LicklePaulie

Hi Dana, Services in Leicester for AS children, good and above average; Diagnostic services for adults excellent but under-resourced and over-run; Post-diagnostic services for AS adults, sparse, under-resourced and over-run; Transition services extremely poor though strategic plans are afoot to address this. Short but brief, there you have it

Granted... See the closing comment to my earlier thread... ps - Just done all the tests I'd not already done, AQ-48 (during diagnosis 3 yrs ago); EQ-14; SQ-62; MiE-15 - all-in-all a quite strong series of indicators!

Sorry to take so long to getting around to responding to this thread - been busy doing other things! For the record, I am the AS subject of this piece... I have to say that I can see where most of the critical comments are coming from. Dr Christian did claim we are all on the autistic spectrum but, in the next take (after my advice) adapted this claim to state that we all portray some autistic traits - the editor obviously thought the first take was more suitable. Similarly, I put the psychologist right when he claimed that gaze aversion was an indicator of autism - I pointed out that 20 years ago the results would have been the opposite and that I used to be accused of staring at everybody! The problem, as I see it, is not being unable to look at people's faces but not having the "natural" ability to gauge the appropriate degree... this was stated on film but, again, the editor obviously saw fit to include the former statement. For the record, I was most annoyed about the dubbing in of the closing comment "...and that is why this is an embarrassing condition"! and was disappointed that approximately three and a half hours of recorded interview (over two sessions) was distilled to around ten seconds of input into the final piece. Regarding the AS tests (et al) it has already been stated that they are only indicators and in no way claim to be definitive. Anybody who subscribes to this forum also is highly likely to give a skewed response because our awareness of what it is assessing is that much higher than the population norm. I was very nervous about going on this programme, particularly given its tabloid nature, but agreed because i) I believe that raising public awareness of the condition is paramount, ii) though tabloid, it is generally sensitive to the issues it addresses and aims to demystify and destigmatise them, and iii) the director was extremely keen, having just received a dx for his daughter. To me a five-minute item will never cover the condition in the depth it needs, however the subject of autism was introduced to a section of society that previously had no awareness of it, the AS questionnaire web-site taking over 100, 000 hits in the following week, so I feel vindicated if not satisfied..

My view is that we (AS) find it very difficult to analyse ourselves in comparison to others. Given that (if the latest published prevalence rates are accurate) only one per cent of those we come into contact with are likely to reflect our own mindset/operating system/call-it-what-you-will, I'm not surprised that we become confused and lack the social and self-awareness portrayed by the majority of the population around us. Neurotypicals have the advantage of being much more likely to find role-models who fit their own blueprint whilst we are left trying to build a flat-pack wardrobe from wardrobe instructions but with the parts for a set of drawers!

Now in that context, I agree, use of the term is uneducated and offensive

How is it that people with a condition that includes amongst its traits a tendency to literal use of language can claim personal abuse when somebody uses a term in its literal sense in another context? The terms 'autism' and 'autistic' are derived from the Greek autos ('self') and, whether one accepts the French view of the Conservative Party or not, I feel it is disingenuous to take offence when they use the term/s to describe an inward-facing and self-absorbed approach when dealing with European politics. That is, in my view, no worse than describing somebody as 'blind' when one believes obvious consequences have been missed, etc. Do we hear visually-impaired individuals screaming "foul" when that happens? Of course not, so what gives us that right? I note that M. Lellouche has since apologised for his ignorance of the offensive connotations of the word (which I obviously share) along with the word "pathetic". I am not a francophile and do not know enough about his politics to attack or defend them whilst I do a great deal of work to increase awareness of the issues faced by individuals with ASCs. It is from this perspective that I bemoan this trivial (imho) "political-correctness" diverting attention from the very real problems we face in an NT-dominated society.

Yes, and there are many parallels to the way a "late" diagnosis (42yo in my case) can affect an individual. I suppose the only reassurance I can offer is that some (possibly many) individuals manage to survive and, in some rare cases, even thrive into and through adulthood even without the limited support available... And don't forget that Autism Act which should at least increase awareness and availability of services in the future. L&P

Ok then. i) The monotony to which I referred was of my original issue (the projection of autism onto famous figures, usually long-dead and without the means to fully test the premise) rather than the particular comments about Churchill. ii) You did not mention Winston being diagnosed with any ASD but you did describe him as "churchill an asperger". I think even the most literal of us might find that a difficult distinction to make. To my mind, many people past and present may appear to portray some of the traits associated with the condition but, given that it takes a fully-trained professional a full half-day of intensive testing to attain a diagnosis, I find it very difficult to accept that label in anybody who has not been comprehensively assessed. Some author, writing a biography forty years posthumous to the subject and with who-knows-what degree of knowledge of ASDs has made a single comment and you have taken it as valid (which is your right) - I however would require far more evidence to do the same (which is my right). That said, I shall refrain from carrying on this debate any further here because I am very aware that asnewb's thread has been somewhat hijacked, for which I offer my abject apologies. Of course, if a thread were started on the subject I would be happy to contribute...

At the risk of being monotonous (surely not, an Aspie who won't let it lie?), here we go again. I find it highly unlikely that Winston Spencer Churchill (I assume we're talking of the same person?) was ever diagnosed with Asperger Syndrome - He died in 1965 and the condition was not identified in the English-speaking world until Lorna Wing and Judith Gould coined the term in around 1980...

asnewb - Please don't fret, I am not offended by your question. I simply get frustrated by some in the AS community who try to claim famous others, many of whom would never attain a positive diagnosis because their "autistic traits" do not (or, more commonly, did not) impinge upon their ability to lead a successful life, as one of their/our own. There are more positive ways to move forward. trekster - I do not understand your confusion. I have deliberately "stolen" Churchill's aside about the relationship between the US and UK and placed it into the different context of the relationship between AS and NTs. I studied some politics at university and admire much of Churchill's achievements (and particularly his oratory skills) but would never select him as a champion of Asperger Rights... Jannih - Whilst I understand your point, I see no more relevance in selecting somebody with Aspergers as a role model than somebody of the same gender, or ethnicity, or nationality, etc. etc. sesley's opening statement actually puts my central point very succinctly - concentrate on who you are and can be rather than what some anonymous (how much do we actually know of any of these celebrities?) others appear to be. Finally, I repeat I mean NO OFFENCE to any individual on this forum. I am simply exercising my right to express my views on the matter, which may or may not concur with the views of others.

Sorry , I mean nothing personal but this sort of thread really winds me up! Yes, Gary Numan and Pip Brown have diagnoses as have Dan Ayckroyd and Sebastien Vettel. From a million miles away we could also argue that many other people, ordinary or great (by public perception), might have Aspergers or portray autistic traits. None of that can change who we actually are. The fact that one of the most promising drivers in the current cohort of Formula One employees has a diagnosis that matches my own does not mean that I might aspire to the same dizzy heights (much as I might wish to!)... nor will my comedic acting abilities suddenly improve, nor my ability to create and perform popular music. I'm certainly never likely to develop a product and company the size of Microsoft, just because somebody else on the opposite side of the western hemisphere is considered by some to portray some elements of an ASD! Let's get real. Everybody, no matter whether they have a diagnosis of AS or not, has their own strengths and weaknesses. Our aim in life must surely be to discover exactly what they are in each of us and to make best use of the positives and minimise the damage caused by the negatives. An example: trekster above comments on the great difficulties she faces in attaining academic recognition, yet I personally know more than one Aspie who has gained PhD status with relative ease... but faces enormous (if not insurmountable) difficulties in entering and/or maintaining a place in the world of work. Same diagnosis, different challenges. Please do not let us fall into the trap of using famous others as false indicators of who we might become nor, worse, as excuses for our failings. Surely we have a responsibility to ourselves and those close to us to make the best of the cards we are given? What is the value in claiming Gary Numan or Pip Brown or Dan Ayckroyd or Sebastien Vettel or Bill Gates or Albert Einstein or Uncle Tom Cobbley and all as one of our own? We are not them and are no more likely to attain their distinctions in life than are my NeuroTypical brother or sister. I repeat, I mean no assault on anybody or on their views - I simply cannot see that this type of discussion is helpful to any of us who are struggling simply to negotiate normal everyday life (unless a sense of reality is not considered relevant).

I have to take exception to that statement, I'm afraid. There are many books written by people who simply wish to help others by explaining their own individual understanding of the condition. For the record, Luke Beardon (quoted earlier in the thread) is one of the most knowledgeable NTs I have ever encountered, having worked with individuals with autism and Aspergers for many years. There seems to be several very strongly-held (and often inappropriate if not entirely erroneous) views emerging throughout this thread. I'm all for freedom of expression, but let's at least try to ensure some degree of understanding before we all wade in with our comments...

This advice is not strictly true - though normal procedure is GP referring to CMHT referring to Diagnostic Services you can ask for a referral to assessment services direct from your GP. It IS extremely frustrating trying to work your way through all the red tape (particularly when the professionals themselves are not sure of procedural limits!). Simplest course of action? Put down on paper the reasons you and your husband suspect ASD; Take this to GP and request direct referral to Diagnostic Services; Insist in assessment from specialist in the field (clearly CMHT do not often meet this criteria); Scream and shout at GP until you get desired response (they will normally be happy to give your problem to an expert and get it out of their office). Though this seems rather confrontational, unfortunately in the current system it is only the loudest that get attended to. Do not worry though, you are not by-passing the system by making this request, you are doing nothing wrong, and it is perfectly acceptable for the GP to request an assessment directly.

I think this is the important bit - not just for DLA but when seeking ANY form of statutory assistance. It simply adds weight to claims as pre-existing and ongoing issues, rather than having to prove current concerns and then to provide evidence that they are ongoing or indeed worsening...

I agree with baddad, ASD per se is neither a blessing nor a curse. There may be certain areas of our lives which an ASD may allow (some of) us to succeed in but equally there are others in which an ASD may cause (some of) us to be comparatively inhibited. Not better, not worse, just different.