Not just Aspeger's. It's both. Make no mistake. It is a real condition. People really have it. There are also people who don't have it, but say they think they to excuse themselves for their own personal foibles. To make things more complicated, Asperger's is a spectrum disorder. In other words, it's not a simple case of you either having it or not. There's a whole continuum of affliction. You can have a severe case of it, or a mild case of it (which I suspect I do, but I don't know, and I don't much care, since it doesn't slow me down), or you can have it in any degree in between. So how bad of a case of AS do you need in order to be considered AS? That's a good question. It doesn't much matter. Who cares as long as it doesn't slow you down or debilitate you? To make you understand, try to think of it in terms of sickle cell anemia. From what I know, sickle cell anemia is a condition in which your red blood corspicles are abnormally shaped and can cause the blood of people to clot easily. But there are different severities of the condition. In some cases, it's actually beneficial because it can make people resistant to malaria and it's not considered too detrimental to the individual. On the other hand, you can have a severe case of it and as a result you blood will clot very easily and you'll be at higher risk of getting an embolism and dying. If you have a mild case of it, it doesn't slow you down (it can actually be beneficial) so it's not really a bad thing and might not even be considered a disease or detrimental condition. The same is true with AS. There are some people with mild AS who are very highly functioning and you might not even notice anything weird about them; they just learned how to adapt. However, there are people who have it really badly, and for them it's definitely detrimental. There's a point in the severity of the condition where it's just not feasible or possible to blend in. This point varies from person to person. Some are, some aren't. For those who are, maybe they're proud of their unique abilities, personality, or interests. Or maybe they're just miserable and need to love themselves and cling to any identification in order to do that.
At some point, it becomes obvious to a person that living the way we tend to do in the West, is not really satisfying, not really worth it to work for it, to put one's happiness in it. This is not an "excuse for not trying hard enough", it is a reason for not trying hard enough.
I have asperger's; I was diagnosed at the age of four. However, I rarely express little, if any symptoms of it. Although I still have occasional social awkwardness or fear of a social situations, I am very social.
That's when a lot of people have it in its most acute form. (i.e, I did a lot of weird shit when I was younger Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!)
yes it is very real, but i think that some kids are having this label thrust on them by the doctors because they don't know how to help the child or even deal with the child, i know kids with the condition and life can be hard for them at times, example, one boy i know likes to dress up has wierd things i.e television and he will really belive he is a television, he says weird things and does unappropriate things at school!
yeah misdiagnoses on pysch things happen fairly often i was mis digiasnosed with add and was of stimulents for a decade when i didn't did them needless to say if screwed me well and good
Links and excerpt; my two cents Just a few links: Page, Tim. "Parallel Play". The New Yorker. August 20, 2007. http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/08/20/070820fa_fact_page Siegel, Robert. "Pulitzer-Winner on Living with Asperger's". All Things Considered. August 20, 2007. http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=12750745 Simon, Scott. "The Variations of Glenn Gould". Weekend Edition Saturday. September 21, 2002. http://www.npr.org/programs/wesat/features/2002/sept/gould/ An excerpt from The New Yorker: I heard the All Things Considered interview last year, and remember being fascinated with it. But for some reason I didn't post it here or in a blog. Whoops, my bad. At best, I would theorize that, as people were trying to get me back on antidepressants while another professional was muttering something about attention-deficit disorder, the last thing I wanted was another diagnosis to throw into the mix: "What about this ...?" And that's the thing. We all want to be justified. And there are many who would bend over backwards to justify us. But at the same time, the more important thing for many a psych patient is that it doesn't matter what we call the problem. People don't fucking care. In fact, if the problem has a name, they'll just use that name as a weapon. Self-diagnosis. Trendy. What-the-fuck-ever. The point is to be healthy and live as such. Except, of course, that there is a world full of assholes out there just waiting to fight tooth and nail in order to divert that effort in the name of more important things, like making money and kissing ass. The diagnoses are necessary as a context explaining what it is one seeks to fix. Restructure, recalibrate, repair. I dare anyone to look at a terminal patient and say, "Everybody dies sometime. 'Cancer' is just so trendy. Don't give me that shit. Stop making excuses." In other words, if you can't live the way we want you to, just hurry up with the dying, already. Think about it this way: even if it's "just an excuse", that is still significant of something amiss.
If you keep trying to do something over and over and not only fail at it but don't see the point of it except for the expectations of others, then an explanation can be a great relief. People often do not realize how strongly social norms are enforced with obvious and subtle reinforcement. It's designed to shape people into the mold of cultural expectations, but when you cannot be molded it only creates low self-esteem.
But whose explanation? Why identify yourself as someone with Asperger's - when you might just as well identify yourself as a strict Taoist? The difference between the two identifications is relevant: The first one makes you and other people consider yourself as "abnormal" or at least "unusual", but definitely someone with a "condition" that requires "treatment" or at least "adjustment". The latter implies no such thing - and possibly gives you the opportunity of a less burdensome/burdened life.
I don't find the term Asperger's to imply treatment or adjustment, except adjustment of my own expectations, which I find liberating. These terms aren't mutually exclusive either. I just think the concept of Asperger's is a useful shortcut. People who also identify with it can talk about it's qualities which seem universal, and coping strategies. Sometimes it just enough to know that in spite of being different, it's not really a flaw- only compared to NT culture. Within Aspie culture it's normal.
OMG that's me! I don't think I do have Aspergers though, even though a lot of my friends and family say I have characteristics at mild end of spectrum. I have a friend with pretty severe symptoms (diagnosed), he isn't any less capable of living just like people without symtoms do, just people around him need to know how to take him and speaking literally helps since abstract thinking or metaphors etc can throw him a bit. Have a few family members with variety of different degrees of symptoms (again some diagnosed but others it's hardly noticable).
Many people have at least one Asperger's trait, but only those with Aspergers tend to show all of them.
where did you get that information from? just curious! my sons Dr is seeing him tomorrow i'll ask her!
I have read alot about it. Here is a good website to start with: http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/
ok i'll check it out! i wasn't having a dig, i just wanted to know where you got that fact from, because my son has a high aspergers risk!
