Just realizing ds is Aspie -- can you tell me where to begin?

[kbutton]

Have any of you read the Life with Asperger's blog by Gavin Bollard? I find that blog to be helpful. He talks a lot about his awareness pre- and post-diagnosis, how it's affected his marriage, where he has blind spots. It's very interesting even if it's not something you can apply to everyone with a broad brush. He's pretty systematic and particular about how he discusses things to avoid misunderstandings (though he is certainly opinionated and strongly so).

 

FWIW, my gifted Aspie has some self-awareness and empathy, but it's DIFFERENT than with other people. As he's gotten older, it's easier to see how it is different, particularly now that we ask more questions rather than thinking everything was okay if something wasn't staring us in the face--we certainly had some difficult behaviors all along, but we also had spans of time where he would seem very typical or even more mature than others. It's not always easy to describe how it's different though. Our other son (younger) is extremely emotionally aware (we have to watch that he doesn't make himself transparent in an effort to keep things peaceful), and the contrast gets wider between the two of them all the time. 

 

Some people have some theories about an increase in the percentage of the population with Asperger's at the highest end of the IQ spectrum (like the top 2% or so of gifted folks). Others will cry equally loudly that the same population is mistakenly diagnosed at higher rates with Asperger's. Both arguments come from experts. Basically, lots of folks on the spectrum and lots of folks on the profoundly-gifted-and-then-some end of the IQ spectrum are at serious risk of being misunderstood, more than likely. It is hard to generalize about Asperger's, and it's hard to generalize about giftedness in some ways since there is a huge stretch of IQ that fits into that category.

 

I've seen folks paint entire personality profiles (like INTJ or INTP in Meyers Briggs) with the Asperger's label. That kind of thing is beyond the pale, but I think it does show that personalities that are not represented in the population at high rates are definitely seen as so different that they can be, in essence, dismissed by a diagnostic label (albeit one used very cavalierly). If we have so little respect for neurotypical diversity, it's not surprising that folks who are very different, gifted, etc. ask if they could be on the spectrum or have another diagnosis. I know from personal experience that if your interests fall out of the mainstream (as defined by the people around you), and you have a personality profile that is a tiny percentage of the population, it can be a difficult world sometimes. (Yep, I'm an INTJ, now that you are all wondering.)

[8filltheheart]

I also know of aspies who *aren't* to that extreme, who do hold jobs, etc. etc., so there is variety.

Absolutely. But, he does have a high IQ and he has been diagnosed. Having a high IQ has not "lessened" his symptoms. That was my point, since the question posed was "I'd be interested to know if a person's self-awareness might be different if they are gifted as well as aspie or "just" aspie."

 

The other 2 are most definitely not on the spectrum in any way, shape, or form.

[PeterPan]

 I'd be interested to know if a person's self-awareness might be different if they are gifted as well as aspie or "just" aspie. But again, I am obviously just speculating and you're right that there could be other things that could apply. 

 

 

 

Absolutely.  But, he does have a high IQ and he has been diagnosed.   Having a high IQ has not "lessened" his symptoms.   That was my point, since the question poised was "I'd be interested to know if a person's self-awareness might be different if they are gifted as well as aspie or "just" aspie"

You know, I totally missed that line in her comments.  That's a very good catch!

[texasmama]

In my experience, IQ is not really a factor in Aspergers' self-awareness unless you drop significantly below the average range of IQ.  In that range, self-awareness might drop off separate from Aspergers.  I am not sure I have even known anyone with the diagnosis who functioned in the well below average IQ range, so this is speculation on my part. 

[Elisabet1]

I don't mean this rudely at all, but why do I need a formal diagnosis? I've lived w/ DH for 24 years. I know a ton about Aspergers.

 

My DH is afraid that an actual diagnosis could hamper his future in some way. Maybe getting a diagnosis is the first step. . .?

 

Again, no rudeness meant!

 

Alley

No need for a DX. The ped even agreed with me on my 3rd with ASD, there was no need for a official dx, it makes no difference.

 

We did go on and get him an official DX, but that has done nothing for him.

 

If you don't want to go for official testing, then don't. I am all for skipping the testing!

[Lecka]

Thanks for the blog recommendation.

 

My point was more ---- let's say that in my own personal random sample of gifted people, maybe there are more who are more on the Aspergers side.  I think this is fairly true for me, to be honest.  So ---- if I say ---- well, person x and y, who I know got high SAT scores and did very well in high school, and I think are basically gifted, how do *I* know if they are gifted people with usual gifted characteristics, or if they are more on the Aspergers side.

 

I do not have a sample size of 300. 

 

If my sample size is smaller, how do I know, whether my sample size is not representative?

 

I think, because some of the gifted people I know are possibly/probably more on the Aspergers side, then how do *I* know if that is "just gifted" or if it is *not*?  It is not that I don't think other people can know.  I just think --- for a lot of people, maybe to say "well I am similar to some other smart people I know" is not going to be a good way of knowing.

 

But I think it is a good point, that it could be a giftedness thing. 

 

As for the law enforcement thing...... if you read the Tony Attwood book, he says he thinks a lot of people with Aspergers may be drawn to the military, because it is very regimented, it is very clear what the rules are, many things about it are very structured and predictable, the rules are clear, etc etc etc.  Now let's take that as a given.  I take that as a given.  (This is pertinent to me because my husband is a soldier -- many autism parents in my local community are military parents or military spouses.)  So -- are any of these people being identified in some way by the military?  No.  Do they have as rigorous of testing as a police department ---- very possibly not.  But a) is that test looking for it? B) is having characteristics of Aspergers even something that would be undesirable in a police officer? 

 

If you are going to say ---- oh no, it is not possible, someone with Aspergers cannot manage to be in the military or work in a police department ----- then, I can see that if reserving a very strict definition.  But ---- if Tony Atwood is (as far as I know) kind-of a reputable person, and he says that many people with Aspergers may be drawn to a career in the military ---- then to me ---- that has to mean that there ARE in fact people with Aspergers who are in fact in the military. 

 

At least ----- that is how I read that sentence in that book. 

 

It is kind-of something I am pretty interested in -- I would welcome hearing if I am misreading that or missing something there. 

 

(My Kindle is lost so I can't look it up, but I remember it as a mention in his main book about Aspergers.) 

 

Edit --- I googled "Tony Attwood military" and the 7th link goes to the page from the book.  "There are several other careers, not yet mentioned in this section, that may be appropriate for a person with Asperger's Syndrome..... Another is a career in the military." 

 

So I guess he doesn't come out and say "yes, there are soldiers I think have Asperger's Syndrome," but ---- it is implied to me?  He is mentioning it in the same paragraph as librarians. 

 

 

[Lecka]

That "insight remarkably absent"...... I am afraid it describes some of my close family members, who are SO SMART.  Also, liking word play but not liking most jokes (pointing out how they don't make sense....).  So I think I just do not have a good sample size or representative sample.

 

So I just mean -- for me, if I am saying "well it is all normal in the gifted people I know the best" and they DO have kind-of different personas when they are not around family ----- I have realized as an adult, it is not so normal to have such a different persona for the world. 

 

But I think it is not so neurotypical, really?  But I am not sure? 

 

I do like that kind of person more, too.  Reminds me of my family :)  Very comfortable for me to be around in a lot of ways. 

 

Even if some things are extremely frustrating or just sad. 

 

For sad ---- my sister was taken advantage of in college by a "boyfriend" who got her to carry a drug package for her.  She was released to my parents after two weeks in jail awaiting her court date (she would not believe my parents that the boyfriend wasn't coming.... for months afterward she waited for him to send a letter and was sure that something beyond his control was stopping him).  It is beyond sad and gullible and not knowing you are being used by a despicable person. 

 

So -- that is my sister and in a lot of ways she is one of the smartest people I know.  But she just does not get some things..

 

So I don't know -- would she be diagnosed with Aspergers now.  I am pretty confident she would be diagnosed with autism as a child if she were a child now ----- my mom had a very hard time with her when she was a small child.  And ----- that is part of the reason my son was late to be diagnosed ----- some things he did were normal in my family!!!!!!!!!!!  But he is truly more severe and truly he needs extensive therapy.  I think for my sister ---- she could have just had an easier time, maybe.  But she does well now, her husband is nice, she has 2 daughters, she is a CPA, she is active in her church....

[Tiramisu]

No need for a DX. The ped even agreed with me on my 3rd with ASD, there was no need for a official dx, it makes no difference.

 

We did go on and get him an official DX, but that has done nothing for him.

 

If you don't want to go for official testing, then don't. I am all for skipping the testing!

 

In my state, there are services available for children (perhaps up to age 21) with an AS diagnosis. It could make a big difference for some families who couldn't afford or coordinate different services themselves. I'm thinking of behaviorists and therapists coming into the home, specifically. And, as 8Fill has talked about before, there are services for adults to get evals and help them acquire employment.

[8filltheheart]

This is a case of where one falls on the spectrum would make a huge difference.

 

My ds misinterprets situations all the time.

He has incredibly slow processing speeds.

He has huge executive function deficits.

He has motor control issues.

 

The sum total of those disabilities.......I would personally be terrified of him being a police officer or in the military.

[8filltheheart]

In my state, there are services available for children (perhaps up to age 21) with an AS diagnosis. It could make a big difference for some families who couldn't afford or coordinate different services themselves. I'm thinking of behaviorists and therapists coming into the home, specifically. And, as 8Fill has talked about before, there are services for adults to get evals and help them acquire employment.

 

I would be seeking intervention therapies for a child diagnosed.  Early interventions are the most successful long term.

[PeterPan]

No need for a DX. The ped even agreed with me on my 3rd with ASD, there was no need for a official dx, it makes no difference.

 

We did go on and get him an official DX, but that has done nothing for him.

 

If you don't want to go for official testing, then don't. I am all for skipping the testing!

I understand that at some point you see so much of this stuff you find you figure out some of it yourself.  However a full eval is a VITAL process for many people, because it's putting words to all kinds of categories of things the parent WON'T figure out for themselves.  I can't tell you how many times we have someone come on the boards and go "I know my kid has (insert label) but why is he doing xyz?!?!" and they do NOT see the connection because all they ever had was some idiotic PED eval with a stupid 4 minute screening tool and a bunch of ASSUMPTIONS.  A ped can be WRONG, WRONG, WRONG, and the point of full evals is to TEACH you how things are connected and how their mind works and CATCH stuff.  That psych eval can catch motor control, vision problems, APD, anxiety, EF issues, LDs, processing speed, need for referrals for OT/speech/VT, genetic disorders, all sorts of things, and that ped is just giving a pat label. 

 

If for lis1 the full eval made little difference, it's only because she only has so much experience already and already knows how to do the interventions, therapies, accommodations, discipline approach changes, etc.  For most people, that leap going from a ped label to a full eval is going to be huge.  That is if the psych actually spends any time.  Get one of these 2 hour kiss and promise psychs who run just a couple tests, tell you hardly anything, and hand you a stack of numbers, and sure you're going to wonder why you bothered.  Get a psych who does 2-3 days of testing and hands you 6-20 pages of writing and spends hours answering questions on what to do with it, and I think most people are going to be VERY glad they did it.

 

And yes, I'm with 8 on the early interventions.  I got evals for dd much later (12), and with ds I'm pushing all interventions and things earlier.  You get that all the time, why so early, you're just reading into it, blah blah, but it DOES make a difference.  Guess that's just a little vent.  When you tell people you're getting ST for a 2 yo (and really bending over backward to do it, driving multiple hours each week, etc.), people launch into their stories of kids who magically started talking at xyz age.  When your kid is 4 and you say you're planning evals cuz you know stuff is going on and think it's xyz, people tell you you're reading into things and jumping the gun and just want to clinicalize normal behavior.  There's sort of an anti-eval stuck in the mud tendency to life, and sometimes we have to force ourselves out of that comfort zone and to do the hard thing and get them.

[PeterPan]

This is a case of where one falls on the spectrum would make a huge difference.

 

My ds misinterprets situations all the time.

He has incredibly slow processing speeds.

He has huge executive function deficits.

He has motor control issues.

 

The sum total of those disabilities.......I would personally be terrified of him being a police officer or in the military.

Hey 8, I don't mean to pry, but at this point have you done any interventions for the EF stuff?  Of all the things, this is the one that actually responds to interventions really well.  We have EF workbooks like from Linguisystems, Interactive Metronome (or the free hack version), EF coaching with certified educational therapists, etc.  The motor control is hard, because OT is just inherently not set up for anyone bigger.  We've had instances of people going from say an 8th percentile processing speed to 30th with IM.  If you haven't pursued these things (due to lack of time, whatever), it might be something to consider.  

[8filltheheart]

Hey 8, I don't mean to pry, but at this point have you done any interventions for the EF stuff? Of all the things, this is the one that actually responds to interventions really well. We have EF workbooks like from Linguisystems, Interactive Metronome (or the free hack version), EF coaching with certified educational therapists, etc. The motor control is hard, because OT is just inherently not set up for anyone bigger. We've had instances of people going from say an 8th percentile processing speed to 30th with IM. If you haven't pursued these things (due to lack of time, whatever), it might be something to consider.

We were doing lots of therapies, but right now the only thing he is doing is going to work. He is refusing any interventions right now. We want him going to an adult social group and he is adamantly refusing.

[PeterPan]

I'll have to get that book. Thanks.

 

One thing that I found fascinating about my husband is that he was incredibly rigid in some ways, yet completely flexible in others. For instance, he HAD to have a takeout meal from a certain restaurant every week on a certain day. He hated it if his working hours changed because he had to fill in for someone else, yet he would never know what his working day actually looked like in advance and that didn't bother him one little bit. Within the context of "I'll be working then and then", he could do anything. He was definitely more of a rule-follower than I am. People respected him because if he gave his word, he would follow through no matter what. He was bothered by labels and uncomfortable clothing, something DS has as well. Books had to be in alphabetical order. Clothes had to be hung up exactly in one way. He'd moan if I got it "wrong". 

 

I was not suggesting that certain diagnoses make someone unfit to work in law enforcement, but I do know that divergent thinkers are not sought out as employees in any government agency here, in this particular society. But then again, I am different than he was. I could not live with the stupid rules of the local bureaucracy. He was not bothered by it one little bit, yet he achieved the best outcomes possible within that system and worked for people, rather than the bureaucracy. 

 

The divergent thinking is probably more associated with giftedness than with Asperger's, I guess? I do believe that a full eval for both me and my kids would offer some valuable insights. Perhaps I will explore whether something like that is possible in private clinics. 

Dialectica--You're not crazy at all for thinking his ability to be b&w and rule-following would make him succeed in an environment like that.  I'm sure it did with me at the (extremely rule-driven) college I went to.  I don't know where you're going with divergent.  He might be very divergent, creative, devil may care, etc., but his rules internally tell him not to apply them to certain situations, meaning he doesn't.  I also go back to my point that because this is a spectrum, a person might not, in evals, get the label they're anticipating.  You could go in thinking aspergers (which I think most in the christian community accept as a medical disability) and instead come out with OCD or something else (which the christian community will then say is all part of made up pop psychology, unbiblical, and clearly evidence of a SIN problem).  Oh yeah, it's amazing.  

 

There's also a phenomenon of aspie rub-off, where the traits of the aspie rub off on the NT spouse.  (at least from what I've read)  Also notice he's following those rules and to him they're *normal*.  To you they're noteworthy, as in you actually notice them.  

 

There's some discussion that some of the aspie-like hang-ups with rules of location are actually due to vision problems.  I need things to be in the same place every time, yes.  Like move it 4 inches, I miss it.  But when you look at my vision, turns out I have issues with peripheral vision!!  So think about that, that we're clinicalizing something that actually at least *started* as a physical problem.  I'm low tone and have some developmental vision issues.  That's not rocket science to figure out.  So now that I KNOW why I'm not finding something (because my peripheral vision is not letting me see it), I take a DEEP BREATH and tell myself it's ok to look for a minute and ask for help.  Before I used to just get angry that people hadn't put things away right, kwim?  And yes, my spices are in alphabetical order.  :D

 

Similarly, there's discussion in vision communities that missing social cues (and forgetting faces) can be a visual processing issue.  It's kind of wild to think about actually, and I don't really have a great answer on that one.  It's curious to me that he's a COP, because that requires some ability to look at the person and have a clue what they're thinking, doesn't it?  Either his rules he was taught are so formulaic that there's no issue, or he's able to use POV (point of view) and theory of mind.  

[8filltheheart]

.  You could go in thinking aspergers (which I think most in the christian community accept as a medical disability) and instead come out with OCD or something else (which the christian community will then say is all part of made up pop psychology, unbiblical, and clearly evidence of a SIN problem).  Oh yeah, it's amazing.  

 

I think that is a very broad brush and is probably more to do with the community in which you are located or denominational issues bc we have never encountered anything like that in any of the places we have lived (which is a lot.  ;) )

 

Also, Dialectica's dh is deceased.   She is referencing what she saw.   She is a widow living overseas.http://forums.welltrainedmind.com/topic/505797-just-realizing-ds-is-aspie-can-you-tell-me-where-to-begin/?p=5532582

[texasmama]

I think that is a very broad brush and is probably more to do with the community in which you are located or denominational issues bc we have never encountered anything like that in any of the places we have lived (which is a lot.  ;) )

 

 

I agree.  It sounds like you have encountered some legalism and ignorance.  I've not ever had that experience, and as a therapist who is a Christian, I would never give the feedback to anyone that sin is the cause of their mental health issues.  I don't believe it, and it is cruel.

[PeterPan]

I agree.  It sounds like you have encountered some legalism and ignorance.  I've not ever had that experience, and as a therapist who is a Christian, I would never give the feedback to anyone that sin is the cause of their mental health issues.  I don't believe it, and it is cruel.

Oh I totally agree.  It's just a huge problem in some christian circles, with people refusing evals (utterly refusing) because they're done by psychologists.  If they're done by a medical doctor (but not a p-doc) that's ok, but as soon as you say psychologist, it's all bad, refusing to call sin sin, blah blah.  And then the double standard on labels, calling some of them bad and some of them medical, is even more beyond the pale.  This is what I grew up in and live around, and it's NOT just one isolated church or denomination.  It's so deeply rooted in what is being taught in some circles, people outside those movements wouldn't even believe it.  Look up Jim Berg.  (all your problems are sin unless an MD identifies it)  It kept my dad from getting medication years ago and is part of the reason my parents marriage fell apart.  (the denomination told her it was a sin problem, he agreed, she wanted him on the meds)

 

It's a serious, serious issue in some circles and lots of kids are not getting help because of it.  When I mentioned my dd's label to someone recently, she quietly said "don't you think it's actually CAPD like my boy's turned out to be?"  Like it was bad enough to get evals and then even worse to accept the label, that labels are only acceptable if they're the particular labels the leaders decide are acceptable.  CAPD and autism are acceptable.  ADHD, OCD, bipolar, these are not.  EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE ALL INTERCONNECTED.  What idiots.  What biased, uneducated, prejudiced, small-brained idiots.  Sorry.

[texasmama]

I'm sorry to hear your experience, Elizabeth. I understand your strong feelings. I have experienced the thought that you must see a Christian therapist because any other will steer you wrong and ruin you, your marriage or your child. Uh, no. A BAD therapist will do that, and those come in all flavors. Ignorance is hard to address, too. My most recent conversation about this completely shut me down because it was clear that these educated and intelligent Christian people were not open to my views, even as someone on the inside of the profession. So I do understand what you refer to.

[Tiramisu]

Can I just say that this discussion is immensely helpful for me? I am getting new insights and suggestions for new sources to investigate. You all are open-minded and probably weird like me, but much more knowledgeable. Indeed, it would be impossible to share issues one is dealing with to this extent and be met with such acceptance in society. 

 

I was mentioning DH for several reasons. First, someone mentioned partner choice. He seemed perfectly normal to me at the time, but now I can only conclude that he clearly wasn't. Because we worked well together, and that meant lots of theoretical discussions about stuff and never being accused of being argumentative, boring, or weird. As my kids are growing, I see a lot of my own weirdness in them but also a lot of DH's. DS, for instance, has some of the same preferences when it comes to routines and organization. I mean, the preferences aren't the same but he has this incredible drive to organize things in the same way all the time and gets upset when they aren't the way he wants them. This is interesting to see. 

 

I'm not familiar with the Christian community in the US (there are probably many different ones with their own sets of beliefs about mental health stuff), but I do know that mental illness is unacceptable in the society in which I live. One can be "weird" within certain limits, but an official label and being open about that is very much stigmatized — even depression. Talking openly about giftedness is also not OK. This is a shame, but true. It does affect how motivated I am when it comes to seeking an official diagnosis. 

 

It's hard to imagine life with someone "normal". People have told me I'm very normal but I have my doubts. In any case, I was raised with interesting people and interesting is what I'm used to, as in the types of discussions you've mentioned with some singing and dancing thrown in. There are frustrations but the alternative seems really boring. I think most of us fall into the "weird" with limits category. We get up, do our jobs, get along with people. We have a lot to laugh about, but of course some tears, too.

[Crimson Wife]

I do think, for instance, that I have empathy. I am not a psychopath, and I don't that is what the diagnostic lists mean by a lack of empathy either.

IMHO it is a myth that folks "on the spectrum" lack empathy. It has been my observation that they can be deeply empathetic towards others. Often they are very concerned with global issues like environmentalism, poverty, humane treatment of animals, etc. What they struggle with is with understanding how their personal actions affect those around them. They can be extremely self-centered and have real difficulty putting themselves in other's shoes. They will often insist on rigidly applying a rule rather than giving someone a break because of circumstances. That kind of inflexibility can be one of the most infuriating things in dealing with those "on the spectrum".

[Crimson Wife]

An example is the classic moral dilemma of Heinz and the medicine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_dilemma

 

Someone "on the spectrum" would rigidly apply the rule that stealing is wrong and would place that above Heinz' desire to save his wife's life. As a Christian, I am against stealing, but I would be okay with Heinz stealing the drug to save his wife but leaving the money he had and then paying the rest when he can.

[PeterPan]

Can I just say that this discussion is immensely helpful for me? I am getting new insights and suggestions for new sources to investigate. You all are open-minded and probably weird like me, but much more knowledgeable. Indeed, it would be impossible to share issues one is dealing with to this extent and be met with such acceptance in society. 

 

I was mentioning DH for several reasons. First, someone mentioned partner choice. He seemed perfectly normal to me at the time, but now I can only conclude that he clearly wasn't. Because we worked well together, and that meant lots of theoretical discussions about stuff and never being accused of being argumentative, boring, or weird. As my kids are growing, I see a lot of my own weirdness in them but also a lot of DH's. DS, for instance, has some of the same preferences when it comes to routines and organization. I mean, the preferences aren't the same but he has this incredible drive to organize things in the same way all the time and gets upset when they aren't the way he wants them. This is interesting to see. 

 

I'm not familiar with the Christian community in the US (there are probably many different ones with their own sets of beliefs about mental health stuff), but I do know that mental illness is unacceptable in the society in which I live. One can be "weird" within certain limits, but an official label and being open about that is very much stigmatized — even depression. Talking openly about giftedness is also not OK. This is a shame, but true. It does affect how motivated I am when it comes to seeking an official diagnosis. 

Yes, I literally got off the phone with someone (not even a christian) who said NOT to get ds labeled, to avoid it at all possible.   :svengo:   Yes, hiding one's head in the sand makes it all go away.  With no label, it's not really happening; you're normal.  You're only a weirdo if you actually get the label.  

 

You do realize that goes back to a view of every single thing as a defect, right?  I think what you're on the cusp of (or have already figured out) is that you have these watermelons you're juggling (to use the theology illustration).  You have the sense in which it involves brain damage and defect, and the sense in which it's very much NORMAL, built-in, wired, how God made them.  I find my peace in juggling those and not getting stuck on one or the other, kwim?  I think it's helpful to read books from people on both sides of that issue, so you can latch onto it in a more whole, healthy way, rather than saying it's only defect or only this or that.

 

Well that's pretty wild about it being taboo even in Europe.  I would have assumed the opposite.  Wild.  But I think you have to do what gives you peace.  If evals and having those discussions gives you peace, go for it.  It's a good process to go through, a journey.  And yeah, if you thought he was normal, maybe...  But that's fine too, kwim?  Like we like ourselves, kwim?  I've been talking backchannel with someone about Sherlock (BBC tv show), and I had no clue he wasn't normal.  But you know, there's kind of a humor to it, to read someone's list of all the things that are NOT nt about Sherlock and then watch it again and be surprised anyone would view it that way.  It's sort of informative, a people study.  I don't see getting in an uproar about something you are (or aren't), but it's helpful to have the right words and develop some methods to deal with the most problematic parts or the parts that keep you from accomplishing your goals.  In that sense I think you're really wise to pursue the evals and I think it's *helpful* (especially to your dc) to get them, because they deserve the right words for things.  They deserve the right words rather than having to live with innuendo and accusations of motive and wondering.  On the other hand, I'm totally not into the slap a label on your kid and call him defective line of thought.  That doesn't seem healthy to me.  He's a human with quirks, not a label with legs.

[PeterPan]

I'm sorry to hear your experience, Elizabeth. I understand your strong feelings. I have experienced the thought that you must see a Christian therapist because any other will steer you wrong and ruin you, your marriage or your child. Uh, no. A BAD therapist will do that, and those come in all flavors. Ignorance is hard to address, too. My most recent conversation about this completely shut me down because it was clear that these educated and intelligent Christian people were not open to my views, even as someone on the inside of the profession. So I do understand what you refer to.

Honestly, what I'm struggling with now (just being honest here) is that not many of the really conservative christian colleges of our stripe have licensed counselors. NONE. So if my dc goes to college and has EF issues, struggles with anxiety, whatever, she's going to get told it's a SIN problem and slapped with a Bible study.  I'm sorry, but that upsets me to no end.  It disgusts me that one department in the school will say something exists while the other tells you the symptoms of it are all a sin problem.  And I can't wrangle that in my mind.  I can't tell if I can prepare her so well that it wouldn't happen, or if it just isn't even worth the bother.  And frankly, that means our options are a much less conservative school or a secular school, both of which bowl me over from my perspective.  

 

The same school with no licensed counselors who will tell a student their aspie or adhd symptoms are spiritual problems of pride and anxiety is the same school that will tell girls they need to forgive their "christian" rapist, stop being so bitter, and not go to the law.  It's a huge issue confronting a number of schools right now, and I don't think people have made the connection.  They talk about the Grace mess with BJU and the new accusations against PCC and PHC, but they don't get the underlying thread, that it's how they've been treating ALL the problems, not just one.  Unqualified, unlicensed counselors who handle our kids who aren't trained in anything BUT the Bible and give glib, stupid, offensive answers like oh yeah, go see your MD and get cleared.  So if the MD misses your thyroid problem (which they often do!), then you're back to being told you have a sin problem.  If your beautiful dc raised in a christian environment all his life questions his sexuality and feels the way he does, it's ONLY a sin problem; there's NO other way to talk through it or deal with it at all.  

 

Sorry, rant, rabbit trail.  But like I said, when the rubber hits the road, the question is how much you're willing to let your SN dc hit that system.  When it's good, it's very good, and when it's bad it's horrid.

[texasmama]

Blech, Elizabeth.  Just blech.

[PeterPan]

To add to that, there are probably some differences between mental health issues and neurological differences. Which condition falls where? As science advances, there could be some changes there. I far as I understand Asperger's, I'd be more inclined to not call it a mental health issue — though mental health issues might result from it. But I only just started looking into it, so I am not in a position to judge. 

That's what has surprised me this week, when I've dug in really hard trying to understand this perseverance mess.  I had no clue that some of these labels were part of the spectrum.  I had heard them mentioned quietly and darkly for years as "mental health" problems, which of course in christian circles is code for blowing off sin (bad, wrong) with a secular psychologist's label.  But those same people, if you walked up to them and said your kid had autism, would give you sad looks like you just announced he had terminal cancer.

[texasmama]

And this is interesting too. It is obvious that Elizabeth's experiences must have been difficult to cope with, but before reading this comment it never occurred to me to either think that or to say "I'm sorry to hear that". I thought, "it's interesting how some religious denominations think that mental health issues are caused by sin", which then led me to make a comment about things being medical issues or mental health issues. 

 

That is not a normal reaction, right? Thinking like that could indeed point to Asperger's, right?

I would not go so far as to label your reaction "not normal".  Elizabeth, you and I were not sitting here in my living room having coffee as she shared her experience.  You read it on a 2D computer screen, and you have not met Elizabeth.  In a sense, she is not "real" to you.  The culture of this forum, I have noted through the years, is to share information, not to get support.  I am a person who tends to offer a lot of support in the form of hugs, even virtual internet hugs, even if people are not necessarily looking for that.  When Elizabeth shared her experience, I don't think she was doing so to get support but to explain her feelings and to add to the discussion and to provide clarity regarding her stance on these things.  Also, my reaction to Elizabeth is due to my having felt that I have gotten to "know" her through the years of posting on this forum and having the shared experience of dc with "issues".  So I chose to offer empathy.  It is not wrong not to offer empathy in this situation nor is it abnormal.  Some people are not bent towards giving internet "hugs" to people they don't know IRL.  I am on a far side of the "empathy and support" spectrum in this sense, and I am aware of this.

 

So, long story short (not!), you might wonder how you would react if you and I and Elizabeth were all in my living room sharing coffee when she brought up how wrong thinking on the part of a group of Christians contributed to untreated mental illness of her father and subsequently to her parent's divorce.

[PeterPan]

And this is interesting too. It is obvious that Elizabeth's experiences must have been difficult to cope with, but before reading this comment it never occurred to me to either think that or to say "I'm sorry to hear that". I thought, "it's interesting how some religious denominations think that mental health issues are caused by sin", which then led me to make a comment about things being medical issues or mental health issues. 

 

That is not a normal reaction, right? Thinking like that could indeed point to Asperger's, right?

You never ran into it, with them using religion to call you bad, so you wouldn't have a reason to identify with it.  I'd more look for major evidences of missing social cues (people coming up to you asking why you didn't xyz), perseverances, that kind of thing, the big stuff.  But I'm not a psych.  

[PeterPan]

 We get up, do our jobs, get along with people. We have a lot to laugh about, but of course some tears, too.

I don't.  I get up, get caught up in one thing, and forget almost anything else exists. If it's school, we get school done.  If it's photography, I forget to do school.  If I'm doing something like that, forget laundry or meals. I forget what my kids look like if I don't see them for a day, and then I'm shocked when I see them again, as if I have to get to know them all over again.  I don't laugh at what most people laugh at, and the whole concept of "friends" on FB evades me.  I only have one thing I'm into at a given moment and talk about in conversation, so if you meet me or happen to be talking about that, I seem pretty normal.  Try something else, and it gets really crunchy.  

 

I never realized these things till my dh begged me to stop talking about only that one thing when we'd go on our evening 4-wheeler rides together.   There was literally only ONE THING I was talking about, and I had no clue.  I didn't know I was missing social clues till my dh finally, in exasperation, asked me if I hadn't SEEN the response dd was giving me, and he realized I literally had not.  And no, I don't think most people would say I get along well with people.  I'm a very concerned human being, but people get pretty astonished at times at what I'll do.  They'll write me back-channel telling me better ways to write things.

 

I could go on, but then you'd REALLY know I was nuts, lol.  :D

[PeterPan]

I would not go so far as to label your reaction "not normal".  Elizabeth, you and I were not sitting here in my living room having coffee as she shared her experience.  You read it on a 2D computer screen, and you have not met Elizabeth.  In a sense, she is not "real" to you.  The culture of this forum, I have noted through the years, is to share information, not to get support.  I am a person who tends to offer a lot of support in the form of hugs, even virtual internet hugs, even if people are not necessarily looking for that.  When Elizabeth shared her experience, I don't think she was doing so to get support but to explain her feelings and to add to the discussion and to provide clarity regarding her stance on these things.  Also, my reaction to Elizabeth is due to my having felt that I have gotten to "know" her through the years of posting on this forum and having the shared experience of dc with "issues".  So I chose to offer empathy.  It is not wrong not to offer empathy in this situation nor is it abnormal.  Some people are not bent towards giving internet "hugs" to people they don't know IRL.  I am on a far side of the "empathy and support" spectrum in this sense, and I am aware of this.

 

So, long story short (not!), you might wonder how you would react if you and I and Elizabeth were all in my living room sharing coffee when she brought up how wrong thinking on the part of a group of Christians contributed to untreated mental illness of her father and subsequently to her parent's divorce.

You've really nailed this.  And I will say, as I pondered it, that I appreciate your comments/empathy, because it's the first time someone has really ACKNOWLEDGED it.  I talked to a VP at a particular christian university and told this to him, and he was just FLAT.  He had NO CLUE what was going on in the school with these issues.  Blows my mind.  So just to have anyone in the christian community care is a nice change.  ;)

[PeterPan]

IMHO it is a myth that folks "on the spectrum" lack empathy. It has been my observation that they can be deeply empathetic towards others. Often they are very concerned with global issues like environmentalism, poverty, humane treatment of animals, etc. What they struggle with is with understanding how their personal actions affect those around them. They can be extremely self-centered and have real difficulty putting themselves in other's shoes. They will often insist on rigidly applying a rule rather than giving someone a break because of circumstances. That kind of inflexibility can be one of the most infuriating things in dealing with those "on the spectrum".

Actually, the problem is being the one who's on the spectrum who's being told something idiotically vague like "you're proud" and then when you get handed the Bible study on pride YOU TOTALLY AGREE IT'S BAD.  Like yeah, pride is bad, but can you please actually tell me what in the WORLD you're talking about?  If you have no mental conception of pride, no list of behaviors to attach it to, then it's just theory, this term.  And they act like if you'd just ASCENT to them and agree, something would just magically CHANGE.  You can't change what you can't see.  

 

Or look at how Jim Berg's techniques for anxiety are so close to CBT but don't acknowledge the WHOLE POINT of CBT or why it's necessary or why it works.  So then you're giving someone half solutions, when there were whole answers out there.  And the crock?  There was NOTHING unbiblical about CBT.  There is not reason why a christian can't understand the Bible AND anxiety and spectrum and how the brain works and use ALL the methods out there to keep someone stable.  NO, only one method will work.

 

Whatever.  And they think others are aspie.  The b&w, dualism thinking there is just mind-boggling.  

[PeterPan]

IMHO it is a myth that folks "on the spectrum" lack empathy. It has been my observation that they can be deeply empathetic towards others. Often they are very concerned with global issues like environmentalism, poverty, humane treatment of animals, etc. What they struggle with is with understanding how their personal actions affect those around them. They can be extremely self-centered and have real difficulty putting themselves in other's shoes. They will often insist on rigidly applying a rule rather than giving someone a break because of circumstances. That kind of inflexibility can be one of the most infuriating things in dealing with those "on the spectrum".

Btw, when I showed Pretending to Be Normal to a friend and had her read it through quickly to get her thoughts (she has a phd and is a quick read), first thing out of her mouth was that the woman was self-centered and should get some biblical counseling.  Yup, diagnosed aspie, and your problem is you won't read your bible enough.  Someone can ascent to the virtue of something and still have no clue how to implement it or that it's happening or why it's happening.

[PeterPan]

I'm going to go hyper focus on the blanket I'm supposed to be sewing.   :thumbup: 

[Lecka]

I do know exactly what you are talking about, OhElizabeth, and I ended up changing denominations for reasons partly related to this.  My church now is a member of the United Church of Christ denomination.  There are things I miss, but it has been a good decision for us. 

 

 

[OneStepAtATime]

My brain is pea soup at the moment from all the pain killers I am on, and the total lack of sleep for two days, but I have been reading this thread and its varying shifts in direction with great interest.  

 

OhE, although I have not run into the excessive amount of issues you seem to keep running into with the Christian community refusing to see certain assessments and issues as "real" situations instead of "sin" needing more prayer/bible study/etc., I HAVE had some issues with this.  They just aren't extremely vocal about it.  There are looks, some whispers, strangely worded inquiries, etc.  The bias and inaccurate assumptions are there with some people, just not as in your face as I guess you have run into.  Still upsetting and frustrating, but I can ignore it most of the time.  The people who usually seem to see things that way are not people I normally have consistent contact with.

 

Mainly though, the big issue where I live has been people assuming any and all issues are just bad parenting.  Kid can't read?  Parent wasn't helping kid at home by reading to them when they were young.  Kid having trouble memorizing math facts?  Parent too lazy to do all the drill and kill needed.  Kid melts down in frustration over inability to rote memorize spelling words?  Parent spoils kid too much.  Seeking evals?  Parent is too lazy to parent and must be looking for an out, some good excuse for NOT parenting properly.  Even my SIL was told that the reason my poor niece, who has a brain tumor, and whose eye sight started failing when she was little and was having vision and coordination problems very early on was because SIL encouraged her to walk too soon, or SIL let her drink a soda when she was two, or SIL and BIL didn't interact enough with her physically, etc. etc.  This is what DOCTORS were telling them, not just friends and family (although there was that, too).  This is such a damaging attitude to have and keeps many parents from seeking the help their child really needs.

 

I don't believe in labeling a child just to get a label and labeling doesn't have to mean telling the world my child is damaged.  It SHOULD be to give answers on strengths and weaknesses and best approaches to help the child to thrive as much as possible.

 

 

[Crimson Wife]

Btw, when I showed Pretending to Be Normal to a friend and had her read it through quickly to get her thoughts (she has a phd and is a quick read), first thing out of her mouth was that the woman was self-centered and should get some biblical counseling.  Yup, diagnosed aspie, and your problem is you won't read your bible enough.  Someone can ascent to the virtue of something and still have no clue how to implement it or that it's happening or why it's happening.

The self-centeredness is because of the way that the brain is wired in those with ASD. It's not the result of any personal sin but, like any other medical condition, the result of living in a broken world. Studying the Bible has spiritual benefits, but it's not going to help fix a disability.

[8filltheheart]

It is also more than simply seeking a label.   It is seeking assistance for a very real disability.  It is more than a simple difference.

[Tiramisu]

I don't.  I get up, get caught up in one thing, and forget almost anything else exists. If it's school, we get school done.  If it's photography, I forget to do school.  If I'm doing something like that, forget laundry or meals. I forget what my kids look like if I don't see them for a day, and then I'm shocked when I see them again, as if I have to get to know them all over again.  I don't laugh at what most people laugh at, and the whole concept of "friends" on FB evades me.  I only have one thing I'm into at a given moment and talk about in conversation, so if you meet me or happen to be talking about that, I seem pretty normal.  Try something else, and it gets really crunchy.  

 

I never realized these things till my dh begged me to stop talking about only that one thing when we'd go on our evening 4-wheeler rides together.   There was literally only ONE THING I was talking about, and I had no clue.  I didn't know I was missing social clues till my dh finally, in exasperation, asked me if I hadn't SEEN the response dd was giving me, and he realized I literally had not.  And no, I don't think most people would say I get along well with people.  I'm a very concerned human being, but people get pretty astonished at times at what I'll do.  They'll write me back-channel telling me better ways to write things.

 

I could go on, but then you'd REALLY know I was nuts, lol.   :D

 

I like you just the way you are, OhE!

 

I'm not on FB either and have little interest in shooting the breeze. I hyperfocus and talk about one thing! I think everyone at my church has heard me talk about my special interest. LOL. 

[OneStepAtATime]

So are YOU a diagnosed aspie? I don't think you're nuts. You sound cool. :)

:lol: I think so, too.

[PeterPan]

So are YOU a diagnosed aspie? I don't think you're nuts. You sound cool. :)

Nope, but you're welcome to catch a plane over and we'll go together.  :D

[PeterPan]

An example is the classic moral dilemma of Heinz and the medicine. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heinz_dilemma

 

Someone "on the spectrum" would rigidly apply the rule that stealing is wrong and would place that above Heinz' desire to save his wife's life. As a Christian, I am against stealing, but I would be okay with Heinz stealing the drug to save his wife but leaving the money he had and then paying the rest when he can.

 

 

Surely, rigid thinking can be applied in more way than one? There is no dilemma in my mind here. Not a dilemma at all. 

 

While I think "stealing is wrong", I think stealing from the poor is more wrong than stealing from the rich — as you may have gathered on the other thread :).

I don't recall the precise number of criteria, but yes you should expect to see rigid, b&w thinking.  For instance, in that situation I'm not sure how they got any of the iterations suggested in that wikipedia article.  I simply know the situation would not happen, therefore the question is not relevant.  God would never give you a situation in which you cannot do what is right.  (Think Kirk, the Kobayashi Maru scenario.)  In my mind there is no way that could happen that there is not a way to do right, therefore the situation cannot happen.