in the original findings elmindreda 22:12, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  This article have become extreme curebee 

message: This term is only favored by curebee NTs, and is almost never used in the autistic community. It therefore needs to go everywhere it is used in the article. --Rdos 08:46, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: This article is not just for the autistic community, though. Keep a NPOV...it doesn't need to go! -- Tim D 14:18, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: From what I've seen, many other minority groups mentioned in Wikipedia have had their wishes for proper forms of address respected. What makes autistics any different? elmindreda 22:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Most of the text already uses "autistic", so it should be straight-forward to convert the last remaints of "person-first-language" as well. Anybody can do it, and I wouldn't revert. --Rdos 19:00, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I personally wouldn't be too comfortable with that...there are different ways of looking at autism, and as long as it is a neurological disorder, I think that the term "with autism" shouldn't be avoided. Otherwise there's a chance that those who don't know anything about autism might read it differently. -- Tim D 20:02, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Autism is not primarily a neurological disorder. Autism is primarily human diversity with some genetic vulnerabilities that sometimes causes mental retardation and other problems. That's why it is pretty offensive to use person-first-language and terms like disorder, deficit and dysfunction. --Rdos 20:00, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Sure it is, but for those who function highly with it and have the right skills, it may not necessarily be a big handicap (at least in their eyes) - and that's an important distinction. Autism is more than a "human diversity" issue, and if the symptoms lead to no loss of function within the world, then you're really not talking about autism. -- Tim D 00:15, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Who doesn't have loss of function? I mean, nobody is a super-human possesing all possible talents. It can still be mostly a diversity-issue, even if some of the autistic functions are less adaptive than the neurotypical functions in today's society. --Rdos 18:29, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Significant loss of function, to be exact, where it keeps someone from doing what they want or need to do. Say there's a person who feels a little anxious when he leaves the house - he might just be an "anxious person." If these feelings keep him from ever leaving the house, that's agoraphobia. Most disorders are defined by a critical point on a continuum, and autism is really no different. Someone who doesn't like to talk may just be quiet...someone who doesn't talk and doesn't understand others - to the point where communication is heavily impaired - has something else going on. -- Tim D 07:16, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  The term "people with autism" 

message: I don't find it correct to describe CAN and others as "advocacy". Both the autistic community and CAN could (and do) claim to be involved in "advocacy". My original term probably wasn't too good either, but I used it as a starting point about the differences between the camps. I'd like a better name for it. "Research" is OK. --Rdos 05:56, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: There certainly is a good amount of overlap between the "community" and "advocacy" groups. Perhaps they all can go under an "advocacy" heading and then separated into a couple other subheadings? Something like autistic membership and non-autistic membership? I don't know about groups that may have both, though... -- Tim D 07:42, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Name of link sections 

message: i dont know but for osme strange reason ive been thinking about this and ive been wondering if autism could maybe in some cases be the expression of intelectual brllience to such an extent to which is obscures all else.  thats just the way i think bout it, maybe these so called Low functioning autistivs are actually he most extremely intelegent they just think on an alternate mental level tha other people cannot relate to.  naturally with their intelect they couldn't care less if other people understand the way they think, they figure no one else can understand anyway.  im not a psycologist but this concept intrigues me.
:That's original research.  Could a more experienced wikipedian correct me, are we allowed to remove stuff like this from talk pages?  WLU 21:16, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think so, but the "cabal" might think otherwise. --Rdos 13:56, 29 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: If this appeared in the article as original research, it'd be removed in a heartbeat. It's good to keep this in the talk page, however, because it gives an opportunity to point out that research done until this point says that "intellectual brilliance" theory is not accurate. -- Tim D 01:41, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Not correct. No such research have been conducted. This seems to be the major problem here. Much of the needed research is never done because the drug-industry will not sell any pills on it . --Rdos 18:58, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Paranoia :) There is plenty of research happening out there that is not funded by drug companies...I've been involved in some myself. And the good academic journals out there that publish the stuff are completely independent. -- Tim D 20:05, 1 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Tim, you are a big joker. "the good academic journals out there that publish the stuff are completely independent". I don't think so. Perhaps you can name one of them so I can send them an article? They will not publish controversial research, very likely because it threatens the revenues of the "poltically correct research" they are dependent on for new articles. At least this is my experience after three refusals to send controversial, multi-disciplinary, autism research on peer-review. --Rdos 19:53, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Seriously, just because they don't publish you doesn't mean that it's a conspiracy. What university or organization did you publish from? Is there a registered IRB that you went through? Did you have powerful statistics? And even if all the stars align in the logistics, there's still no guarantee...you just have to be persistant. If you're feeling adventurous, I can even take a look at something that you submitted. I'm pretty good at looking at just about anything objectively... -- Tim D 00:20, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you dare, certainly. I can send you the manuscript (in private). It's mostly about Aspie-quiz, and the conclusions that can be drawn from it. I mean, Aspie-quiz is probably one of the largest (if not the largest) database on autistic traits available anywhere. --Rdos 18:33, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm a daring guy...I'll be happy to take a look. If you're up to it, how about e-mailing it to tdowling at mac.com? -- Tim D 07:21, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

text:  My problem with aspie-quiz is not the idea of it, but the fact that it comes off as having something of a Forer effect. Questions like "Do you _____ more than most people?" requires a degree of subjective judgement on the user's part. What I think of as "most people" is not going to be what someone else thinks of.(Unless you've changed that -- it's been a while since I took the quiz.) Another problem I have with it is that its very name puts difference between Asperger autism and non-Asperger, or Kanner autism -- a distinction which was artificial to begin with. Some autistic writers have called for an end to this distinction (autism is autism, in other words.) There is also this pop culture myth that Asperger = ability to speak. I realise that aspie-quiz contains a lot of questions and that you've revised it over the years as more is discovered about what autism really is. I think it's a good idea, I just think it needs some more updates and changes. I don't think there's a conspiracy, I think they're saying you need more statistical information. --Bluejay Young 19:50, 4 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  Aspie-quiz doesn't attempt to isolate autism from AS. It shows that many psychiatric disorders are interrelated, not only autism and AS, but also ADHD, Bipolar, Social phobia, just to mention a few. --Rdos 09:49, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I understand. I guess that's where you and me part company because I have a lot of trouble believing that autism is a psychiatric disorder -- in fact, I have a lot of trouble believing that most of the things that are called psychiatric disorders (ADHD, social phobia, etc.) really are, as opposed to ordinary differences or variances in thought and learning style, shyness, etc., which have been pathologized.  (For those who might reply "But they've been clearly labeled as such by modern psychiatry" I'll add that the way things are today, if modern psychiatry labels something a pathology, I'm less inclined to believe that it is. (viz. Thomas Szasz, etc.)) Anyway, maybe instead of aspie-quiz when you next revise it you could call it autie-quiz? --Bluejay Young 09:25, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
replies: text:  I don't understand why we would need to part company. I'm not advocating that any of these are disorders. IMHO, the quiz could just as well be called "neurodiversity quiz" or even "neanderthal heritage quiz", especially the later since scoring is not in any way related to autism or ASDs. The quiz is entirely scored on the primary axis of factor-analysis of the traits. --Rdos 18:32, 7 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Personal Theory