Could I have aspergers..??

[icesyckel]

Otherwise, that would imply medical professionals should be more trusted than those with conditions.

PEPH. You are saying that if we do not assign equal weight and credibility to professional diagnoses and self diagnoses that it follows that we are trusting medical professionals over people with conditions. However, evaluating the weight and credibility of a diagnosis, professional or otherwise, has nothing to do with the trust one places in the individual doing the diagnosing. Reliability/credibility and trust are different concepts.


As a society, I do not believe it is practical to give the same weight to self-Dx that we assign to professional diagnoses for the reasons above discussed. However, from a purely scientific perspective, without any mistrust of the subject to be diagnosed, I assign more weight and credibility to professional diagnoses because they are more objective and because, when properly done, they involve more in-depth testing than an individual can conduct using online screening mechanisms and subjective, anecdotal "evidence." This is true even if the subject is a doctor, as the testing needs to be administered by someone not emotionally invested in the outcome.


However, this is a generalization. In the specifics, a doctor who renders a diagnosis without conducting the proper testing is no more reliable than a self-Dx and possibly less so. However, one cannot take this specific conclusion and apply it to the general - this is where it becomes PHEPH.


Consider: Dr. Brown is an internist who examines Rita's person and, without any testing, diagnoses her with autism. Because Dr. Brown's Dx was unreliable, all professional Dx's are unreliable. One does not follow the other.

 

[icesyckel]

white collar crime, and wrongs occur just as much from professionals. Do you know how much insurance fraud is committed by medical facilities each day? Coding wrongs, over billing, diagnosing to satisfy insurances. Add that to other medical wrongs seen everyday, like long waiting lists, underdiagnoses &. misdiagnoses, treatments not tailored to the specific situation, but just tailored to the condition, and often to the masses, etc. Then there are the medical failures for many professionals to listen or be objective, or timely, or with abrasive attitude. So, if all that has occured, we must assume they are competent and have good intentions?

Please don't take this the wrong way, but you seem to have an almost pathological mistrust of those in the medical profession. Granted, given your personal experiences, this is understandable, but it also proves my point. Your specific, subjective experiences have led you to erroneously conclude that medical professionals, in general, are not to be trusted. My own experiences would disprove that generalization.


Yes these crimes and improprieties you describe occur in the medical profession - possibly with greater frequency than any of us would like to admit. That they occur, however, does not make a self-Dx scientifically more reliable than a professional Dx.


Here is another fallacy: you presuppose that committing insurance fraud makes a physician bad at his job. I can tell you that many of the best heart surgeons in the USA fraudulently bill insurers and Medicare. Conversely, I wouldn't want to be operated on by an honest surgeon with shaky hands.


These issues/problems you are describing matter and are relevant to the healthcare and insurance industries generally, but they are not specifically relevant to whether a professional Dx or a self-Dx is more reliable.


The fact that some of us as a community are willing to fall on the sword of self-Dx as a reliable means for detecting autism, well it won't help any of our better agendas. We won't be taken seriously by society at large, nor should we be if we adhere to such notions. I am not saying self-Dx is without any value, but let us dispense with this fiction that it is generally more reliable than a professional Dx. Else, we will do more harm than good.


You may be able to point to specific professional misdiagnoses, but how many have incorrectly self-diagnosed themselves as being on the spectrum? Such anecdotal evidence does not affect the general reality that objective testing and Dx, when done appropriately by qualified professionals, is more reliable than a subjective, self-Dx.


Now, show me someone on the spectrum who has studied and become licensed, and we have the ideal: people with autism conducting the testing and making the professional diagnoses. Then we have all the benefits of the personal experience and scientific reliability.

 

[icesyckel]

Also, realize there are doctors that have mental health conditions too to cloud judgement, so that has to then be considered too, if the suggestion is they have more objectivity.

It depends on the condition, really. I see no reason why someone on the spectrum cannot be a doctor, and such a person would be uniquely qualified to assess others.


However, a schizophrenic doctor might not be the way to go, I agree. We wouldn't know whether science or some invisible voice was directing our treatment.

 

[icesyckel]

just as a doctor could say he was right about everything, but I should not assume that. It is not a secret that medicine is far from perfect, so no patient should assume any practitioner or clinic is above doing some wrong, as that gives that professional and clinic extra power to commit those wrongs, if they knew we were not analyzing them too.

Medicine and psychology are imperfect sciences - true. However, they are both more scientific than relying upon subjective experiences, feelings, and anecdotes.


However, your inference that providers should be scrutinized and monitored closely for compliance with the law and established practice standards is well taken.

I can see your side to things, that it could be unhealthy for a society to question professionals.

That is close but not precisely the point I was making. However, yes it could be unhealthy. It would also be unhealthy for healthcare providers to proceed without oversight.


I am not saying society should take what professionals say and never question it. I believe it is a good idea to get second opinions and to research a provider's education, skills, licensure status, disciplinary history, patient reviews, and other information online before settling on a 1st or 2nd opinion provider.


However, absent specific evidence that a professional lacked the credentials to diagnose or implied improper or deficient methodology in arriving at a Dx, I do believe a professional Dx is inherently more reliable than a self-Dx as a general rule. There are always exceptions.

 

[icesyckel]

I guess my argument would be, well if you clean up your act then we would not need to resort to that. Those mental health professionals who committed aggregious wrongs are rarely held accountable, as who is going to be trusted? The doctor or the patients? That is why I am usually on the side of patients, if both sides have good points. They have their high priced lawyers to fight things. Patients do not.

This is an area where we are in agreement. There is oversight for physicians, but most people believe that their only recourse is to file a lawsuit and involve lawyers. Instead, the most effective first step to hold a provider accountable is to go to the government licensing authority and make a complaint. You would be surprised how often doctors in the US have their license to practice medicine suspended or their DEA license for making prescriptions suspended. Sometimes doctors are never permitted to return to practice. In some areas complaints can even be submitted online.

I recently had an issue with a specialist. I threatened to complaint to the licensing board, and I got an immediate and satisfactory resolution. This won't always happen, but there is accountability in place, though there could certainly be more.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

Hello,

Thanks for your many replies. I know you had to break them up because of word count, but that is ok, as I just had a brief reply.

After reading all your replies, I think it is safe to say that we still disagree for most points.

Our vast family medical experiences supports our positions. If anything I am too patient, objective and caring. I wish the medical community and huge supporters of them could be more objective. Our society would be much better because of it.

 

[icesyckel]

Hello,

Thanks for your many replies. I know you had to break them up because of word count, but that is ok, as I just had a brief reply.

After reading all your replies, I think it is safe to say that we still disagree for most points.

Our vast family medical experiences supports our positions. If anything I am too patient, objective and caring. I wish the medical community and huge supporters of them could be more objective. Our society would be much better because of it.

You're welcome, and don't worry about disagreeing. Most people disagree with me. I am accustomed to it.

Regardless of whether I agree/disagree with you, given the experiences you and your family have had, I can certainly respect your position and misgivings about the medical community.

Setting aside our original topic for a minute, I really think you should consider reporting some of these hacks to the appropriate licensing authorities. If you don't, then someone else will just end up having the same experience you did in the future. I hope y'all have better fortune in the future at any rate.

 

[SusanLR]

I like:

I agree - you have found your tribe

. That's how I feel here too. Finally a place we can talk about anything that we think may be ASD and get replies and not feel uncomfortble about it. NTs don't understand or don't want to hear about it.

I have a question though on thought processes that the majority seem to have processing thoughts: Thinking in pictures instead of words.
My mind usually runs constantly with both.
Rapid verbal thoughts that are hard to verbally express without rambling along with almost photographic memory type thinking. Yes, my mind is a busy place!
Also music seems to be a constant with me. I like calming music like soundscapes/meditative type music all day throughout the house.
Driving I like songs with words, on the classic rock side. Keeps me alert and helps with mental concentration as my wandering thoughts and hyper visual distractions can interfere with concentration needed while driving.
And unless I am in a very depressed or anxious mood there is always some song in the background of my brain that is just there. I've become used to it.
This could be a thread of it's own, but, wondered if others are like this?

 

[Keigan]

@SusanLR ,

You describe my own mind perfectly.

To help with the feeling of stress and anxiety, get a fidget toy that you can play with. The toy will help you focus your thoughts and burn off some of the energy tugging on your thoughts. I have two heavy chain bracelets that I wear while driving or out in society, they work very well for me - www.stimtastic.co

 

[SusanLR]

Thanks Keigan for your insight.
I think the idea of the heavy bracelet might be something to try.