Jump to content

Talk:Asperger syndrome/Archive 11

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15

Causes of AS

I've recently found out that my friend has a brother with Asperger Syndrome. Whats special about them is that they're identical twins. The cause of Asperger Syndrome cant be only hereditary if my friend doesn't have Asperger Syndrome. Whats up with that? 80.178.76.191 15:01, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

In cases of identical twins, it's often found in both (I even heard of a case of aspie triplets), but occasionally it isn't. That doesn't mean it's not genetic, that just means that it's not 100% genetics and 0% environment. Quite a few genetic predispositions take something to activate them, they aren't all automatic like eye color. Rheumatoid arthritis is a good example, it's primarily genetic, but still takes one or more environmental factors to activate it, and it behaves much the same in terms of affecting twins. http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=356909 Poindexter Propellerhead 21:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
I've heard that alot of people with family members that have Asperger Syndrome tend to show some of the symptoms, is it even possible to research this area, especially without an accurate way of diagnosing whether a person has Asperger Syndrome or not? Whats the point in research into the causes when you cant determine who has it? 80.178.89.1 10:17, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
Great point! Heredity is certainly one of the main cause, as you've said people who show said symptoms may have the same or similar symptoms such as their parents, grandparents, etc. It's one of the main causes but it certainly doesn't always turn out to be the case. -Pilotguy hold short 12:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

Proportionality

this obscure article is longer than osteoporosis or alzheimers disease.


If it bothers you, go write longer articles on osteoporosis and alzheimer's disease. Or were you wanting to split up the article on Asperger's into some subarticles? If the main aim of your statement is to get us to reduce the size of this article, I don't agree.

Inaccurate Information

Hello,

As an individual with Asperger’s Syndrome, and as an individual who has read several comprehensive books on the subject (including book written by Tony Attwood, world expert on Asperger’s Syndrome), I was surprised to find some ‘facts’ here that had absolutely no references and that I had never, ever read in any book (even autobiographies of those with Asperger’s Syndrome). These comments included:

“Lack of appreciation of humor - although they may grasp jokes at an intellectual level, and rarely even excel at making jokes, they fail to appreciate its emotional worth. Sometimes, their smiles and laughter may appear unnatural.”

What? Tony Attwood even said in his book that some with Asperger’s develop a great sense of humor usually based on their realizing that they take many things literally (I know I definitely fit this category). In addition, many people with Asperger’s, including myself, love and appreciate hearing jokes just as much as any one else.

“Lack of embarrassment - although persons with AS have an intellectual understanding of shame and embarrassment, they are unable to grasp concepts on an emotional level.”

Also untrue, many, if not most, are able to emotionally grasp the concept of embarrassment (even intuitively from feeling the emotion at an early age), though they may not express the emotion in a conventional way.

“Financial imprudence - although some people with AS can manage their own finances, they usually appear to be careless or even reckless, with money. In most cases they require the assistance of others in managing their own finances and making financial decisions. “

I do not have the slightest idea as to were whoever posted this received the idea from. I have never read it in any book or on the web, and people I know with Asperger’s are by far some of the most financially responsible people I have ever met, due to their above average ability to keep emotions and reason separate and their ease with doing what they feel is morally correct.

Willis first hand experience. I deleted all four of those. But I'd like to discuss it. Sykee 07:24, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

I would like to see those restored, but perhaps rephrased. Please keep in mind that not all people with AS will exhibit these traits. They're simply more common with AS, and can be used to help diagnose AS if an individual has a mix of a few of them. These come from the DSM-IV manual, which is what psychologists rely on to make a diagnosis. The criteria, including the ones listed above, have been compiled from decades of case studies and extensive research by doctors and universities. As more is learned about AS, its entry in the DSM-IV will be updated; so by no means is the material in the DSM-IV written in stone. However, it is a reliable resource, and its information is useful to the article.
To address each statement individually:
"Lack of appreciation of humor" - Not every person with AS will exhibit this. However, a large enough number of people with AS exhibit this to a certain degree, which makes this useful to the article. I'll admit that the phrasing isn't very good, though. It should instead clearly describe how many people with AS have a tendancy to take jokes in the literal sense, which you articulated so well in your comment. Although the initial description that you deleted sort of alluded to that fact, its wording was quite poor. The diagnostic language of it was of a subjective (somewhat judgmental) nature, where information on Wikipedia needs to be objective and neutral in nature. It could also be noted that people with AS tend to favor unconventional, abstract humor. For example, an abstract word association or word play might be absolutely hilarious to the person with AS, while everyone else isn't even able to make the connection. (In this case, it's the people without AS who seem to lack the appreciation of humor!)
"Lack of embarrassment" - Again, not every person with AS will exhibit this. Here also, the phrasing was very poor - this time to the degree of actually describing autism, rather than AS. The description was also extremely generalized and simplistic. Here again your comment added much improved information, which you worded in a much better way.
"Financial imprudence" - Here again, not every person with AS will exhibit this. However, this description was fairly acceptable. What it lacks is the explanation of why some people with AS might be a bit wreckless financially. Most people with AS are passionate about specific things here and there, and sometimes this leads to impulsive shopping sprees. Conversely, I know of AS savants who are financial wizards at the stock market, where it's extremely profitable to keep emotions completely out of it. Ironically, they tend to be indifferent over losing a thousand dollars at it in a single day, but will often become very upset over losing a dollar bill somewhere. The second sentence about most cases needing assistance in financial matters likely doesn't belong there. Although it's true for severe cases of AS, that comment is generalizinga bit too much. It would be better to rephrase it so say "In many cases..." instead. There are plenty of people out there without AS who manage their finances much worse than a few people I know who have AS!
What was the fourth item that you had deleted? Thanks!
Hopefully that helps answer a few things, and will provide some positive input in improving this section of the article. If someone wants to rephrase the deleted information so that it's appropriate for the article and up to Wikipedia standards, be my guest! --Dulcimerist 01:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your input. I had added those three (not four) items as they are some of the social/behavioral differences of my own sibling with AS (diagnosed at 50). I knew that they were authentic, although I could not back it up with citations. Apologies for the poor phrasing-I'll try to improve it as best as I can.Sykee 04:15, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
Point 21, "Formal mannerisms and etiquette". People with AS generally are formal in the sense they use long words. Social niceties though may not come spontaneous and could be judged superfluous. People with AS are known to be unintentionally rude, after all.

This article is really disgusting. I have an IQ of 140 (that puts me in the top .6% of the human race in intelligence) and I am flabergasted by the negative, condescending tone of this horrible article. "Aspergers" have a capacity for humor (I definitely do) and you can't put them all into one category. Not all Aspergers are literal, scientific thinkers. I am very imaginitive and creative. I write fiction, and have excelled at writing for a newspaper at only age 18. I'm not going to say I'm superior to neurotypicals, but I am equal. Give Aspergers the respect they deserve and change this hideous, disgusting article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JJAC116 (talk • contribs)

I agree with the above posters. The article makes many generalizations and blanket statements that are offensive to those who have been diagnosed with Aspergers. It could be extremely harmful to a young person's self-image and self-esteem to read this stuff telling them they cannot empathize or connect emotionally with others. Self-esteem is a big issue for people with psychiatric labels. Even depicting "our condition" as undesirable is offensive. Quite frankly I love who I am and how I am and would never trade it in for "normality." It's called NEURODIVERSITY! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.81.0.194 (talk • contribs)
I agree with both of you, but because of the complexities of of Asperger Syndrome, it would be impossible to write an article that gives insight into every person who has it. The article has to rely on studies done by researchers, and researchers have found certain things to be universally true of people with AS. That being said, the above posters in this discussion are correct: Many of the things described in the article do not apply to all (or even most) people with AS, and that should be made clear in the article. And I understand what the article is trying to say when it mentions a lack of empathy and so on, but this is misleading and should be reworded. --DearPrudence 17:41, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
From my reading I think there are two factors at work here. Firstly it probably is not clear enough that no two aspies are alike, that is symptoms (and I'm not sure that is the right word) that express themselves in one person will not be identical to the next person. So any description of effects should be prefixed with "may be". Secondly it has been noted that Aspies tend to have average to above average intelligence. In other words they can learn, and probably from a very young age, to modify behaviours that do not achieve positive results. Thus many Aspies simply do not express characteristics (that is a better word) that may define them as Aspies because they have learnt how not to express them. And I'd agree. AS is a gift. --Michael Johnson 22:51, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
Having dear ones who are aspies, I fully understand and sympathize with all those people here who have AS. However, I also know very well what AS is like. The article is 100% accurate. AS is a neurological condition, please try to accept that as a fact even if the term is unpalatable to you. Some, if not all aspies definitely have a very simplistic manner of thinking (someone really close to me with AS lacks imagination to such a degree that he/she cannot lie, as lying we were told requires some extra imagination. Again, I am the last person to offend an aspie, but by calling AS a gift which it is not, and not depicting the symptoms accurately you are preventing others from being diagnosed. If you do not fit into one of the said conditions, others will, and you may be even an exception to the rule. Please realize that although there may be positive aspects to AS there are negatives too. One of my loved ones was not diagnosed properly for a long time because we didn't know enough about the symptoms. So please think about others like us who may be reading this aricle. Also remember that the DSM IV, Gillberg, ICD-10 Szatmari, criteria all use the word "Impairment" and "disorder" unanymously. The words describing AS in this article such as "logical" and other superlatives which suggest that AS is a form of giftedness are not criteria. Sykee 04:47, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
I don't think that AS is a negative or positive thing (it really depends on an individual's perspective and experiences, though), and agree with you, Sykee, when you say that we should not try to lessen the significance in the article of perceived "negative" aspects of AS. However, we cannot let it swing too far in the other direction, either - this is an encyclopaedia, so we should be trying to present only the facts, rather than pass judgement. I disagree with those who are calling the article disgusting, but I was glad to see that JJAC116 made some changes to the article to make it clear that the symptoms described do not apply to all aspies. --DearPrudence 23:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
I halfway agree with both of you. You cannot write diagnostic criteria for something that's not a disorder, so the mere fact that diagnostic criteria exist show that it is often considered to be one. At the same time, one could have every single trait in DSM, but manage to cope well enough to have a happy life, and overlook the problem areas; everyone has problem areas, but they don't all require diagnoses, eh? Such a person is undiagnosable, since all criteria specify that a diagnosis cannot be made unless AS is significantly messing up the person's life. So diagnosable aspies may only be the tip of the iceberg, there may be a large part of the autism spectrum which extends into the range of "normalcy," and they (like some diagnosable aspies) may feel that their aspie traits are, overall, a very positive thing.
The flipside is that for some people it will be ambiguous as to whether it's a benefit or an impariment overall, and there are some who will suffer from more than their share of the negatives without being blessed with many of the benefits. I've also known NTs who were excessively so; talkative people with well-developed social skills, but who had poor concentration, tepid IQs and weak logical abilities, which impaired the quality of their lives. They, too, are at the unfortunate end of a particular spectrum.
So, for some people, having too much (or too little) in the way of AS traits is a disability. For most people, whether more towards the aspie or the NT, their state is a mixed bag. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
The one that was fixed in the social differences was the deletion of this one:
"#Lack of embarrassment: although persons with AS have an intellectual understanding of shame and embarrassment, their ability to grasp the concept on an emotional level may be limited."
As far as my understanding goes, (and our psychiatrist will definitely agree), aspies definitely have a perception of shame/embarrassment that is different from neurotypical people. Can we replace it with a toned down version? How about "differences in perception of shame" instead of "lack of embarrassment", which I begun to realize sounds a little offensive? Some aspies (not all)certainly have this symptom.
What about aspies having "stiff gaze" which almost appears to be like they are staring at you. Some aspies definitely have a distinct gaze. Can we put it somewhere?
Sykee 04:23, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
The point is that to include it you need a reference. To say "our psychiatrist says" or "some aspies have" is not enough. Find a book or journal article that can be referenced back to the assertion. --Michael Johnson 04:30, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Please be kind

  • If anyone has read any of the below statements, you might see a glimpse of our lives. We Aspies know it's a struggle, but honestly, I remember the words of my patron, St. Francis de Sales; "Be who you are, and be it well." Remember to take your comments here with a "c'est la vie" attitude and remember, we are all in this together, to build Wikipedia, not bring it down.--wpktsfs 04:35, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

People with AS

Has there ever been succesful people with AS?C.bonnick 21:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Absolutely, see the bottom section of the article. Also, a major mathematical breakthrough was awarded the Field's Medal (like a Nobel in Math) in 2006.
There is speculation that historical figures have had it like einstein, mozart, thomas jefferson. Of course you can't diagnose dead people so who knows.
(Sorry for the commentary wiki-friends, couldn't resist.)141.149.168.130 00:43, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
Glenn Gould, the Canadian pianist, is largely suspected of having had it. And having read a LOT about him, there is no doubt in my mind that that was the case. --DearPrudence 02:25, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you it really helped, so people with AS can be successful. You have put a smile on my face. C.bonnick 10:42, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

This probably ranks as WP:OR but I have a mild form of AS and I am the Chief Architect for my company, a known national expert in my field, have three kids (one of which with severe AS) who I think (hope, pray) I am raising well, and have been married for 15 years mostly successfully. LOL. Alex Jackl 14:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
Yes but can you source that? Especially the kids? Birth certificates perhaps ;-b

CeilingCrash 00:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay- now that WAS funny! Alex Jackl 06:09, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

I have a parent in my classroom who is a respected board member and works for the EPA. His daughter is lovely, he's happily married, and he has AS. I also know people with AS who have graduated college and others who are very successful in the field of IT.

Just out of curiosity, wasn't Einstein thought to have AS? What about Bill Gates? I remember reading about him showing signs; unfortunately I can't source this, but it's a suggestion. -=PhotoN=- 15:06, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Jeopardy champion Ken Jennings has a mild form of AS, and was very successful with that! (Of course, memorizing trivia tends to be a strong suit among many people with AS!) Another success would be Kurt Cobain of the band Nirvana; who has been speculated to have had a form of AS, which was unfortunately misdiagnosed while he was alive. Inventor and electricity/radio pioneer Nicola Tesla definitely had AS, and we benefit from his discoveries and inventions each day! --Dulcimerist 22:46, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Archimedes, brilliant mathematician and scientist of antiquity, may have had AS. His later counterpart Sir Isacc Newton may have as well. These might be too speculative to post, however. --Dulcimerist 23:29, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I've never heard of Archimedes possibly having it - interesting. If you have a good source that references the speculation, he'd be a good one to add. (Newton is already mentioned in the article, by the way.) --DearPrudence 23:45, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
On a cool note, the Archimedes Project at Stanford's Center for the Study of Language and Information is an autism project named after him. Archimedes' death during the Roman invasion of his town is one of the more convincing pieces of evidence, as he reprimanded a fully-armed Roman soldier who was standing on his science project. The soldier killed him for it, even though all of the soldiers were ordered to bring the famous Archimedes back to Rome alive so that Rome could benefit by his genius. Conference Presentations: Mark Blaxill, MBA Archimedes also exhibited behavior that was so out of the ordinary that historians felt impelled to record it, which can only be explained by AS. "The Genetics OF Genius" by David T. Lykken, Professor of Psychology, University of Minnesota, illustrates this quite well. --Dulcimerist 02:01, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Nicola Tesla is very noteworthy and should definitely be listed, as he did far more to pioneer electricity than anyone else. "Autism & The Internet" and Famous Aspies are good sources for him. That second link also list some additional noteworthies. --Dulcimerist 02:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
Could you go ahead and please add Archimedes and Nicola Tesla to that section? I get a bit lost as far as inserting the reference material; and tend to mess up somewhere, making the formatting go insane. References listed above for those two. Thanks! As far as Kurt Cobain goes, all I can find are speculative theories on blogs that aren't solid enough. Ken Jennings is a definite, as he was featured on a CBS story on AS; but I can't locate a transcript of the story online. --Dulcimerist 07:48, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Proposal for a new section

In the spirit of positivity, I propose a new section: Aspergers' traits in fiction.

The section would include Aspergers behaviors and characteristics as plot devices, as well as fictional characters that most people identify as exemplifying Aspergian personality traits -- as long as specific behaviors can be cited as typifying "Aspergers syndrome". This would allow incorporation of both pop and historical fiction that employs Aspergian behavior as a device to move a plot forwards (or is that backwards? <-- har (aspie humor) :> ). Note that Aspergers traits are often used in fiction as a positive form of comic relief.

For example:

  • Characters
    • Data, Star Trek TNG: Incapable of expressing emotion, speaks in a monotone, uses symbolic logic to systemize understanding of the universe, conflicted when faced with decisions that involve violating a rule of logic, faithful to the goals of his captain, good parent to his cat Spot {ta da!}, literal and honest to a fault, attempts at humor are generally perceived as highly esoteric, (... etc.)
    • Napolean Dynamite: Literal thinker who misses communication cues by responding to questions literally. Example: Trisha and Napoleon have the following phone conversation: "Hi, is Napoleon there?" "Yes." "Can I talk to him?" "You already are!".
    • Michael Raines, Raines: Police detective who solves crime by mentally creating a 5D model of the victim, but who, to all appearances, seems to be talking to himself creating concern among his colleagues.
    • ... etc.
  • Plot devices
    • (Any Shakespearean comedy, for example), (point of Aspie behavior creating comic recursion)
    • ... etc.

Would this be acceptable? (btw, next time you're watching tv, watch for an Aspie character or characteristic and add it on) --Renice 13:50, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
[Hell, if you're going to give me the cake, you ought to let me eat the damned thing! :> ]

My sense is, on the one hand, this would be harmless in the encyclopedic sense in that there is no possibility it would misinform (given the appropriate overture), and that it might be illustrative. It also sounds like great fun.
If there are objections to it being a tail-section on this article, I'd still like to see it as a new article, for the latter reason given above.
I have to look this up, but i think i recall in Heinlein's Time Enough For Love, somebody says to the main character, "OK - I'll get back to you." So the protagonist sits down, and simply waits - and is prepared to wait for years - until the other person literally "gets back to" him. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by CeilingCrash (talk • contribs).
I would be in support of such a section, although perhaps with a better title. If we look in the Down syndrome article there is a similar section titled "portrayal in fiction". I imagine there are other articles with similar sections also, and it is important to attempt a bit of consistency, so perhaps using a similar title would be a good idea? --Dreaded Walrus 20:03, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
I think this is a fun idea but I am wary of speculative diagnosing of fictional characters with AS. AS, like many similar, umm.. ,conditions :-) is a spectrum disorder. Many traits defined as AS are shared by other things and I that makes me wary of this section. I am not speaking against it just that we should be cautious about what we put in it. For what that is worth.Alex Jackl 14:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
I think that's why it's important to make it clear that these are depictions of SYMPTOMS or TRAITS, not of someone with a diagnosis. That in itself may make the nature of a 'diagnosis' a little clearer. --Renice 15:35, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the big distinction is, while downs syndrome is (i suppose) more-or-less comprehensible to people (at least in outward appearance), it is very difficult to walk away from a discription of Asperger's with any sense of what aspergian thought is *like*.

It is essentially a lack of 'integration functions'. Information is not automatically weaved together and synthesized. For example, NT's have face-recognition algorithms that take a million pixels of data and do an instant face lookup. Aspie's in general don't have that capacity.

Those integrating algorithms make lots of probabilistic *assumptions*, which are usually true, but not always. For instance, a pair of twins could trip up an NT easily, whereas an Aspie is much more likely to notice a small scar on their left cheek has disappeared.

Aspies sort of come at everything with a completely clean slate. I think it is more precise to say they are "context-blind" rather than "mind-blind". This is usually a problem for the aspie, but sometimes creative leaps lie beyond the scope of accustomed context, so it has its advantages. This clean slate - lack of context - can be a) misunderstanding, or b) humorous, or c) revolutionary.

To illustrate, a) Once my girlfriend asked me, "do you like spanish olives with egg salad?"

I said, "Oh yes. Very nice." Later I took a bite of my sandwich, "Eeeeeeeeeeew!"

She said, what's wrong?

I said, "I didn't know you meant IN my egg salad !!" (OK this is a little bit of B) Virtually anyone else would have concluded with 99.99% certainty what she really meant. The aspie brain doesn't make that assumption and has no way of knowing that others would."

b) A classic joke has a historian and a mathematician on a plane. The historian looks out and sees a brown cow, and writes dutifully in his notebook, "There is a brown cow in Nebraska."

The mathematician sees the same thing and says, "there exists at least one cow currently in Nebraska, it is brown on top. Unless I'm dreaming. Or you are."

c) The notions of time and space were unchanged since euclid. They were considered to be undefinable for the most part, they could be described, but thought to be first terms inherent to existence itself. It is very Aspergian for Einstein to say,

"Time is what a clock measures." From first term to the behavior of a machine.

"Space is what a ruler measures." Again, to a simpler machine.

Then he asked the question, "If i have two identical clocks, keep one here, and mail another one to pittsburg and have it returned here, will they read the same?" His genius was not that he thought of a new thing - it was that he UNthought something. He UNthought the implicit context of time and space, threw it out, and asked "what *instruments* are we talking about? And what exactly do we think they do? Are we sure?"

An NT's context-engine is unconscious, so he doesn't know what it is he has assumed. The aspie doesn't have one.

--- This also, perhaps, accounts for the fact we tend to write ... er ... much longer descriptions of things. We can't guess what context is normally understood.

Anyway, I think this can be conveyed best by example, and the examples are often funny.

CeilingCrash 20:08, 26 March 2007 (UTC)


I would support this as well. Well-known examples/metaphors for AS would be quite useful to help illustrate to people what AS is like. Each example would have to be explained, of course. An obvious one would be Rain Man, from the movie "Rain Man," who was character portrayed as having AS. Ted Danson's character from the television series "Becker" might also fit here. --Dulcimerist 02:34, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

I think rather than AS Raymond Babbitt was portrayed as someone with a deeply autistic life - a true autistic savant. if you look at Kim Peek's page on Wikipedia you will see he has many other problems to face. Kim's father has said he worries about who will look after Kim when he dies. People with AS are generally able to look after themselves. Soarhead77 21:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

The character in Rain Man had AS. Here's the source: Plot summary for Rain Man --Dulcimerist 22:01, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Ah, but that was just the opinion of some IMDB reader who posted there. The character of Raymond Babbit was based on a man named George Finn, who lives in NYC, and is diagnosed autistic, but not AS. Because savant syndrome at that sort of level only affects 50-100 people in the world -- about in in every 650,000 autistics, if the 1% figure holds up -- an autistic savant probably wouldn't be a very valid person to compare to. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I support your idea, however I suggest you start the article with a disclaimer of some sort, saying something along the line's of "the traits of the characters below may not be entirely due to AS, and may be the accumulation of other factors and personality traits(etc)" in order that some characteristics may be inadvertently associated with AS TheJackle 00:47, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. I would also want to be careful so that this section doesn't discount the serious nature of this article. Since the article is about a real medical condition, we wouldn't want to see a section such as this become a distraction or form of entertainment through hypothesis.  ;) --Dulcimerist 21:32, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

re. People - Experts on the Loose

viz http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2988647.stm - I am sorry to hear that Aspies don't have a sense of humour... --Ndaisley 08:12, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Some Aspies do have senses of humor, some don't. It depends on the person really. Aspergers isn't a something with "across-the-board" symptoms, it truly depends on the person. Like fingerprints, no two Aspies are the same. (Full Disclosure: I, myself, am an Aspie and have a weird sense of humor) Take Care...NeutralHomer T:C 17:04, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
Forgive me, there was an element of sarcasm in my posting; as I get older I become increasingly cynical about the 'expertise' of people with letters after their name, particularly in the area of 'how people function'. It concerns me very much when 'experts' make generalised pronouncements of the kind featured in the cited BBC page without backing up their claims. I don't for a moment believe that most AS people are without humour. --Ndaisley 11:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

suggest removing remnant of Family section

the all-too-familiar verifiable source problem :

The referred source, kathy marshak, has a degree from the Fielding Institute, a distance-learning school http://www.fielding.edu/, a PhD in Psychology.

Their PhD in Psychology degrees are not accredited by the American Psychological Association (APA), in contrast to their PhD in Clinical Psychology, which is accredited by the APA.

This seems a grey area I don't really know what to make of.

More to the point, her website makes no reference to anything she's published in an academic source, so the section seems a wash.

Thoughts?

As an aside, she is part of the aston-linehan-singer mutual endorsement ring dedicated to eradicating the scourge of scientific research in our lifetime. She is similarly possessed of the same disturbing fixation on MALES with asperger's. 

 from her FAQ on Asperger's :   http://www.kmarshack.com/therapy/asperger/faq.html 

 " What kind of parents are people with Asperger Syndrome?
   We are just learning about this tragedy from adults coming forward
   to tell about being raised by AS parents"

CeilingCrash 10:59, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

  • I will go with consensus on this one but I do not like this section. I am biased though as an AS parent with three children, one of which has AS. I am behind removing it unless someone comes up with more reliable citations Alex Jackl 14:41, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, I see your point CeilingCrash! Hers is very linear thinking -- might as well ask, "What kind of parents are tragically inept people?" (<-- I think I'm going to have to write that up, it makes me laugh too hard :> ) --Renice 15:48, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Agreed. As an AS raised by an AS, I think that anyone who believes we make bad parents is perhaps in need of diagnosis themselves. Neither me or my (Neurotypical) borhter have any problems with my Mother, we are in fact much closer to her than many of our peers are to their parents. In fact, I found the whole 'less signs of affection' thing completely untrue and offensive. Is anything, me and my mother are more affectionate towards eachother than our peers. This person doesn;t know what they're talking about, IMHO 24.86.59.67 05:34, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
  • Agreed, as well. I came across a website like that while doing research, and this "inept parent" stuff is extremely biased. If anyone's looking for a constructive way to redo this section, perhaps some unbiased information could be placed here instead. Are there differences in having an AS parent? If so, what are they? --Dulcimerist 21:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Section suggestion : Emerging evidence for long-term improvement

What do y'all think about a new section concerning the long term development of children on the spectrum?

"One central finding of the study, said Dr. Coplan, is that children in the normal range of intelligence (an IQ of 70 or above) show significant improvement in their ASD symptoms over time. "We can offer the hopeful message to parents that many children with ASD will improve as part of the natural course of the condition," he said. This finding reinforced impressions by Dr. Coplan and many previous researchers about clinical outcomes for children with ASD."

http://stokes.chop.edu/publications/press/?ID=181

This is one of a crop of such studies, serious long-term data collection (in the US anyway) didn't start until about 10 years,and is now coming to fruition.

This information also serves to make people weary of the snake-oil cures which may be taking credit for this natural progression.

CeilingCrash 19:26, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Neurological or genetic causes

Someone mentioned in this section that there have been scientific studies on the causes of autism. None of these seem to be in the article yet, so I did some Googling and came up with these potential sources:

http://www.wpic.pitt.edu/research/CeFAR/default.htm http://www.cmu.edu/PR/releases04/040727_autism.html http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1235486

Could these be useful? Lostvoice 09:51, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

I Support adding this information, together with my above suggestion about long-term prognosis. It seems we need to expand the Research andOther causes section, as there is mountains of results flooding in. Specifically, the genetic link to autism appears irrefutable now; the distinction between HFA and Asperger's is becoming sharper (thanx to Volks at Yale).
In general, the new research has taken a turn for the hard sciences, and I think it would be a great improvement to flesh that out here.

CeilingCrash

I Support this as well. It's been proven through studies that people with AS are more likely to have children with AS, which would point to a genetic link. I'm not as well-read on the genetic studies; but if you can cite some, this would be extremely useful information for this article. --Dulcimerist 22:52, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Neurodiversity : not Judy Singer's word after all

In this talk section (above somewhere), Judy Singer claims she coined the term "neurodiversity." The wiki article on Neurodiversity credits her for this in a paper published in 1999.

I discovered her claim is false, that it was coined in 1998 by Harvey Blume. I have corrected the article to give him proper credit. If anyone (especially Ms Singer) wishes to comment, please see Talk:Neurodiversity.

CeilingCrash 22:44, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

"Removing" Asperger's

I just wanted to keep the language moderated and avoiding the "getting rid of" kind of conversation. I think talking about removing Asperger's is overly negative. I am not fixed on this. Alex Jackl 12:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Pharma BS

All of this could by BS launched by "Big Pharma". See Jeff Rense's website for more about "diseases". 205.240.144.220 06:14, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Helping "late bloomers"?

What do you do when you're an adult and find out that every problem described with AS nails every major problem in your own life? Rhudi 04:09, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Realize that you've probably figured out how to survive anyway and laugh at people that need all the stuff we don't? I mean honestly, there's not much to do when we're diagnosed early, forget about later on in life. Unless you're incredibly stupid you'll have known for awhile you;re odd and been coping with it. The fact that now we can be diagnosed just means it's easier for NTs to sort out the world.

I disagree with the above person. I found out only after my son (who has it more dramatically than I do in spades) was diagnosed and his neurologist recommended I get myself tested. It helped me develop some more sophisticated and dramatically successful coping mechanisms. I got a lot of peace of mind. Alex Jackl 16:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

Get yourself tested. If the test is positive, as Alex mentions, that information can lead to valuable coping skills and explanations. In some cases, medication is also helpful. Getting tested, especially for an adult, takes a bit of doing - I would recommend an expert in autistic disorders, no general practitioner or psychiatrist should moonlight in Asperger's by checking off DSM symptoms - and they may not know that.

Most of all, the test can lead to self-acceptance and self-understanding. And what's better than that?

"Autism rocks." CeilingCrash 23:35, 29 April 2007 (UTC)

I agree. I was tested by an expert in adult Asperger's recommended by my son's neurologist. She was very useful. She also told me I fit the criterion but I had a very, very mild case. She recommended doing nothing different than I had been doing... Alex Jackl 04:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

I hate to jump ship but early on i was diagnosed with aspergers 3 times. Amazingly i outgrew it. I am no longer diagnosed with anything and i live a completely uneventful life. That someone can be told "you are very special you are slightly autistic" when you were young and put into therapy and special classrooms and everything, ande then those same people who forces you into special treatment say: whoops we screwed up, sorry for depriving you of a normal life" is just wrong.66.176.172.119 00:20, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Diagnosed with AS (Alien species)

I have just been diagnosed at the age of 48, I know I have always been different but never really knew the reason why. I decided to get diagnosed for the sake of my children, I have decided not to label them yet - but by understanding myself and the condition, I can help them and at last I can start to understand why I have such a fast complex brain, it’s like it’s been feed all the wrong information all its life and now I can set it, me and my family free to be ourselves. Why am I the one everyone remembers for all the wrong reasons – I like my world it’s fun, please try and accept me for who I am because it’s you who excepts me to comfort and fit into your world. AF Bradley NZ 10 May 2007

Earlier I put AS 'advanced species' have changed to Alien Species as do not want to be disrespectful to anyone else. We are all different, that's what makes our world so interesting. I first put advanced to make myself feel better, as over the years for no reason at times, have been put down and felt like an alien to this planet - so Alien is a more appropriate word to use. I have more than just Aspergers Syndrome, but that is apart of what I'am and getting diagnosed was the best thing I have ever done and is really helping me to understand myself, help my children and hopefully others.

AssBurgers?

Should the article include anything about the "AssBurgers" thing? Mike(Talk)/(Cont) 00:52, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

I do hope you are talking about pronunciation66.176.172.119 00:21, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
If you are referring simply to how AS is often referred to that way as a joke (or whatever you want to call it), then no. It's not important enough to mention. --DearPrudence 04:14, 16 May 2007 (UTC)
If you're refering to the pronunciation that I agree the phoentic pronunciation should be included. However that's it? -- Rehnn83 Talk 09:20, 17 May 2007 (UTC)
Mentioning this might actually be useful. This homophone is very confusing, especially since most people are completely oblivious to the term "Asperger's." For example, a young man I know was trying to explain to his teacher that he had AS, and only referred to it as "Asperger's." The teacher thought that he was saying "Ass Burgers," and sent him to the principal's office. Sure, the term "Ass Burgers" has been used as a joke on television shows (i.e. Becker), but this homophone issue goes beyond a simple joke. The non-joke side of it might warrant it being mentioned briefly in the article. --Dulcimerist 23:13, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Citation? Are you kidding?

With regard to this:

Children with AS can learn to manage their differences, but they may continue to find social situations and personal relationships challenging. Adults with AS are able to work successfully in mainstream jobs and live an independent life.

needing a citation. Should I just upload a scan of one of my payslips? Damburger 00:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

I agree, Damburger. --DearPrudence 01:32, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree with this as well. The notable people with AS section in the article is plenty citation in itself to support the statements. --Dulcimerist 23:16, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Becker and Gersten quote

Can someone please tell me who supplied the following. The quote isnt referenced and I would like s source. MY email is joelbeasant@hotmail.com

In 1982 Becker and Gersten found that ABA techniques were indeed educationally beneficial because they provide "motivational programs based on positive reinforcement such as a token system and a systematic task analysis for developing academic skills". ABA also promotes the foundation for academic and living skills. Once certain skills have been acquired, it is possible through ABA to generalize these skills and add new skills to the "existing repertoire through various techniques of shaping, extinction, backward chaining, and prompting". (Schreibman, 1975, Sulzer & Mayer, 1972, Wolery et al, 1988)

Try looking through the history, like most people would...and try SIGNING your posts! SmUX 17:01, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Changes

I made some additions based on my own personal experience with AS. I hope it is OK. Sykee 14:51, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

One may check-Lyons & Fitzgerald's, Humor in Autism and Asperger Syndrome (Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, Volume 34).

If making major changes, it's better to propose thos changes here on the discussion page first. That way all of us have better communication in developing this article as a team, and everyone can have some good input. Thanks!  :) --Dulcimerist 19:33, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Removing paragraph on partner/family issues

This material and these sources have been repeatedly rejected in this discussion as being non credible references. Material from academic/refereed sources is welcome. CeilingCrash 18:31, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Ceiling Crash. I drafted and placed that (non-offensive, and extremely brief) paragraph, and was not aware of earlier rejections of this subject. I might add that I am not associated with the usual protagonists you have it in for, and am working from my own position as one of the said family members. Also, I do not know the Wikipedia criteria for credible reference, and do not have time to delve into ways this matter can legitimately be presented, BUT find it hard to believe that Maxine Aston's pages (for example) do not qualify as credible reference for a non-clinical issue http://www.maxineaston.co.uk/workshop/HoC_next.shtml. I will say for the record that your not offering an alternative suggestion on how these widely recognized family issues can be included in the entry, and simply deleting it, is suspect. In my mind it amounts to unreasonable censure of negatives as you don't offer a reasonable alternative path. I hope you can at least consider drafting something 'you' feel sits well with your vision of how the syndrome might affect family members. Sincerely. soulgany

I agree with soulgany, JC

Anyone can write a book. Publishers exist that will print anything for a fee. (In fact, Aston's books are riddled with grammar and semantic errors which wouldn't get past any editor.)

The general criteria for inclusion into this article is : at a minimum, the author holds an advanced degree (PhD/MD), and the text referenced has gone through the process of peer review, whereby claims made are subject to scrutiny. In other words, it is of academic quality. You will see the existing sources meet these criteria. The actual qualifications of those listed also include historic, global reputations for accuracy and responsibilty.

Note that this does not guarantee truth, far from it. It just prevents the most basic, fundamental errors from being introduced. For example, Maxine Aston makes claims about people with Asperger's, her only data has been her experience counseling couples and a questionaire on her website. How many actually diagnosed aspies did she encounter in her counseling sessions? How many were guess-work on her part, as she holds no degree above bachelors and by no means qualified to make this assessment herself?

Then we have the issue of selection bias. People in happy relationships do not seek counseling. Read that again. And a third time. Aston has spent no time whatsoever studying randomly selected samples of diagnosed aspies in the general population - which is the only way conclusions may be drawn about the world in general. She has no basis on which to make any claim about Aspies in general whatsoever.

Selection bias occurs again with the questionaire on her website. People in happy relationships don't go googling for solutions to marital problems.

To illustrate this point of selection bias, suppose i got knocked on the head, and came to the sudden belief that red-heads were all shoplifters. I hang a big sign on my door, "help for red-headed thieves and the people they steal from."

Sure enough, people come to my door, "My g-d! I had no idea my red hair had anything to do with it! You're a *pioneer* - soon the scientific world will catch up to you!" Shopkeeps who catch a red-headed thief will be drawn to my practice, and my new Seminar : "Red-headed thieves in your town, how to save your shop" attracts a few dozen gullible fools. Everyone vents and much healing occurs. The testimonials - not a dry eye in the house.

And it's all total nonsense. In graduate school they teach you not to do these things. Because peer reviewed sources will reject them summarily. Saving us all this sort of lengthy discussion.


Sorry for the bold text, I hadn't noticed there was an objection for a few weeks, so i wished to make it catch the eye of any interested parties. I shall debold it in a few daze.CeilingCrash 07:11, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Here are my general thoughts on the subject, not unique to this article. There are many articles which have both medical aspects and non-medical aspects. I'll pick a subject very far from this one, so we can be a little detached. Let's say... bondage. Now, according to DSM, if you practice bondage, you are suffering from a paraphilia, and an argument could be made that nothing in that article should lack a citation to a peer-reviewed, academic article by someone with at least a PhD in psychology. The only problem with this line of thought is that many significant aspects of the subject will never be covered, as they will never the topic of academic papers. I'm sure you can see where I'm going with this.
I'm not the least bit opposed to keeping this vast majority of this article to medical standards. But I don't think it would be entirely inappropriate to have a distinct section where societal issues and so forth could be brought up, where more usual standards for citations applied. Yes, it is a medical topic. It is also a non-medical topic. Poindexter Propellerhead 08:20, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree in general with Poindexter. In the case of Aston, who claims Aspies are prone to : alcoholism, emotional abuse of children, and unpredictable outbursts of anger - in fact she says if violence occurs in a family that is a clue to look for asperger's http://www.faaas.org/doc.php?25,135

- the wiki principle "extraordinary claims require extraordinary references." applies

The problem arises, I suppose, when people address a non-medical topic like "what's it like to be a partner of ..." and then lapse into medical proclamations, "from my research I've seen Aspies exude noxious gases ..." I'd be happy to see non-medical information that is properly 'contained' and doesn't make global claims.
Also, Aston looks like an Australian's nightmare : http://www.maxineaston.co.uk/aboutme/
I'll be back to apologize for that in the AM, i'm tired, and we aspies ... oh never mind.  :-b CeilingCrash 09:08, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry to ms. aston! (Not really, but i'm working on it.) In all seriousness, to soulgany, I should have been less taciturn and more welcoming in my initial response. You see, there has been an apparently concerted effort to promote the writings of Aston/FAAAS/ASPAR here. There was an attempt to create a new article and a spirited discussion that followed here Cassandra_phenomenon. I should have assumed good faith on your part, however. And you should not feel your contributions here are unwelcome. Generally, any substantive change gets introduced here in Talk .
As a partner of an Aspie, your presence and contributions here are most welcome. Wiki was built on the convergence of conflicting views. One doesn't always win the debate - even if you're right - but my experience is wiki folk are extremely fair, reasonable and forgiving, whatever their views. CeilingCrash 16:45, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
My one lingering concern on this topic, having championed the cause of controlled inclusivity, is how best to allow input from various non-medical perspectives without creating an intolerably long article -- which, in my opinion, we already have. Unless we want to fork it off into a different article, it probably won't be possible to give more than a few sentences to the thoughts of a given party (who lacks scientific credentials). That would mean that it's likely to end up a section full of disparate little chunks, rather like a typical "trivia" section. Unless, that is, there's a better way which I haven't thought of. Anyone have any thoughts on this? Poindexter Propellerhead 17:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

CeilingCrash and Poindexter: I'm a little reluctant to address this topic now after becoming aware of my lack of understanding of Wikipedia standards for comment, but am optimistic that you now see potential and validity for a brief statement. So I reiterate my original proposal that one or both of you draft a short account on how the syndrome "might" affect family members. Your concerns about the topic becoming unwieldy and unreferenced are certainly valid (I totally agree, and for the same reasons!). As you have both shown skill in discriminating what are/not acceptable references I will make the following suggestion: Draw up a few representative sentences you feel happy with, and back them with only the best quality 'credible references' you can find (yes, there are very few, and these are of low reliability. nevertheless...) and draw the quality of these references as this section's baseline standard. Creating that cut-off standard will allow editors to remove all the ongoing dross which will inevitably be added from week to week. The more subjective additions can be regularly spring-cleaned. Tedious I know. What do you think? 124.187.14.93 23:51, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Ya, i'm game! You should feel no reluctance about speaking here in Talk, as you can tell it's pretty much glorious mob rule. Feel free to propose any new additions here in Talk, this is a good place for drafts. Info about parters etc of Aspies is going to stir up some hornets but so bet it. CeilingCrash76.19.39.205 03:24, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I can't make any promises on anyone else's behalf, but my impression at the moment is that we have a lot of momentum, and will continue moving through the various sections for a while yet. There seems to be particular interest in dealing with the social and familial parts, so if he's amenable, maybe we can do with those sections something like what we did with the opening paragraphs. Poindexter Propellerhead 01:45, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Ok, here goes. Some of the problems which seem to come up in the family/partner contributions to the entry stem from their subjectivity -"partners experience this, that, this, that, and the other (ad infinitum)" and there is little discrimination of which AS behavior is supposedly responsible for the experience. So I'm wondering if a more objective description of specifically which AS trait/s are likely to cause familial and relationship problems would make for a less contentious, and shorter presentation? Many AS traits such as stimming or intellectual specialization are accommodated or even appreciated by loved ones, but other traits such as alexithymia and mind-blindness tend to impose the greater stresses on communication and the ability to 'work problems out' (if I read it right). Perhaps it could be approached in this fashion? I would not be against at least a reference to Aston's work, or T. Attwood's, but am doubtful about the neutrality/objectivity of the FAAAS team. For instance, Aston defines her 'CAD' concept as the experience of "emotional deprivation", and although she doesn't mention alexithymia anywhere, this is most certainly the AS 'trait' indicated, as alexithymia is clinically proven to involve a deficit in emotional recognition and concomitant emotional reciprocity. Such things could be more tightly tied and referenced. There may be other more reliable references to family and partner experience, which unfortunately I'm unaware of. So I'm just playing with a few ideas right now. 124.187.14.93 04:05, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

In fact there may not be any need to mention these people (Atwood, Aston, etc) at all. Just the key traits identified as responsible for interpersonal empathy deficits might do it- mind-blindless and alexithymia. Over to you 124.187.14.93 08:44, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm at a bit of a loss when it comes to approaching the subject in a wholistic sort of fashion myself, since there is so much variation among aspies, and among NTs. I've seen reference (in popular sorts of materials) to "cold aspies," for instance, yet I've known aspies who regularly committed social gaffes by being too openly and sincerely affectionate. That being an aspie (or an NT) can have major impact on the family I don't challenge for an instant, but the form that might take doesn't seem all that predictable to me. So I favor breaking it down into specific areas which may or may not apply. That both allows for a high standard to be maintained in the citations we use (since specifics are usually easier to scientifically document than broad generalities are), and at the same time lets us avoid having things degenerate into negative stereotyping of either sort of person. But I'm just throwing that out there, I'm barely awake at the moment, and have surely overlooked some things. Soulgany, JC, others: your thoughts? Poindexter Propellerhead 10:06, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes. The wholistic declarations about Aspies or NT's just don't take important variables into account, nor do they discriminate between beneficial traits/behaviors and those more problematic ones. AS is a collection of behaviours and traits after all, and the few problem areas in relating and empathizing need isolating. Interestingly, I have read (can't remember the figure) that mind-blindness does not apply to all Aspies, and likewise alexithymia only applies to 85% of Aspies. This means that there is a significant percentage of individuals (say 15%) who would presumably not cause what Maxine Aston called "emotional deprivation" in their partners or family members. So it may be a matter of elaborating in that direction: 'Some AS individuals experiencing significantly high levels of mind-blindness/ alexithymia (or whatever) may place stresses on family and partner relationships due to lack of empathy and the inability to understand the beliefs and intentions of others.' (this is not a phrase to use..... just giving the train of thought). PS. let me know if this is too negative or derogatory, as that is not my intention. 124.187.14.93 12:30, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
For the next day or two, PD and I may be distracted with some work we're doing on the 1st section. The way we've been achieving balance is to mention the bad with the good; for instance, Aspies may not interpret correctly their partner's emotional state and fail to respond appropriately. Then say somewhere else that Aspies are possessed of a strong sense of fairness. Something like that. it doesn't have to be one for one, but the idea is to light up both sides. Best. Perhaps you could write a draft and put it here? CeilingCrash 208.49.146.130 15:17, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Oh - and this book, http://www.jkp.com/catalogue/book.php/isbn/9781843107347 is excellent and agreeable to people across the spectrum. the author is a wife and mother of aspies (no pun intended!) unlike Aston and others, she is still happily married, and gives lots of good tips for crossing the NT/Aspie gap. 208.49.146.130 15:21, 7 June 2007 (UTC)CeilingCrash

The trick is to not preference the happily-married's over the unhappily married's. So your proposal to represent the bad (through a detailing of specific traits) and good is appropriate. So far I think a representation of the positives has succeeded in earlier parts of the page, so this section could include a dual presentation. You are both doing a good job so I'll leave it to you guys, as you know what feels comfortable and what is accurate, and you are better at navigating this job than me. But if I do get seized with a moment of creativity I'll put it up here for appraisal. 124.187.14.93 23:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

That's not the wiki spirit, "you guys write it!" Take a stab, post it in talk, it will be ruthlessly edited no matter what. You bring up a good point which i'm not sure how I feel about. One could argue that somebody in an unhappy marriage has no business writing a book on marriage, any more than an elephant should give dance lessons. If someone has found strategies that work in their particular marriage, and generalizes them by suggesting them, there really is little harm done if they are wrong. With an unhappy marriage however, generalizing the experience of an unworkable marriage that should have never occurred can do tremendous harm. Also, a person's personal experience is without any objective contraints, they can say what they want and who can dispute them? A person in an unhappy marriage is going to have enormous emotional incentive to distort. For example, in Aston's book, there is not a single case of any conflict occurring because of the NT's (always female) shortcoming.

In every marriage both people must grow. NT/Aspie marriages are no exception.

I think balance occurs when you look at the positive and negative aspects of Asperger's together. Aspies *do* have traits that are helpful in a relationship, many consider them less apt to be deceitful, less apt to escalate in anger, more loyal in terms of fidelity (these observations have been made by subject authorities). They also have traits which are not helpful AT ALL.
Perhaps I should not say "happy marriage" but "working marriage". What does someone in a miserable marriage have to offer except "don't marry an aspie?" And how reliable is that ?
It is my sense, and i do confusy easily so dont take it too seriously, that any book about marriage must examine the strengths and weaknesses of both ppl, or it's not about marriage. it's about resentment. CeilingCrash141.149.168.130 00:34, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
My reasons for being reluctant to draft something are good: I simply don't have enough knowledge about AS other than a subjective viewpoint, and that is woefully inadequate. If I did write something it would be subjective rubbish. You on the other hand have obviously read widely on the subject and are in a much better position to write something objective. Do you think thats a reasonable assumption? I am aware that you have every right to be disinterested in addressing the subject. I also agree with your suggestion that positives and negatives be included together. I've made tentative suggestions above (about the key communication hurdles posed by those Aspies with mind-blindness and alexithymia) based on my subjective understanding of the issues, and thats presently about the limit of my ability. Believe me, if I had the objective knowledge to back a statement you would see that my Wiki spirit is alive and well. By declining to write rubbish at this point is in fact in the best Wiki spirit. Nevertheless my intuition and recognition of how 'hot' this issue is tells me there is something which needs addressing. If I do think of something valid, I'll certainly float it. 124.187.14.93 01:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

PS. I have noted the overriding emphasis in Maxine Aston's work on male-Asies with female NT's. I agree it would be more neutral to de-genderise discussions, and also yes, NT's can be a a problem too (in which case I'd question the 'NT' appelative). In fact I much prefer "non-Aspergers" to NT, as NT simply cannot apply to the varied race of humans, who each have their troubling idiosyncratic pathologies and none of whom is really "typical".

How about starting off with a statement about the historical difficulties which have presented in addressing this subject: ‘Partner and family issues are a source of great contention, with AS advocates and their partners/family members often presenting wildly divergent pictures of the positives and negatives involved in AS relations with others [include representative reference examples]. Because AS involves a variety of behaviours, some of which may not be present in the profile of all individuals, a selective AS-trait/behaviour analysis, and their relative positive or negative impact on relationships proves more accurate/useful/is required? than wholistic generalizations. Moreover, in those relationships where difficulties are experienced it is reasonable to assume that the non-asperger's partner or family member may also contribute to the problems experienced as a result of their own pathologies and behaviours.’
And continue on with: 'Regarding AS traits and behaviours which inevitably play a role in relationship dynamics, these can be divided into the positive, neutral or accomodatable, and the potentially disruptive factors:
Potentially positive: [name them and cite reliable references]
Neutral or accomodatable: [description and references]
Potentially disruptive: [description and references; I would include here mind blindness and alexithymia for their reduction of empathetic attunement, though I'm not stuck on these alone]'

Ok, tear it apart! 124.187.14.93 02:24, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Wow. This is an awesome framework. Seriously.
Suggested additional sections -
  • techniques for managing NT/Aspie relationships (i agree with yer objection to the term 'NT')
  • "associative mating" some claim that aspies tend to select other aspies as mates, which is supposedly partly behind their increased (perceived) presence in the population
  • Ceilingcrash's tantrums - why can't they get his medication right?
As poindexter indicated, this is definitely taking the form of an article unto itself rather than a section.

CeilingCrash141.149.168.130 03:09, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Making a seperate article is not such a bad idea, and as you suggest it can be fleshed out with useful suggestions and techniques for families/couples to improve relationships. My only concern is that such a seperate article might be assailed by vandals, but I guess thats no different to what happens on the present page. Of course I wouldn't have the foggiest on how to create a page, but if there's enough interest by others who can, then I'd be willing to contribute to ideas or wording where I can. soulgany 124.187.14.93 03:42, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I very much like the idea of an "Asperger's syndrome, the family and society" sort of article, and would be more than happy to put the page into place (with a link from the current article), if we have consensus on that approach. Poindexter Propellerhead 03:53, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I support a new article like that. CeilingCrash 04:01, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Me too. When you are ready. The above template can be transported and grow. soulgany 124.187.14.93 04:05, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
OK... "Asperger's Syndrome, the Family and Society" was not something I spent over 5 seconds considering, and it doesn't really fit Wikipedia conventions. Does anyone have a better idea for what to name this page? If not, we can proceed, and change it later when someone comes up with an improvement. Poindexter Propellerhead 05:35, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
"Asperger's Syndrome and Human Relationships" ??? CeilingCrash 05:44, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
That works. Or maybe "Asperger's Syndrome and Interpersonal Relationships". soulgany 124.187.14.93 09:15, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I like it. Edit away! I'll hack some template stuff into there tomorrow... http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Asperger%27s_Syndrome_and_Interpersonal_Relationships
Addition: Never make a blank stub of an article right before you go to bed, unless you want to wake up to find that it's been speedily deleted for lack of content.  ;-) To fend off a repeat, I recreated it with a copy of the contents of the "Social Impact" section. We can discuss whether or not that section should be moved; even if there is no consensus for doing so, having it there buys us a little time. Poindexter Propellerhead 17:07, 8 June 2007 (UTC)


Done as much I can for now: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Asperger%27s_Syndrome_and_Interpersonal_Relationships

Anyone care to have a tinker?? soulgany 124.187.14.93 13:29, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Article or Section?

It seems to me that the above page is completely superfluous, as all the same positivistic slants are presented here. I recommend someone delete it.

Cheers Soulgany101 12:11, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I agree that the Interpersonal Relationships article is completely redundant with the "Social Impact" section, since that article started out as nothing more than a cut-and-paste of the section. I didn't intent to leave the redundancy in place forever, but wanted to give editors some time to get that article up to speed. Since it's now been several weeks, and dozens of edits have been done to the new article, I went ahead and deleted the redundant section from the AS article, replacing it with a link to the new one. Poindexter Propellerhead 18:46, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Good. I put up some legitimate, referenced material about alexithymia and ToM, but Zereaph corrupted or deleted it again without offering discussion. I'm afraid I have not got the time to combat that kind of behaviour. It was worth a try. Soulgany101 21:09, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I was inspired by the original working spirit of CC, PP and myself toward the new article despite our obvious different positions on the subject. Unfortunately I am cynical about Zereaph's ability to let something balanced stand.
I have one alternative question: is it possible for someone to salvage anything original and referenced from the earier Interpersonal Relationships draft, and to insert it in an appropriate spot on this page? I think there is probably only a paragraph or two so-far on alexithymia/Mind-blindness and empathy, worth salvaging. In my thinking this would provide for a balanced presentation. Soulgany101 22:21, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

I think you will find you are mistaken, I removed your unsubstantiatated personal opinions, your references to people who do not accord with WP:RS and your totally inappropriate "working notes", but anything properly sourced was simply moved to a different area it seemed to fit well with. (see [1]) --Zeraeph 22:40, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Tell you what, Soulgany. I think that the original idea of splitting the article was a good one, so I would like to leave that stuff where it is. However, I am very good at finding high quality cites, and am not opposed to finding cites which back positions which I do not personally hold. Email me a wishlist of deleted statements that you want references for, and I'll provide the references, even if I personally disagree with them. Poindexter Propellerhead 22:56, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
I absolutely and totally agree with you on that Poindexter...I don't think Soulgany quite understands that, as long as there are real citations that accord with WP:RS, it doesn't matter if he says the moon is made of green cheese. :o) But Wikipedia gets enough flack without posting and endorsing questionable sources and unsubstantiated personal opinions (I think the "notes" were just genuine "newbieism" but they really HAD to go all the same). --Zeraeph 23:24, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

PP. Your willingness to discuss and make positive contributions is much appreciated as i am an appalling novice in Wikipedia editing skill. Nevertheless, I'm finding the process a little overwhelming at present because of the 'one step forward, twenty steps back' experience. If I feel inspired in the days or weeks ahead I will seek your help with citations. Thanks again. Soulgany101 23:49, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

In fact, I think I will bow out of that article altogether. Not because I don't think there is a very legitimate subject there to be treated, but more because the forces against are discouraging for a novice. There is a skeleton there for others to work with if they wish (others who are up to speed on the do's and dont's, and will not waste thier time or effort by making mistakes). If there is no interest in alternative view then it really stands as a superfluous page.  :-) Soulgany101 00:33, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I really hope that you will reconsider, Soulgany. There are definitely some nutty extremists on various sides of this topic, but I have never for a moment considered you to be one of them; I've appreciated your input as a moderate and not unsympathetic perspective which differed enough, in ways which are perfectly understandable, to help keep these articles NPOV. The "original research" rule was devised to keep people with extreme minority opinions on subjects related to physics from creating pages which looked kooky to those from a mainstream perspective, it was not meant to force people to footnote every word they type. If something is sufficiently obvious that nobody's likely to contest its factuality, it will stand without references. That's whow we can have pages on various neologisms, for example. Even defining a neologism would be impossible using great references, because "pwned" won't be in the OED for years, if ever. So it's not as if unreferenced statements don't happen here, almost every article has them. They just need to be obviously true. Having different perspectives involved keeps everyone honest, as claims which should get challenged, do.
That brings me to the former opening paragraph of the AS social issues article. I liked the way that you and CC started it off with a discussion of how it's controversial, and mentioned differing perspectives. I didn't worry about that from an OR angle, because anyone who delves into the subject will see the truth of that paragraph very quickly. But here I am talking about one article on the talk page of another, so I'm going to continue my monologue over on the correct page. Poindexter Propellerhead 03:19, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

Reversal of Symptoms

This contribution should be deleted. If this contribution is kept, it should have a note appended stating that the author has NO credentials in mental health, and that it is only one man's opinion and has no scientific data to back it up. He admits this on his blog page at blogspot.com. James howard 37 02:45, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

By deleting this section this article now closes the door to hope for people with AS tendencies. This article is a key 'search the net' place for people being hurt by AS tendencies, and it now presents the 'accepted wisdom' that AS is untreatable and un-escapable from. It is just like a medieval cleric saying "of course the sun orbits the earth", slamming the door on any new thinking. Why not at least mention examples of people who have possibly escaped from AS, even if unproven? - because this could help other searching people to improve their lives and those of their loved ones. JC unlearningasperger.blogspot.com.

If you see the section here, "Section suggestion : Emerging evidence for long-term improvement", you will see a new study which shows autie/aspie children tend to improve naturally over the course of time. It is most credible.

Curious

I am curious as to why this is up for cleanup. If it was a featured article and is "one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community", then why would it require cleanup? I, personally, see nowhere in the article that cleanup is necessary. If it is, please let me know where and I will glad to cleanup where needed, but I think the article is great as is. Take Care....NeutralHomer T:C 03:55, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and full disclosure, I, myself, have Aspergers. - NeutralHomer T:C 03:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I moved the existing cleanup tag from one section of the article to the top of the article, because of citations needed, listiness, handwaving original research, unformatted refs, external jumps, non-reliable sources, and more. The WP:FAR was less than a year ago, and the article has completely fallen apart again, so will need to come up for its third FAR soon, if the article isn't restored to status. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:59, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Ah, I just noticed you said you'd work on it, so I'll give you a list:

  • The lead should be a compelling, stand-alone summary of the article, covering all the important points. See WP:LEAD.
  • Numerous uncited entire sections and bits of uncited text have been added since the FAR.
  • Over time, I've noticed changes to cited text, so that I doubt that the text is accurate to the sources citing it, and the entire article probably needs to be checked for accuracy versus the sources. This is particularly a concern with the Attwood sources, but many others as well. Text changes have been made without concern for whether they conform to the original source.
  • Careful formatting work on the Footnotes has been lost; several of the new sources are of dubious reliability, and are unformatted (see WP:CITE/ES). There are some completely unformatted new refs, and blogs aren't reliable sources.
  • Original research appears to have been added, as there are many unsourced statements of opinion.
  • WP:MEDMOS might help guide your work, although this article might not exactly conform to every point.
  • The External links have again grown to an External link farm, and need to be pruned per WP:EL, WP:NOT. There are commercial links in the external links as well.
  • There is a lack of high-quality sourcing (hint: if you don't see a PMID, it might not be peer reviewed).
  • There are mixed reference styles, with some references added in the inline Harvard style, while most of the article uses cite.php.
  • Speculation about deceased people who might have had AS isn't sourced to highest-quality sources, and a lot of it should probably be deleted (see WP:MEDMOS).
  • There are cite needed tags, and wikilinking needs.
  • There are external jumps, and URLs inserted directly into the text.
  • There is choppy prose with several one-sentence paragraphs.
  • When the article completed FAR, it had been converted to good prose; several lists have now been added, and the article has become listy. (The list of 21 things is an example.)
  • If it has to go to FAR again, it should have images.
  • The cleanup tag was originally on Reversing of symptoms, so it needs work.

The article has barely squeaked through FAR twice, and it looks like the people who used to watch over the article are no longer watching it, and it's been trashed pretty well. I hope it can be cleaned up without a third FAR, but a large effort is needed, because I suspect most text will have to be checked against refs. You can see the version that passed FAR by clicking on the oldid in ArticleHistory; that will give you an idea of what has been changed or added. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:11, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I will probably kick myself for this, but what is FAR? - NeutralHomer T:C 05:02, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
FAR = Featured Article Review (I might be wrong about the "Review" part, but that's the basic idea.) --DearPrudence 05:15, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I hate to admit, but I might not be able to look at this objectively, since I have Aspergers myself and personally to me, this all sounds right. Due to my own Aspergers, it might be a conflict of interest, if you will. The more I read, the more I go "this sounds OK to me". Perhaps I should leave this up to others you can be objective and don't have the conflict of interest that I have. If I can help in any other way, please let me know, I am willing to help. My apologizes....NeutralHomer T:C 05:10, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
You can do it if you don't focus on what it says, rather focus on whether it's cited, if the cite is reliable, if the ref is formatted correctly, etc. It's not whether it sounds right; it's whether we can prove a reliable source said so :-) And then, whether the article conforms to WP:WIAFA, WP:MOS and lots of other guidelines that featured articles should meet. Right now, the article has gotten off track of WP:WIAFA, and it's not about whether it sounds right; it's about the fact that we must cite everything to reliable sources (not commercial or self-published, preferably peer-reviewed), avoid original research, write in a compelling way (without unnecessary lists), and conform to Wiki's manual of style. You can go up to the ArticleHistory at the top of this talk page, and click on the version that passed FAR; it wasn't great, but it was much better shape than now. WP:FAR = featured article review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
I hope the following comment is taken in a constructive and light-hearted tone : Screw the FAR. That's right, screw it. This article has been evolving thru extensive and exhaustive debate to reflect a plurality of views on what is possibly the single most controversial issue in psychology/neurology. The lede paragraph should not be compelling, it should be accurate. It should reflect the plurality of views, however hedging. I'm all for fixing broken links, and tracking down unverifiable sources, and double-checking language. I don't see how images could possibly be relevant to 95% of this article. Asperger's is not a topic with a lot of popular appeal, it is controversial, complex and often confused. We should tell it like it is. Here at wiki - and nowhere else - we are free to choose truth (or accuracy) above any other consideration. Let us not waste that unique privilege.CeilingCrash 19:47, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Sounded kind of biased to me

Why did somebody put back in the "social impact" section? Whoever made the section seems to be pretty biased to people with A.S. like I am. Like I said, I have been told that I am gifted, and I can get a job and get married if I wanted to. As a whole, the section isn't biased, but for the most part it is.Sean90 20:48, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Could you please comment here on which statements in that section seem biased to you, and why? This discussion page will be useful in making the article sound better. In many cases, the material in the article is simply poorly-worded, which can easily be fixed. Also, please keep in mind that not all people with AS will exhibit the same symptoms, and symptoms ranging from mild cases to severe cases all need to be posted in order for this article to be informative. Thanks! --Dulcimerist 19:30, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

There are a few poorly worded sentences I'm going to take a stab at, I won't make any major changes w/o introducing them here first. In fairness to the tireless Wiki tribe; when text gets edited and re-edited sentence structure tends to break down organically.

I can't help thinking the constant idealogical tension regarding Asperger's is a result of colliding terminology. In this discussion and in other places, the word 'Aspergers' can be used to mean : a) a superior configuration of the brain, displaying enhanced memory, unconventional creativity, ability in artistic and verbal expression, in the mathematical sciences and displaying unusual fairness and honesty in their relations to each others. (Attwood, Baron Cohen, and Asperger make these observations ) People in this category use the Asperger term not because they satisfy the DSM criteria, but rather a neuropsychiatric exam reveals the traits that are the *operational* criteria for Asperger's : sensory perception and integration differences (a ticking clock may bother them), extremely precocious verbal ability as early as 5 years old. There is a part of the test for Asperger's called the Embedded Image test, on which the Aspie patient is seen to *outperform* NT's. These people have every right to the term because their doctors use it.

Or it can be B), another group that more closely matches the DSM, and experience - by their doctor's account and their own, difficulties in being productive, in having meaningful relationships, in understanding the emotional state of others, and so on. This group *also* has legitimate claim to the term.

These two groups are not disjoint; each person may identify with parts of each.

Or it can mean C), Amateur-Diagnosis-By-Proxy. Here I am referring to the use of the term Asperger's by fraudulent 'support' groups such as ASPAR, FAAAS and Maxine Aston, where the 'Asperger' person is not present, rather someone close to them *thinks* they have Asperger's, but there is not a proper diagnosis of any kind. This group will complain of *undiagnosed* Asperger's, which - if you think about it - is a contradiction in terms unless the patient later is diagnosed.

It would be *so* much easier to if group A) had one term, group B) had another, and group C stopped using the term altogether.

Ah, wishes and horses ... CeilingCrash 12:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

That does get pretty confusing. For group "A" I think the term "savant" might apply better. A percentage of autistic and AS have savant skills which makes them superior at certain things. Of course, the trade-off tends to be a lacking in social and other skills. For group "B" the AS term fits best, as the DSM has guidelines to identify AS. (Of course, the DSM is constantly getting updated as more research is done. Perhaps one day it will list those brain scans as a diagnostic guideline.) I would ignore group "C" since it's all based on hypothesis. I have no idea what I really just typed, actually... --Dulcimerist 21:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
I'm not sure what i'm about to type! Certainty is over-rated i spose. I would offer up that 'savant' in the sense of 'autistic' savant seems to convey extremely isolated abilities amidst a sea of dysfunction. Higher up the spectrum the water recedes and you get whole continents of ability; such that thousands of ppl with aspergers state clearly they would not undo their neurology. Some even claim they are superior to their NT cousins; the next step in evolution - which true or not, is probably the kind of thing left unsaid.
But i agree wholeheartedly that maybe we should leave "Asperger's" to the doctors as a container for pathology, and adopt a new term like "spectral" or something. It seems every group has a right to choose their own name. Hmm. Now I don't know what i just typed either ... CeilingCrash
I would add that there's a branch of "A" which isn't talked about very much, because they can't be (or won't be) diagnosed, and that's people with a heavy dose of the positive traits and a light case of the more problematic ones. People like Bill Gates (who I have seen rocking in his chair during a thought-provoking, stressful meeting -- there is no doubt in my mind that he's on the spectrum) have no reason to want a diagnosis. And if he was tested, the diagnostician might say "You're the richest man in the world, how can you be disabled?" After all, DSM says it's a disorder. Anyone who has AS traits that run in their family know exactly what I'm talking about, because they have relatives like that. We can mention the existence of such people, since Asperger himself did, but we're forbidden from calling them aspies if they mainly got the superpowers and little of the kryptonite stuff. Which I think is kind of dumb.
Sorry, just had to rant for a moment. Poindexter Propellerhead 01:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Social Impact Section should be removed

Questions of bias aside, the Social Impact section has non credible sources and is non encyclopedic. I *think* this decision had already been reached here, the section deleted, and somebody put it back in. The sources are no good, and the content declares what an Aspie *needs to do*, which is of dubious veracity and not germaine to what Asperger's IS.

The National Autistic Society is not a peer-reviewed source of academic quality; neither is anything from Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Given all the academic-quality research being done on Asperger's, there is no reason for us to use any sources less credible.

Not to get into dispute over content, but Attwood's "theory of mind" has been universally rejected by later clinicians, and probably wouldn't have published in a peer-reviewed source.

Er ... nobody seems to be home in discussion. I'll zap this section. But you guys don't want me running around unsupervised in general. I'm a crazy person ... CeilingCrash 19:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

CeilingCrash 15:44, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Agreed. Declaring what an Aspie "needs to do" is subjective language. Wiki articles should contain objective language. If good sources can be found which list some of the common AS social issues, that would be fine in this section. --Dulcimerist 21:57, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Paragraph one, ironing out ...

Proposed change, "Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the Autistic spectrum. It manifests in various ways and can have both positive and negative effects. It is typically characterized by issues with social and communication skills. Due to the mixed nature of its effects, it remains controversial among researchers, physicians, and people who are diagnosed with Asperger's Syndrome."

to

"Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the Autistic spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. Issues with social communication (verbal and non-verbal) are nearly universal to those with Asperger's. Other characteristics vary greatly from person to person, these include : sensory integration/sensitivity issues, repetitive behavior, and 'stimming' behavior such as rocking [reference]. Positive characteristics have also been observed and vary greatly: enhanced memory, an advanced grasp of languaged as early as age 5 [reference], and mathematical talent [reference] which, in once case at least, is of historic impact [reference to Giorgi Perelman]. Due to the mixed nature of its effects, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, physicians, and people with the diagnosis.

208.49.146.130 17:18, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Suggestion

The deleted sections mentioned above - family relationships and reversal of symptoms - imply some people would like to read about new and unproven ideas and techniques that may help improve AS tendency lives, even if these are outside the scientific orthodoxy. Maybe Wiki should have an "unproven related ideas page - user beware!" function, on this and perhaps many other topics. AS, June 07

Stemming

I didn't notice any mention of stemming in this article, even though this is a distinguishing characteristic. Angry Aspie 01:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Do you mean stimming? "In some cases, people with AS may have an odd way of walking, and may display compulsive finger, hand, arm or leg movements,[41] including tics and stims." The Wednesday Island 01:47, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm really, seriously, totally gonna remove the Social Differences section

I got reverted last time; this time i have waited for other folks to chime in, nobody has.

I am removing this section because, and only because : Almost all the sources referenced are non credible or non verifiable. Let me tick them off :

in 21, we have no page number.

In 22, 23, 24, 26, 31, 32, and 33, it comes from Jessica Kingsley publishers. I realize Attwood is a luminary, but when he writes in a non peer reviewed source it becomes non credible.

Jessica Kingsley publishers is not a traditional publishing house with an editing staff and fact-checking capability. I believe they are "subsidized" by the author, essentially self-published. In any case, no peer-review, no fact checking.

25 has no page number.

These don't even come close to academic quality. There is a pervasive and irreperable lapse in quality in this section. Absent any objection, I'm going to zap it.

CeilingCrash 03:33, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

21...this is Wikipedia, we ask for references...not page numbers in books.
22, 26, 31, 32, and 33 - As long as it is true, accurate, and correct, then it works.
23...again, we just ask for a website, not a page number
24...most references don't have titles, it really doesn't matter...seriously.
25...again...website, not a book.
These are not reasons to wipe out an entire section, some 12,000+ words. If you don't like the way it is written, rewrite it. If you don't like the references, find more of them or better ones. But don't wipe out an entire section because of page numbers and no titles. - NeutralHomer T:C 03:46, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

These are precisely reasons to wipe out the entire section. those footnotes make up the whole section with only 2 credible sources left. Without page numbers, a source cannot be verified. The rule of thumb is, a reader should be able to take our article, and go check the references himself.

Truth does not enter into it. We judge verifiability to credible sources. The best source we can use is one from an academic, peer-reviwed journal. Wikipedia specifically warns against self-published books and websites such as Kingsley publishers.

Do I really need to go on? Further, I cannot rewrite this with better sources because the material has no better sources. In any case the burden of proof is on the original editor who put it there - wikipedia clearly states poorly sourced material should be removed.

This article is up for FAR and I am trying to make improvements. I wonder if I am wasting my time. CeilingCrash 04:07, 2 June 2007 (UTC) CeilingCrash 04:04, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I think maybe everybody should get back to basics and check the discussion and concensus prior to FA review http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:Asperger_syndrome/Archive06 , where it was clearly decided that as this is a medical article, only proper, accredited, medical and academic citations are appropriate and that page numbers were essential. In the end, all material that was not sourced properly was removed. --Zeraeph 22:11, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
All of the citations in the disputed section have page numbers now, citing an article by Attwood, which was published in a book, aimed at professionals, by two psychology professors. I'll take a look at the archived discussions and work towards bringing the citations into compliance (if they are not now compliant). Poindexter Propellerhead 22:49, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I am not convinced. But until someone can come along with better references and sources, it should remain. I will tag it as needing extra references, but it should remain. 2 is better than none, for now. - NeutralHomer T:C 04:08, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I appeal to policy, not your convinceability.

There ARE NO BETTER sources because that material is non-credible in the first place. Wiki policy clearly states to remove poorly sourced material, it clearly does NOT state "something is better than nothing." For example, "theory of mind" has been subsequently rejected by virtually every researcher.

I have been the only one working on this article for the FAR, and now I'm going to stop. There are more pleasant ways of wasting my time.

"Screw you guys, I'm goin home!" -- Eric Cartman CeilingCrash 04:14, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

WHOA...whoa, whoa, whoa....back up here. I said I wasn't convinced. I don't like wiping out 12,000+ sections of text. With the massive intarweb, there has to be more references. Until there, it should remain, but tagged (sorry, I didn't tag it right away, had to take care of a message). Now, come back, calm down, and let's work on this. - NeutralHomer T:C 04:18, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I don't agree with the idea that all publications from Kingsley should be viewed as unworthy source material. Most of Hawking's books had no peer review, since they are not academic publications, but I don't hear any great hue and cry over in the physics section to remove citations to Hawking's books. Nor do I see how Kingsley is like self-publishing.
And if it makes you feel any better, Attwood was never a big proponent of Theory of Mind. That got started in the '80s, with Baron-Cohen, Leslie and Frith leading the vanguard. Not that I would espouse banning any of them as authorities, either -- it's not a dead theory, merely an incomplete one.
Anyway, I have no terribly strong feelings about the section in question, although I think a rewrite, or at least a rigorous editing, with citations improved to a reasonable extent, would not be a bad thing at all. Poindexter Propellerhead 04:20, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
I am all for editing or a rewrite...probably would do the section some good. I wish I could, but some psychology stuff goes over my head (I still with radio and TV...much easier). But, if references or citations are needed, please tell me where to start looking and I will give it my best shot. - NeutralHomer T:C 04:27, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Yeah, it can be pretty overwhelming... here, for example, are the peer-reviewed papers which discuss Asperger's and Theory of Mind -- all 925 of them: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Display&itool=abstractplus&dopt=pubmed_pubmed&from_uid=16537236 I'm not sure where I'd recommend that anyone start. I wouldn't mind working on it either, fighting vandals all the time gets pretty tedious, it would be a nice change to do something less mindless for a day or two.

I have taken my medication and calmed down, sorry bout that ... Actually, I'm glad to have anybody here to talk to. I'm much less interested in the Social Impact section than the lede paragraph, I proposed a change ( a couple sections above ^ ) ; i don't like making it wordier, but i felt that lede should give the reader some feel for what Asperger's is, from the various schools of thought. Feedback would be welcome, and i promise not to quote eric cartman anymore ... CeilingCrash 05:40, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

If the "theory of mind" part has been disproven....we could move it to it's own seperate section, explain what it is etc, how it fit into Aspergers as a whole and how it became to be shot down. Give a little history to the section. If that can be done, then I am all for it:) - NeutralHomer T:C 06:03, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
FWIW, I have started adding missing page numbers and so forth in the citations. Here is my take on ToM -- Baron-Cohen, Leslie and Frith sprung it on the world in 1985, and people looked at it as a sort of comprehensive answer to everything related to the autism spectrum. While it has held up fairly well under criticism, it has become very clear that there is a lot that it does not explain. I wouldn't call it debunked by any means -- I can show you a number of peer-reviewed papers from the last few years which consider it a valuable theory, and present some clinical evidence for its validity. I could also come up with some which questioned it, and made it seem more applicable to low functioning autism than to Asperger's. But I'm perfectly willing to listen to arguments against my perspective. Poindexter Propellerhead 06:31, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
Oh, and as regards the opening paragraph? I generally agree. Aspies are a wildly variable group. DSM says it has to mess up your life somehow to be diagnosable, but that doesn't mean that it has to mess you up. So I'd be very amenable to some changes which reflected those lines of thought. Were this an editorial page instead of an encyclopedia, I wouldn't even accept Asperger's as a disorder. I only do that here because DSM says I have to. Poindexter Propellerhead 10:09, 2 June 2007 (UTC)
For TOM, we've got lots of solid references pro and con. Perhaps ToM deserves to be its own section? I'd be happy to do 2 or 3 paragraphs with sterling sources, giving both the strengths of the theory and it's short comings. I'll post here and see what everybody thinks.
In a discussion about 5 months ago, we neutralized the word 'disorder' in the lede to 'condition'. We later say 'disorder' when we reference the DSM. Anyway, here's was my pass at the opening paragraph :
Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the Autistic spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. The primary distinction between Asperger's and Autism is that Autism includes a delay in early language development while Asperger's does not. However, general issues with social communication (verbal and non-verbal) are nearly universal to those with Asperger's [reference]. Other characteristics vary greatly from person to person, these include : sensory integration/sensitivity issues, repetitive behavior, and 'stimming' behavior such as rocking [reference]. Positive characteristics have also been observed and vary greatly: enhanced memory, an advanced grasp of languaged as early as age 5 [reference], and mathematical talent [reference] which, in once case at least, is of historic impact [reference to Giorgi Perelman]. Due to the mixed nature of its effects, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, physicians, and people with the diagnosis.
It's a bit of a mouthful for an opening, but i'm trying to give the reader a feel for this complex 'disorder' that runs the gamut from impaired to genius. (I hope to switch from the former group to the latter some day ...)
PS - for the positive aspects, I was going to source only Asperger and Attwood; since this aspect is likely to be challenged by the curebies ...
So comments please, feel free to take a second pass at the whole thing ...

CeilingCrash 15:38, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I like the first two sentences quite well. The third (difference from other autism is delay in early language development) I'm not as enthused about, because (a) the differences between an aspie and an LFA can be quite extreme, so this might give a wrong impression, and (b) the whole speech development thing is of questionable utility. Gillberg's diagnostic criteria said that you had to have delayed speech to be an aspie, and, pragmatically speaking, the diagnosis of one or the other seems to depend more on what doctor you saw and what sort of impression you made than on the various diagnostic guides. I also find persuasive Ozonoff's argument that it's a meaningless distinction because aspies and HFAs (above age 8 or so) should be treated identically.

Sentence 4: looks good. Sentence 5 (sensitivity issues, stimming) I'm fine with, but would lean towards "these may include" rather than "these include," since like you say, it's highly variable, and many aspies, as they get older, learn to manage their stimming to the point where it's no longer recognizable as such. Positive traits: memory, agreed. Language skills: agreed, I'd say even earlier than age 5 in some cases, but we need to be careful that we're not lumping it together with hyperlexia, which is technically a comorbidity (although how a superpower ever got termed a morbidity at all is beyond me). Math: yes, and I would consider adding sciences and engineering. Last sentence: dandy. So here would be my first attempt at an edit:

Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the Autistic spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. As with all forms of autism, there are general issues with social communication (verbal and non-verbal), but these tend to be less severe than in "low functioning autism."[references] Other characteristics vary greatly from person to person, but often include: sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ("stimming") behavior such as rocking, and intense but narrow areas of interest.[references] Positive characteristics have also been observed and vary greatly, these often include: enhanced memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences or language.[references like mad here, I think... curebies, as you say] Due to the mixed nature of its effects, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, physicians, and people with the diagnosis.

OK, your turn again -- see some things you don't like in my first draft? Poindexter Propellerhead 20:23, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Looking very good indeed. I was just reading about the language development thing, and was surprised to learn you're quite right; Attwood and others point out that some Aspies do have language delays, and in any case the difference between autie and aspie (if any) tend to converge over time (at least for HFA.)
It's rather too bad, because that is the question i hear most often, "what's the difference?" I hate to let this one go, but have the creeping feeling i'm in a quarrel with reality.
In the US, the DSM (our standard diagnostic manual, in case our brit and aussie friends are about) lists "no delay in language ..." in order to help doctors differentiate.
So the choices seem : leave what we have (i agree, misleading), take it out completely (not a bad idea i think), or say the "DSM-IV says ..." with a footnote indicating the point is controversial.
Thoughts?
I've heard the same question a number of times, and agree that some discussion would be good. It's a confusing subject, since DSM doesn't even define HFA (or LFA), just autism. I think it might be good to address it in the History section, since the last few paragraphs there touch on the speech development issue in places, and it's been debated throughout the history of the subject (starting with Asperger and Wing). We can point out that DSM (and most diagnostic criteria) currently say that there can be no significant delay in speech, but that the conclusion is not, and has not been, universal. That section is in need of attention anyway -- it doesn't flow, but meanders awkwardly between unrelated points, added by different editors -- so addressing AS vs HFA vs LFA could be part of a general cleanup. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:07, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Addition, after a little thought: we could do both. The History section needs polishing regardless, but a sentence in the lead paragraph which deals with what all forms of autism have in common, and what differentiates AS from them, seems very appropriate. There should be a clear definition early on, and it's hard to think of a better way to do that. Second draft on the way... Poindexter Propellerhead 00:41, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment. I see several mentions above that this article is at FAR or up for FAR. The article is not at WP:FAR; I only mentioned a list of items that should be addressed so it wouldn't be necessary to bring the article to FAR, as it has deteriorated significantly since it last passed FAR. You can access the version that passed by clicking on the link in the Article Milestones at the top of the talk page. Hopefully editors can address the list I gave above, and the article won't need a review. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:05, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Draft in progress for opening paragraph

(added this section header for anyone who happens to walk in ...)

Looking over the DSM criteria for autism and AS, there are 3 key differences. A major criterium for an autism diagnosis is impaired communication, which is totally absent from the AS criteria. Aspies are also required to have at least normal intellectual ability in non-social areas. And then there's the delayed speech issue. So here's another try...

Draft 2 -- still rough, but getting closer, I think:
Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. As with all forms of autism, there are stereotyped behaviors and impairments to social interaction, but an AS diagnosis requires normal intellectual development in non-social areas. A diagnosis of (non-AS) autism also requires deficits in communication skills which are not a part of the AS diagnostic criteria.[references] Most definitions have specified that delayed speech precludes a diagnosis of AS,[references] but agreement on this point has been less than universal; some diagnostic guides have even said the opposite.[references] Characteristics vary greatly from person to person, but often include: sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ("stimming") behavior such as rocking, and intense but narrow areas of interest.[references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced memory, mental focus, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences or language.[references] Due to the mixed nature of its effects, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, physicians, and people with the diagnosis.

I think we've got the content down, i'm just going to shorten the sentence structure a bit. Are you in the UK? We yanks have a preference for shorter sentences, a hemingway obsession we never got over. Anyway ... here's another swipe at it ...

Draft 3 -- just trying to crunch sentence structure, put sentence object first, and other twiddling. no content changes :

Asperger's syndrome (also referred to as Asperger syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes stereotyped behaviors and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' Autism in that speech and (non-social) intellect develop normally (or better). Some clinicians object to these differential criteria and seek other means of distinguishing Asperger's, still others claim the Asperger's category should be eliminated in favor of High Functioning Autism. [1]

Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ("stimming") behavior such as rocking, and intense but narrow areas of interest.[references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced memory, mental focus, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[21] or language[22].[references] Due to the mixed nature of its effects as well as continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.


Quite by accident, i ended up swallowing paragraph two; the issue with Aspergers vs HFA flowed naturally when we introduced the differential criteria of speech- and cognitive- development. This is starting to really feel right. Which is no small deal, since this will be the #1 google hit when a person types in "asperger's" !! 141.149.168.130 04:42, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm in the Pacific time zone, but my background contains both academia and journalism, so my writing instincts are often at war with each other. In this case, academia was winning.
I'm thinking that the next to last sentence of the first paragraph could use some polishing -- I would like to avoid using parenthesis twice in one sentence -- and that the last sentence could be made more precise. I think we're getting very close, and I'd like to sleep on it before I come back with version 0.4. This article is already #1 on Google, I think deservedly so, but I'd love to see it get even better.
Yes, as for parens, in sentence one perhaps we should move the long parenthetical to a footnote, though we may want to say Asperger's or Aspergers; i think the brits don't use the apostrophe but have to check.
Should we replace the word 'stereotyped' ? I think many readers aren't aware this word has a broader meaning beyond prejudice against a group of people (i had to look it up myself)
I'm going to start collecting sources to cite for this, I'll open up a new section for them ...


Version 0.4:
Asperger syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes repetitive behavior patterns and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' autism in that non-social aspects of intellectual development generally proceed at a normal or accelerated rate.
Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: intense but narrow areas of interest, sensory integration/sensitivity issues, and self-stimulating ("stimming") behavior such as rocking.[references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced mental focus, memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[21] or language[22].[other references] Due to the mixed nature of its effects as well as continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.
(I'm not saying that this should be paragraph 3 necessarily, it could easily go elsewhere.)
There is significant confusion surrounding the difference between AS and the loosely-defined category of high functioning autism("HFA"). While mildly autistic individuals may be diagnosed as HFA because they fail to meet one or more of the diagnostic criteria for AS, it is common for diagnosis to be influenced by non-technical issues, such as availability of government benefits for one condition but not the other.[ref: Attwood, Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, pp. 150-151] Until a formal definition for HFA is agreed upon, and until practice conforms with theory, the distinction between the two is likely to remain murky.
I think this is great, including the paragraph 3. I vote we ship it. CeilingCrash 01:24, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Sounds OK to me. Let's let it sit here for a day or two to give any other interested parties a chance to add input (and for us to get our remaining references chosen), then proceed. If you feel like repeating this process with some other sections (yes, including Social Differences, which could probably be condensed into a few gracefully flowing paragraphs), I'd be up for that. Those who went before have done all of the hard work already; but, as well as making work light, many hands also make for an unseemly patchwork of ideas and styles. With some polishing, I think this article can have the best of both worlds, and the added bonus (if anyone cares) of renewed FA status. Poindexter Propellerhead 02:05, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd be totally up for that. The raw material is there, and despite my previous remark, it would be nice if we passed FAR, and more importantly - it's shaping up to be the single best overview of asperger's anywhere at all. Wiki rocks the cosmos. CeilingCrash 03:44, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Who says there's no upside to obsessing over things, and having a pedantic and formal style of communication?  ;-) Poindexter Propellerhead 05:59, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
We'll have to work fast; no telling when we'll get cured ;-b

Should we mention, among the deficits, difficulty interpreting non-verbal social cues?CeilingCrash 02:05, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Hmmm. As it is now, in the first paragraph we mention social issues and stereotyped behavior, which are the ONLY major categories in DSM. In the second, we mention two types of stereotyped behavior (obsessions and stimming), and sensory issues, which are quite common but not mentioned in DSM at all. Maybe fleshing that out with one or two more of the very most common and obvious traits (including at least one of the social) would make for better balance. Poindexter Propellerhead 02:21, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Changes in bold. Don't know if 'focussed' rather than 'narrow' is too neuro-optimistic :-b Added a couple of social deficits ...

Version 0.5:
Asperger syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes repetitive behavior patterns and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' autism in that non-social aspects of intellectual development generally proceed at a normal or accelerated rate.

Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: intensely focussed areas of interest, sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ("stimming") behavior such as rocking, difficulty interpreting facial expressions and non-verbal social cues.[references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced mental focus, memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[21] or language[22].[other references] Due to the mixed nature of its effects as well as continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.

There is significant confusion surrounding the difference between AS and the loosely-defined category of high functioning autism("HFA"). While mildly autistic individuals may be diagnosed as HFA because they fail to meet one or more of the diagnostic criteria for AS, it is common for diagnosis to be influenced by non-technical issues, such as availability of government benefits for one condition but not the other.[ref: Attwood, Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, pp. 150-151] Until a formal definition for HFA is agreed upon, and until practice conforms with theory, the distinction between the two is likely to remain murky. CeilingCrash 17:32, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm belatedly looking ahead to the next 2 paragraphs, and a couple of things stick out at me. One is that they kept the opening section to a brief discussion of the definitions (while not yet giving any of those definitions as more than links), which doesn't seem like an altogether bad idea. It looks like they did that after copious discussion and wikilawyering 10 months or so back. The other is that there would be some redundancy between the existing second paragraph and our third paragraph above. I have version 0.5.1 percolating in the back of my head, give me an hour or two... Poindexter Propellerhead 22:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

OK, this is more like 0.6 than 0.5.1. Here goes:

Asperger syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive and negative effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes repetitive behavior patterns and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' autism in that non-social aspects of intellectual development generally proceed at a normal or accelerated rate.

Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: intensely focused areas of interest, sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ('stimming') behavior such as rocking, difficulty interpreting facial expressions and other social cues. [references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced mental focus, memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[21] or language[22].[other references]

There is significant confusion surrounding the difference between AS and the broader category of high functioning autism (HFA). While neither AS or HFA have single, universally agreed upon definitions, most diagnostic guides draw a division based on whether or not the subject develops speech skills by the usual age, with delayed speech indicating a diagnosis of HFA rather than AS. [references] A minority take the opposite position; that delayed onset of speech is be required for a diagnosis of AS. [17] Diagnostic tests and other tools are naturally as varied as the criteria. [4]

Other clinicians dispute the view that AS is differentiated from other autistic spectrum disorders. Instead they refer to Asperger's as HFA, or treat the diagnoses interchangably. These researchers argue that language delay is a difference in degree and not kind. [1] Even among those who feel that the differences between AS and HFA are significant, it is common for diagnosis to be influenced by non-technical issues, such as availability of government benefits for one condition but not the other. [ref: Attwood, Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, pp. 150-151] Due to the mixed nature of its effects, and continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.

(That leaves us with a leftover section on diagnosis, which might be better moved into a later part of the article.)

AS is often not identified in early childhood, and many individuals are not diagnosed until they are adults. Assistance for core symptoms of AS consists of therapies that apply behaviour management strategies and address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness. Many individuals with AS can adopt strategies for coping and do lead fulfilling lives - being gainfully employed, having successful relationships, and having families. In most cases, they are aware of their differences and can recognize if they need any support to maintain an independent life.[4]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I like it. We're going to inadvertently rewrite the whole thing as we keep eating subsequent paragraphs! And why not ?

I just tightened some sentences, and deleted the last sentence of paragraph 3 as it seemed to break the flow and seemed obvious (i may be wrong on this. Otherwise i just tightened a few sentences :

OK... I slightly modified your tightening up, as I realized that I'd been unclear in one spot, leading to possible confusion in another (see the edit log if you're curious). Poindexter Propellerhead 03:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

0.6.1.1

Asperger syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive[21] and negative[11] effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes repetitive behavior patterns and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' autism in that non-social aspects of intellectual development generally proceed at a normal or accelerated rate.

Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: intensely focused areas of interest, sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ('stimming') behavior such as rocking, difficulty interpreting facial expressions and other social cues. [references] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced mental focus, memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[21] or language[22].[other references]

There is significant controversy over the difference between AS and the broader category of high functioning autism (HFA). While neither AS nor HFA have universally accepted definitions, most diagnostic manuals distinguish the two according to speech development. Delayed speech indicates HFA; normal onset of speech indicates Asperger's. [references] However, at least one diagnostic guide takes the opposite position; that delayed onset of speech is required for a diagnosis of AS. [17]

Some clinicians deny that AS is differentiated from other autistic spectrum disorders at all. Instead they refer to Asperger's as HFA, or treat the diagnoses interchangably, arguing that language delay is a difference in degree and not kind. [1] Even among those who feel that the differences between AS and HFA are significant, it is common for diagnoses to be influenced by non-technical issues, such as availability of government benefits for one condition but not the other. [ref: Attwood, Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, pp. 150-151][Here's an even better one, in online PDF form: www.sacramentoasis.com/docs/8-22-03/as_&_hfa.pdf] Due to the mixed nature of its effects, and continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.

(That leaves us with a leftover section on diagnosis, which might be better moved into a later part of the article.)

AS is often not identified in early childhood, and many individuals are not diagnosed until they are adults. Assistance for core symptoms of AS consists of therapies that apply behaviour management strategies and address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness. Many individuals with AS can adopt strategies for coping and do lead fulfilling lives - being gainfully employed, having successful relationships, and having families. In most cases, they are aware of their differences and can recognize if they need any support to maintain an independent life.[4]

I think we've got really good balance in each of these paragraphs, and they are in perfect cascading order of importance. CeilingCrash 02:14, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I like it too. Want to go with this version tomorrow, barring any last-minute ideas or input? Poindexter Propellerhead 03:37, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I think we're good for tomorrow. Tomorrow morning US-EST I'll look up some references. I'm going to try to stick to unassailable ones like Baron-Cohen, Uta Fritch or whatever her name is, and so forth. T. Attwood is a little shaky, some think, because his experience is clinical rather than research, so I'll try to opt for researchers where possible. I've also been adding some books at the bottom of the article - what article is complete without a "further reading" list! Been awesome working with you, look forward to more ... CeilingCrash 05:04, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Adding references in-place to above final draft ... 208.49.146.130 17:22, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Citations for Opening Paragraph

[1] Tony Attwood, _The Complete Guide to Asperger's_, ??? page number, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, UK. 2007

[21] Simon Baron-Cohen, Sally Wheelwright, Richard Skinner, Joanne Martin and Emma Clubley The Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger Syndrome/High-Functioning Autism, Males and Females, Scientists and Mathematicians, _Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, Vol 31-1, February 2001

more to come, i'm going to shore up [21] with another reference to Asperger, as this is likely to be contentious.


CeilingCrash 19:14, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Here's one to shore up [21], it's from the Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, as retrieved from the National Institutes of Health website, which will hopefully satisfy the citation critics. And it even has appropriate quotes from Asperger (which is good, because his papers are not available online in translated form). http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=539373 Poindexter Propellerhead 00:34, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Funny, I had come in to put in precisely that reference. The asperger quotations are from here, which makes for a solid reference :
Asperger H. Die ‘autischen Psychopathen’ Kindesalter. Arch Psychiatrie Nervenkrankheiten 1944;17: 76-136.
Asperger's thesis is only 30 pages long, it would be awesome if i could find some german/english speakers who could translate a GPL version to put on Wiki.
I'll be back soon w/ more citations for the rest ...

CeilingCrash 01:31, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

I've forgotten too much of my German to translate at more than a snail's pace. But if you know of a place where the original text is online, I could translate any particular passages that there seemed a pressing need for. Poindexter Propellerhead 02:36, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

As far as I know, the original german has never been typed or OCR'd into digital format. It was published in '44, who knows how many paper copies are in existence? Cambridge may have the only one! Somebody was good enough to scan the pages photographically, which I have in PDF format. I'd be happy to send it along to you if you give me an addy or something. CeilingCrash 06:02, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
That would be great! I don't really want to post my email address, but let me go put an email address into my account configs so that you can email me that way. Poindexter Propellerhead 06:07, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Right on - how do i use that?CeilingCrash 06:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)
Just go to my user page and click on 'email this user' in the 'toolbox' menu on the lower left side of the screen. I believe it will only work if you've put an email address in your configs also, I'm assuming that you have... Poindexter Propellerhead 07:53, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, i didn't get to citations this am, but i till tomorrow and perhaps we can post the opening section CeilingCrash76.19.39.205 03:25, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

can people with aspergers get into relationships

im just asking cuz i am doing a report on it. Can teens get boyfriends or girlfriends? will they eventually get married

yes they can. 151.200.187.218 19:39, 7 June 2007 (UTC)
Yes, there are no stats yet, but not only can they, there is no indication that they are less likely to. With one caveat, as teens, male aspies - in my limited and meandering experience - seem to have a tougher time with it. But every dog will have his day. Arf! So good luck on finding a gi - i mean - your report :) CeilingCrash
Based on my own observations (not a good reference for a report, mind you), aspies tend to be late bloomers in terms of developing viable relationships, but they often do get there. Like CC said in a post above, aspies adapt on their own as they get older, and that applies as much to improving in the relationship arena as it does to anything else. Even a painfully shy and withdrawn adolescent may grow into a happily married adult. Poindexter Propellerhead 01:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I have been married 14 years and have three kids. Doing a reasnable job as a husband and a parent. (I hope). :-) Alex Jackl 15:59, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Ive been In a few relationships now and my parents think I have aspthingy, but I dont have any symtons but then again my parents dont even know me. TaylorLTD 00:36, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Yes, seeing as how AS is commonly believed to be passed genetically through parents, it is obvious that it is possible. Also, as a person with AS, I have had enough success.

I have realized I have a few traits that might be AS, though I've overcome them quite well. (My main problem is literalness; I'm actually pretty good at social skills, though i wonder if reading at 3 with all those Peanuts books sort of helped me figure out how to do them :-)
Anyway, I agree with the late bloomer thing. When I was a teen, I focused on my grandparents, the one relationship I knew worked really well, and thought that the coolest thing would be to hang out with the girl's family and play board games. I had the totally wrong idea of what people meant by "relationship."
I think with courting making a comeback in some circles, I'd have enjoyed that. A family that believes in teens having chaperones would hve loved a guy like me. Something possible to consider for your "report." :-)DTF955 23:31, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

== Final Draft of Opening Section ==

Just adding citations ...

0.6.1.1

Asperger syndrome (also referred to as Asperger's syndrome, Asperger's disorder, Asperger's, or AS) is a condition on the autism spectrum. It manifests in individual ways and can have both positive[n1][n2][n3][1][2] and negative effects on a person's life. Like other forms of autism, Asperger's includes repetitive behavior patterns and impairment in social interaction. However, Asperger's differs from 'classic' autism in that non-social aspects of intellectual development generally proceed at a normal or accelerated rate[6]

Characteristics of Asperger's vary greatly from person to person but often include: intensely focused areas of interest, sensory integration/sensitivity issues, self-stimulating ('stimming') behavior such as rocking, difficulty interpreting facial expressions and other social cues. [6] Positive characteristics have also been observed, these often include: enhanced mental focus, memory, and an intuitive understanding of logical systems, which may manifest itself as talent in mathematics, engineering, sciences[n1][n2][n3] or language[n4].

There is significant controversy over the difference between AS and the broader category of high functioning autism (HFA). While neither AS nor HFA have universally accepted definitions [n5] , most diagnostic manuals distinguish the two according to speech development. Delayed speech indicates HFA; normal onset of speech indicates Asperger's.[6] However, at least one diagnostic guide takes the opposite position; that delayed onset of speech favors a diagnosis of AS. [n8]

Some clinicians deny that AS is differentiated from other autistic spectrum disorders at all[n7]. Instead they refer to Asperger's as HFA, or treat the diagnoses interchangably, arguing that language delay is a difference in degree and not kind. [n7][1]. Even among those who feel that the differences between AS and HFA are significant, it is common for diagnoses to be influenced by non-technical issues, such as availability of government benefits for one condition but not the other. [n6] [Here's an even better one, in online PDF form: www.sacramentoasis.com/docs/8-22-03/as_&_hfa.pdf] Due to the mixed nature of its effects, and continued debate over its definition, Asperger's remains controversial among researchers, clinicians, and people with the diagnosis.

(That leaves us with a leftover section on diagnosis, which might be better moved into a later part of the article.)

AS is often not identified in early childhood, and many individuals are not diagnosed until they are adults. Assistance for core symptoms of AS consists of therapies that apply behaviour management strategies and address poor communication skills, obsessive or repetitive routines, and physical clumsiness. Many individuals with AS can adopt strategies for coping and do lead fulfilling lives - being gainfully employed, having successful relationships, and having families. In most cases, they are aware of their differences and can recognize if they need any support to maintain an independent life.[4]



new:


[n1] Tony Attwood, _The Complete Guide to Asperger's_, ??? page number, Jessica Kingsley Publishers, London, UK. 2007

[n2] Simon Baron-Cohen, Sally Wheelwright, Richard Skinner, Joanne Martin and Emma Clubley Autism-Spectrum Quotient (AQ): Evidence from Asperger Syndrome/High-Functioning Autism, Males and Females, Scientists and Mathematicians, _Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders_, Vol 31-1, February 2001

[n3] Asperger H. Die ‘autischen Psychopathen’ Kindesalter. Arch Psychiatrie Nervenkrankheiten 1944;17: 76-136. Pertinent quotations translated to english : http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=539373

[n4] Fred Volkmar, M.D., director of the Yale Child Study Center. Psychiatric News October 6, 2006 Volume 41, Number 19, page 21 "These are kids who talk before they can walk." http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/41/19/21

[n5] Patricia Howlin, PhD, Fred Volkmar, M.D, Sadie Dingfelder, A Dilemma of Definition, American Psychology Association Volume 35, No. 11 December 2004, page 48 http://www.apa.org/monitor/dec04/definition.html

[n6] Attwood, Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, pp. 150-151

[n7] Mayes SD, Calhoun SL, Crites DL. "Does DSM-IV Asperger's disorder exist?" J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2001 Jun;29(3):263-71 PMID: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?itool=abstractplus&db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=abstractplus&list_uids=11411788

[n8] (Gillberg's criteria may be found at Christopher_Gillberg or at http://web.syr.edu/~rjkopp/data/as_diag_list.html if that suits you better.)


pre-existing :


[1] Brasic, JR. Pervasive Developmental Disorder: Asperger Syndrome. eMedicine.com (April 10, 2006). Retrieved 7 July 2006. [2] Treffert, DA. Asperger's Disorder and Savant Syndrome. Wisconsin Medical Society. Retrieved on 19 July 2006.

[6] BehaveNet® Clinical Capsule™. DSM-IV & DSM-IV-TR: Asperger's Disorder (AD). Retrieved 28 June 2006.

[12] Ozonoff S, Rogers SJ, Pennington BF. "Asperger's syndrome: evidence of an empirical distinction from high-functioning autism." Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. 1991 Nov;32(7):1107–22. PMID

[26] Attwood, Tony (1997). Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals. Jessica Kingsley Pub., London. ISBN, pp. ?? "At present, the results suggest there seems to be no meaningful difference between [Asperger syndrome and high-functioning autism]. They are more the same than they are different."


more to come ... obviously i am citing the H*LL out of this in anticipation of spurious objections ... CeilingCrash 04:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Great, but personally I would like to see paragraphs 3 and 4 moved out of the intro to a later section. They are certainly relevant, but not in the intro. --Zeraeph 05:46, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I just realized "final draft" is an oxymoron. I agree with Zaraeph, break out a section to follow, "Controversial Definition" and plunk par-3 and par-4 there? CeilingCrash 05:58, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
The references look great! I don't have the book in [n1], so can't provide a page number, but we already have 4 other references for the opening 2 sentences, so I'm not too concerned.
"Final draft" on Wikipedia is always a funny term. Final until the next editor comes along!
As for breaking out paragraphs 3 & 4, an "Asperger Syndrome and High Functioning Autism" title (or something like that) seems fine to me. Poindexter Propellerhead 06:13, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with myself now. I'd like to suggest leaving paragraph 3 in but moving 4. It's my sense that a primary question many readers will bring to the article is "Is it autism? How is it different?"
I'll swing by the bookstore tomorrow and look up [n1] page numbers (they have good coffee there too). Do we have the source for [??], a diagnostic criteria which specifies Apies MUST have a speech delay?
Actually, it looks like I need to correct that, I was sure that Gillberg had made it a requirement in his criteria, but I just looked them over again, and he makes it one of 5 communication-related indicators, of which one must have 3. Attwood (AS, A Guide for Parents and Professionals, p.67) notes that almost half of kids with AS have delayed speech, but not beyond age 5. Wing, in her original paper, also felt that delayed speech seemed pretty common. So, DSM aside, the door seems to be open by fairly broad consensus. But I appear to have misremembered in thinking that Gillberg's criteria attempted to nail it open. Poindexter Propellerhead 07:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Do we know the original paper source for www.sacramentoasis.com/docs/8-22-03/as_&_hfa.pdf ? I'd like to keep it if so, remove it if not.
I don't know if it has an original paper source, but it exists in non-PDF format in a few other places online, if that suits your fancy. Here, for example: http://www.behavior-consultant.com/as-hfa.htm Poindexter Propellerhead 07:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
I suppose "Asperger's versus High Functioning Autism" works. I think we might just wrap this up tomorrow before the curebies come and make trouble ... CeilingCrash 06:37, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Have they been at THAT again? I will have to pay closer attention --Zeraeph 08:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
So what's the consensus on paragraphs 1,2 and 3 for an intro, move 4 out? It seems to me the conflict over definition is a central feature of Asperger's and worthy of 1/3 the intro. 208.49.146.130 20:36, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
How about giving 3 and 4 the "====" treatment, so that they are a subset of the opening? That helps break things up a little without splitting the paragraphs off into a completely distinct topic. Poindexter Propellerhead 21:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
That works for me. CeilingCrash 21:32, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
It's all good :o) --Zeraeph 23:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)
Well, I have a copy I'm prepared to start editing all of the references into, but I'm reluctant to start on that if CeilingCrash is doing the same -- no need to repeat all that work. CC, are you doing it also, or shall I go ahead? Poindexter Propellerhead 22:21, 9 June 2007 (UTC)
Go for it PP, i'm tied up this w/e. Since I put H. Asperger's thesis on the web for you to grab, perhaps we should include that link in a footnote 3? It's in the public domain and just may inspire someone to do a non-copyrighted translation, or at least transcribe the german ... CeilingCrash 19:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, after a period of being highly distracted, I am in the process of inserting all of those references into the agreed upon text. Hopefully we'll have some new opening paragraphs before the weekend's out. Poindexter Propellerhead 23:43, 23 June 2007 (UTC)

http://www.aspergerdefense.com/asp_1944.pdf

http://www.socialanxiety.com/area-aspergers.html appears to be a bit of an ad,no?User:Serprex 15:34, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

And a non sequitur to boot ... CeilingCrash 05:46, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

AQ Questionnaire

The link for the AQ questionnaire is an online dating site which requires one's e-mail before spitting out a result. 67.49.247.73 18:34, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Deleted. Why'd you remove the PMID and ISBN from the references above? WLU 18:38, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

I may actually have this!

Seriously tho' I have been known to have a few of these symptoms. Bassium!

Having a few of the symptoms does not necessarily mean that you have AS, but if you really think you have it and want your suspicions confirmed, you should consider seeing a professional for a diagnosis. Unless it is unquestionably clear by the description of AS that you have it, a self-diagnosis is a bad idea. (I am not saying that you don't have it, necesssarily, just trying to give you some advice.) --DearPrudence 04:52, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

New opening para in place

I finally got that put in, sorry for the long delay. CeilingCrash, would you happen to have a page number for citation #1? I don't have that book. Poindexter Propellerhead 07:35, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Love it, PP !! Let me look up that citation ... OK, I put in the page number (and an exerpt) for reference 1. A winning opening section if ever i saw one! -- CeilingCrash 17:06, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

This morning the h2g2 template was done away with (for the second time), in the belief that we should not facilitate links to encyclopedias with which we have no established relationship, and which are viewed as competition.[2] It was not related to reliability especially, we continue to have templates for dozens of sources which are not considered reliable, from answers.com to dmoz.org to comixpedia to imdb.[3]

Noticing the newly redlinked template, an attentive editor deleted it. Not wanting to see content disappear over a broken template, I found the article[4] and put in a working link. Another editor then deleted it again, questioning the appropriateness of including an unreliable encyclopedia as even an external link.

I looked over the article, and felt like it had something to contribute; it's written in a non-encyclopedic style, easy to read and non-technical, which seemed like a good counterbalance to our mostly very academic cites. I didn't notice any particular inaccuracies in it, or any strong POV issues.

Anyway, I'd like some feel for what (if any) the community's consensus on this article is. I'm inclined towards keeping it. Other opinions?

I'm on the fence ... I like the article and its writing style. It's not really a reliable source but it's not meant to be - it's one author's opinion on the subject. But then, ignore all rules and all that ...
On another note, is there a webpage for the last radio item in the external links? I didn't have any luck finding one - I'd just prefer to have a link describing the radio show than a direct link to the audio. Graham87 05:50, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I can't find a text explanation of it anywhere, nor can I get the radio feed to last through the first 3 minutes or so of the show. Poindexter Propellerhead 07:03, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I found a brief textual explanation of the series. For some reason it doesn't link to the online version of the AS show. I got the link from the Asperger syndrome article to play fine with Real Alternative but I also have problems with some RealAudio streams. Graham87 10:19, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
I think it's a good article, as an external link i don't see any harm. I was rather concerned with the debate over its deletion, several editors complained of "advertising for the BBC" or supporting the "competition." As a free resource, we are not competing for consumer dollars. The success of others detracts nothing from our success.
We can't directly reference their content because it's not RS but as an external link - isn't that what external links are for? CeilingCrash 02:50, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
External links should be reliable sources that go into a subject in more detail than Wikipedia can. They can also be link directories like the link to DMOZ in the Asperger syndrome article. The writer of the h2g2 link isn't a reliable source in the academic sense - I'd say he relied on experience from the School of Hard Knocks in writing the article. Graham87 05:07, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Looking over the external links guidelines, the relevant points seem to me to be:
"What to link
There are several things that should be considered when adding an external link.
* Is it accessible to the reader?
* Is it proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)?
* Is it a functional link, and likely to continue being a functional link?"
On the negative side, sites to normally avoid include,
"Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources for explanations of the terms 'factually inaccurate material' or 'unverifiable research.'"
I don't see anything misleading in that article, or anything else which seems in conflict with my reading of WP:EL. And I do like, for example, that it starts off by saying that people with AS are called 'aspies,' then uses that term throughout the article. I like that because it's true, useful information, and I'm not sure that I could find a peer-reviewed medical paper that says the same thing. I could say it, and link to a large number of places which used 'aspie' that way to prove my point, but then I'd be risking charges of OR.
But if anyone knows of something in the EL guidelines that discourage links to generally useful and accurate info which is from an unreliable source, I'll happily go the other way. I might easily have missed something in the rules. Poindexter Propellerhead 05:54, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
OK either the guidelines have changed a bit since I last read them a few months ago or my interpretation of them has been too conservative. In the section "links to consider", the last point is relevant to the h2g2 link:

Sites which fail to meet criteria for reliable sources yet still contain information about the subject of the article from knowledgeable sources.

IMO that describes the h2g2 article quite well. I'm now in favour of adding the link. As there seems to be consensus on this page for readding the link, I'll add it back. Graham87 07:49, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks much, Graham! Both for the edit and for pointing out what I missed. Poindexter Propellerhead 08:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)
Well I'm don't really edit this article so I'll leave it to others, but the manner in which that article is written is not, in my opinion, appropriate for us to link to. violet/riga (t) 15:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
"Aspies"? I've dealt with a lot of people with Aspergers and have never heard that one. If I did I'd likely take it as a pejorative term. violet/riga (t) 15:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Speaking as a person who has been diagnosed with AS, and who has several friends and acquaintances who have as well, it's a self-applied term that a number of us prefer to use. I'd think it might be pejorative in some cases if it was originally applied externally, but i've seen no evidence of that. Lucky number 49 15:19, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I wonder if 'Aspies' is in broader use in the USA than elsewhere? It is my general sense that it is non-perjorative and somewhat affectionate, as shown by the name of the site Aspiesforfreedom.com. I believe it is the lexical nephew of "auties", which i saw on internet listservs in the early nineties.
To me it carries the same connotation of informal friendliness that "yank", "brit", "aussie" or and "kiwi" conveys. CeilingCrash 21:08, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
There's also aspie.com and aspies.de. I've heard it used as almost a pet name, referring to one's self, family, friends or community. If you want to tick off an aspie, there are any number of terms that would be vastly more effective, including ones which are officially sanctioned. Poindexter Propellerhead 23:07, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
I've never seen it used offensively either. --DearPrudence 22:02, 20 July 2007 (UTC)
Me neither and my son's an Aspie. He's a brilliant young man and I'm quite proud of him. He's doing much better than I feared and things are looking much better. He is adapting well to independent life. -- Fyslee/talk 22:17, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Irrational fears

The average human has atleast one phobia. I don't see why fear of flushing toilets is any less rational than fear of buttons or string. Why is this connected to Asperger Syndrome? 80.178.59.139 22:22, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Although the sentence you refer to is neither crystal clear or cited, I think what they're trying to say is that an aspie kid may appear to have an irrational fear of something like toilets flushing, vaccuum cleaners, etc., because the noise puts them into sensory overload. So it isn't an irrational fear at all, just the appearance of one. I'd clean that sentence up if it were sourced, but it's not. :-/ Poindexter Propellerhead 22:42, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
well, the sentence i used was heard on a movie. a quick search on google said that 10% of all americans suffer from some kind of phobia, while wikipedia mentions that 10-15% of children have it. wrongdiagnosis.com said theres no statistics for the prevalence of phobias, but stated 3.7% of all americans suffer from social phobia. this just suggests its a very, very common thing. (perhaps even more common than statistics show). maybe what i said wasnt accurate, but the point was. (heres the wrongdiagnosis.com page on prevalence of phobias.) 80.178.59.139 22:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Sounds like a non reliable source to me, and should be removed. --Michael Johnson 23:06, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
Or perhaps the word "aversion" (sourceable) should be replaced for "fear"; this describes the behavior without presuming to know the emotional state of the aspie.

On the other hand, anxiety and depression are well documented to often accompany asperger's; i'm not sure what the original author was trying to say. Certainly an aspie will learn to fear certain situations an NT will not, especially those he is less competent in. On a personal note, NT's scare the bejeezus out of me :-bCeilingCrash 19:21, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Differences between AS and PDD-NOS

i'm wondering about this. what are the differences between PDD-NOS and asperger syndrome? the only visible difference i can see is motor function problems - and i know some, diagnosed with asperger syndrome, who dont have motor function problems. is their diagnosis incorrect? 80.178.59.139 08:31, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

My impression is that PDD-NOS gets used as a catch-all category for people who seem a little autistic, but who don't seem to quite mesh with one of the more specific sets of PDD criteria. A diagnosis of Asperger's (per DSM) doesn't require any motor function problems at all, so that isn't likely to be what the diagnostician was thinking of in choosing between the two. All kinds of funny things can affect what someone is diagnosed with; the background of the diagnostician, coverage rules of particular medical insurers, and so on. In some cases, you'd probably have to ask the diagnostician before you'd be able to get it all sorted out. (Look at discussion of the AS/HFA diagnosis quandry for another example of this sort of thing.) Poindexter Propellerhead 18:38, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
so lets assume we have a person who can get diagnosed with three different things - HFA, AS and PDD-NOS. are there any advantages or disadvantages to getting diagnosed with one of those, and not another? would a HFA person have an easier time getting benefits than a PDD-NOS/AS person? 80.178.72.69 20:17, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Quite possibly, depending on the policies of their state/province and/or federal government, and the rules of their private insurance carrier (if any). Poindexter Propellerhead 21:03, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
Yes, in the USA, for instance, HFA isn't recognized in our DSM. Without a DSM code, doctors cannot bill insurers. CeilingCrash 02:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

The talk pages are not

for personal announcements or information. For example, tomorrow is CeilingCrash's birthday. He is going to be 41. Not only would such an announcement on the Talk pages be entirely-out-of-place, but provides us a vivid example of a shameless request for Happy Birthday notices. CeilingCrash 19:33, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for that clear warning. We would of course normally delight in withing CeilingCrash "Happy Birthday" and "Best Wishes", but as you point out this is, unfortunately, entirely inappropriate. --Michael Johnson 23:00, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
I'm afraid I have to concur. Someone needs to give CC 41 spanks as punishment for his brazen vandalism of this page. Poindexter Propellerhead 00:00, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
Now THERE'S an idea...can we, at least, join hands in a circle and sing "A very happy unbirthday to you"? --Zeraeph 10:56, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

=== Has Attwood lost his freakin' mind ???===

Now, we're not here to determine truth, rather, verifiability. But it's verifiability to credible sources, credible literally meaning "believable", so we get tangled up in truth despite our fervent vow to the contrary.

Attwood has said some things that are ... disturbing ... in the sense of his being a present RS. On the one hand, the man is huge in Asperger's, he is literally over 7,000 feet tall. On the other hand, he is beginning to say stuff that isn't just false (let he without sin ...) but absurd prima face

In fairness to Attwood, excerpts from talks should not be given the same weight as work he has published and submitted to peer review. It is *very* easy to make an incomplete extemporaneous remark, response to a question, or be taken out of context.

We've also got to be careful with Attwood; the book that made him famous was a general survey of the topic, not new research (Attwood, Tony. Asperger's Syndrome: A Guide for Parents and Professionals, Jessica Kingseley Publishers). This book was not peer reviewed nor subject to other academic standards. I got curious about kingsley publishers and actually went thru most of the manuscript submission process. If you pay them, they will print anything you want. Editing costs extra. If you want peer review, you provide them names of ppl who vouche for it.

Now, Attwood's fame and the world-recognized quality of his first book well compensate for this oddity, I believe. But Attwood, unlike his classmate Baron-Cohen, has never done any scientific research (please somebody correct me if i'm wrong on this point.) He himself repeatedly warns his conclusions are based on clinical data (experience with patients wandering in). This introduces the now familiar Selection Bias problem that led freud to conclude the psyche could be cured by the application of greek mythology to the genitals.

With this background in mind, here are some things he has said. Above we have the star-trek convention remark. Here Attwood actively discourages partners of Aspies some seeking professional help, and guides them to 'grass root' internet forums :

"With Asperger's, life is a stage," Attwood said. "The curtain goes up while they are in public and down when they are at home. Because other people do not see the problem, they question your sanity - you are on your own. In some families, denial has held the family together for generations, and you want to bring down the scaffolding." ...

"You cannot get this knowledge from professionals. contact with other partners through newsletters, a support group, or an Internet site is vital"

[This is a disgraceful abdication of his own profession. The reason you can't get this information from professionals is that it is unsubstantiated and indefensible. Attwood could write this into his next book, thus making it available from professionals - but he knows that he can't. The implication that only partners of aspies are fit to counsel other partners is troubling as well. A neuropsych disorder is no place for anti-intellectual folk psychology]

[There is another quotation where he says Aspie husband fall into 3 categories, all of which are bad. i'll insert it later.]

Attwood nowhere suggests the NT may be the source of trouble in a relationship. (There are lots more ways to be screwed up than the A. Spectrum!)

What is driving Attwood? Where is the voice of reason, "if you're having trouble in a relationship with an Aspie, get yourself some professional and qualified advice and by the way - don't forget you may be the problem ..."

I can only guess. It is worth noting that, autism began in the domain of psychology but is moving to the realm of neurology, psychopharmacology and genetics. There isn't all that much for a psychologist to do for us. They did enuf damage with the Ice Box mom theory already.

But partners of Aspies - cha-ching! Traumatized by life events ... let's have a ... workshop !!!

Attwood and Aston do business together, along with an organization called FAAAS. They put on workshops here in the US, Attwood speaks, he gets paid, promotes his books as well. Along with Karen Rodman, founder of FAAAS, they form a transnational unholy trinity spanning the US, UK, and Australia.

Aston always - always - references attwood in her essays to get reflected credibility. She likes to put her name and his in the same sentence. Aston publishes through - you guessed it - Jessica Kingseley Publishers, so there are no pesky issues with peer review or even editing.

And worst of all, Attwood's latest book, The Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome , has a very stange last chapter. All about relationships, filled with references to Aston (who has done no scientific research.) But check the bibliography - the last chapter doesn't exist. It appears the last chapter was added late in the publication process, after all his other sources were vetted. For Attwood to expend his credibility on the likes of Aston seems tragic to me.

I should close by saying that I believe Tony is a man of great intellect and great heart who appears to respect and even admire some aspie differences. But I believe there are serious questions as to Attwood's credibility. Remember his publications slipped by peer review, i think he has used up his free 'pass' at this point and we have to look at him more critically. My issue with Attwood is not political. Baron Cohen has said some pretty vile things, but he backs them up with research so i hold my tongue.

I may cross-post this to the main Asp talk page ... </rant> CeilingCrash

This is just SO irresponsible. Attwood is about to get a personal flea in his ear from me on this:

"With Asperger's, life is a stage," Attwood said. "The curtain goes up while they are in public and down when they are at home. Because other people do not see the problem, they question your sanity - you are on your own. In some families, denial has held the family together for generations, and you want to bring down the scaffolding." ...

"You cannot get this knowledge from professionals. contact with other partners through newsletters, a support group, or an Internet site is vital"

Has he ever BEEN to an "internet support forum", does he have a single CLUE how toxic and abusive most of them are right up to Admin/Guru level?

Was he drunk? --Zeraeph 14:26, 3 August 2007 (UTC) [crosspost by CCCeilingCrash 18:58, 3 August 2007 (UTC)]

I have to agree with Attwood, that knowledge obtained from life experience cannot be learned from well-meaning professionals. My son has AS and all the professionals urged us to join a parents' group. It was a life-saver. Why shouldn't partners join a partners' group? Only someone who has been there knows what it's like. I'm an Aspy and my husband would love to join a group. He often feels like the odd man out in our family.Berkeleysappho 00:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
To answer CC's question above, Tony Attwood has authored or co-authored 8 peer-reviewed papers listed in PubMed, but that's only a tiny fraction of the text associated with him. Once someone gets a whole lot of publicity, the chance that they will never have publicly uttered anything stupid rapidly approaches zero. Had someone ever inserted one of Attwood's dumbest comments ever into the article, I'd be asking for consensus to take it out. But I don't see a need for a pre-emptive policy. If it gets broke, we can fix it then. Poindexter Propellerhead 01:44, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes PP, i don;t think we have to change anything. Just wanted to raise the topic of Attwood's RS-status. I'm not going to argue against anybody's response as i'm sure reasonable ppl will differ, and am interesting in what the differing views are. I hope other ppl chime in on what was a (admittedly somewhat deliberately) provocative post. CC 24.34.190.34 20:58, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Archive 5←Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13→Archive 15
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Asperger_syndrome/Archive_11&oldid=1136534125"