I was thinking about a close friend who has some, let's just say "issues" re: life. They are not issues of his own making, they are circumstances beyond his control, but they effect him very directly. And I was thinking about him, I realized that he's struggling to cope. It's beginning to "get in the way." He's avoiding certain topics. It is impacting his social life because it's so hard to discuss anything without discussing the issue at hand.
A pause on "get in the way." I frequently will ask my clients whether the issue at hand is "getting in the way." If it's not, or if not too much, maybe it's not in need of a particularly therapeutic focus. Maybe it's just an irritant, and don't we all become irritated!? If it "gets in the way" we might have something important to discuss.
Back to my friend. As I thought about how this issue not of his own making and beyond his control are "getting in the way" I also thought about a family I've been working with. The couple has a teenager with a developmental disability (beyond their control, not of their own making) who has given them some pretty big behavioral challenges. This teen's parents have risen to the occasion. OK, not perfectly, after all, perfection is not really to be had in this world. But they've done a great job. Things have gotten better. There are no delusions about their child's challenges - or their teen's strengths. During the summer they took a vacation that was fun for them and fun for their teen - not always an easy task. Compromises? Sure. But they know who their kid is. They set their child up in this vacation and in school to have the best chance of success. And it's not perfect, but they work hard and they understand the child's diagnosis and how to best manage his needs with theirs.
Oh yeah, my friend. Well, he knows there are resources for him to go to where he might not feel so isolated, so alone with the circumstances that have befallen him. He knows of them, but is hesitant to use them.
Which got me thinking, what does it mean when we walk in whatever door that could help us - but are hesitant to do so? The door to therapy to talk about depression; to a medical doctor to discuss the high blood pressure; to the attorney to actually make a will that insulates our loved ones from the difficulty of the decisions that are ours. When we avoid doors, I think it's about our hesitance to accept the reality. It's when we are able to put aside - even for a brief time - our minimization or denial of the issue. It's when we consider that we might get/need help with the issue. It's a hard step. It's a step that can really change our lives, regardless of the door we're facing - or trying to not face.
And for the record, my "friend" is a melding of many many people, the family is not.
Wednesday, September 17, 2014
Does an Autism Diagnosis Always Matter?
As with all of my blog postings, materiel information about people is changed to protect their identity.
I received a call from a distraught mother yesterday. Her son's psychiatrist, having known this kid for many years, offered (seemingly in frustration) that "maybe he should be tested for high functioning autism." Mom was aghast. Her son certainly had cause for depression - there are lots of stressors in the family that don't need to be enumerated here. He may well have ADHD. The psychiatrist is treating for both, and that's fine. He's a bright boy, and bright can be a blessing as well as a challenge. He can be hard headed (not shocking for a smart young man who does well in regular education classes who is in early adolescence with some significant but not crippling family issues) but I'm not sure it makes for a diagnosis of high functioning autism (HFA). It makes for a kid who's "behaving badly" in the words of Ross Greene, author of The Explosive Child. If the boy even did have the diagnosis, which I'm quite sure he does not, as being hard headed and angry is way different from the rigidity that comes with classic autism, even HFA. And even if he was very rigid, would we not look at anxiety first, since there are no stereotypic (repetitive) behaviors or significant social impairments in evidence? It seems to me this off the cuff remark was someone who, at best, was thinking out loud and didn't have the "should I say that out loud" filter quite on tight enough. I've certainly been there, so I can't be too critical on that front. At worst, it is a reflection of the pathologizing of people who struggle.
And interestingly, the new DSM seems to, essentially, fudge together autistic diagnoses with one broad "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" brand with modifiers as to the need for more or less support, more or less impairment etc. which might be valuable for kids who are lower functioning, but I'm not so sure that it always matters for the very high functioning kids.
I saw a self referred law student a while back, certain he had Asperger's. I didn't bother the schpiel informing him that the DSM had done away with that diagnosis, not wanting to pop any bubbles. He was smart, doing well in school, was living with his girlfriend in a relationship that he described as working well. He admitted to worrying a lot. I suggested he might have anxiety issues. He was uninterested and went for another opinion and, no surprise, received a diagnosis of Asperger's. NIMH states that almost 30% of adults will meet diagnostic criteria for anxiety in the course of their life. This is in comparison with 2.3% of adults who will meet diagnostic criteria for autism, and that's according to the highest rate recorded, which could well be an over estimate of the incidence. Didn't we all learn that "when you hear hooves think horses not zebras" because horses are much more commonly found than are zebras? I thought that was standard diagnostic practice. Look at what's more likely, not what's trendy or intriguing.
With the young man whose psychiatrist suggested autism testing, maybe it was the lack of effectiveness of the anxiety/anti-depression medications that were being prescribed. Not every kid responds so well, or so easily to medications. Why suggest autism testing and send mom into what seems an unnecessary tizzy when there are many other more obvious ways to understand his presentation? Why not look at the issues facing this guy, his strengths, his weaknesses, his family dynamics? It seems to me the answers are not to be found in finding (or is it creating?) an autism diagnosis for this kid.
I'm not opposed to testing, nor am I opposed to diagnoses. I refer for autism testing all the time and value my colleagues' input into how to best understand some kids. Yet I'm also in some agreement with the new DSM trend towards describing individual issues and challenges. But I'm becoming more interested in solving problems. I'm not at all sure chasing after a diagnosis is always the smartest move.
I received a call from a distraught mother yesterday. Her son's psychiatrist, having known this kid for many years, offered (seemingly in frustration) that "maybe he should be tested for high functioning autism." Mom was aghast. Her son certainly had cause for depression - there are lots of stressors in the family that don't need to be enumerated here. He may well have ADHD. The psychiatrist is treating for both, and that's fine. He's a bright boy, and bright can be a blessing as well as a challenge. He can be hard headed (not shocking for a smart young man who does well in regular education classes who is in early adolescence with some significant but not crippling family issues) but I'm not sure it makes for a diagnosis of high functioning autism (HFA). It makes for a kid who's "behaving badly" in the words of Ross Greene, author of The Explosive Child. If the boy even did have the diagnosis, which I'm quite sure he does not, as being hard headed and angry is way different from the rigidity that comes with classic autism, even HFA. And even if he was very rigid, would we not look at anxiety first, since there are no stereotypic (repetitive) behaviors or significant social impairments in evidence? It seems to me this off the cuff remark was someone who, at best, was thinking out loud and didn't have the "should I say that out loud" filter quite on tight enough. I've certainly been there, so I can't be too critical on that front. At worst, it is a reflection of the pathologizing of people who struggle.
And interestingly, the new DSM seems to, essentially, fudge together autistic diagnoses with one broad "Autistic Spectrum Disorder" brand with modifiers as to the need for more or less support, more or less impairment etc. which might be valuable for kids who are lower functioning, but I'm not so sure that it always matters for the very high functioning kids.
I saw a self referred law student a while back, certain he had Asperger's. I didn't bother the schpiel informing him that the DSM had done away with that diagnosis, not wanting to pop any bubbles. He was smart, doing well in school, was living with his girlfriend in a relationship that he described as working well. He admitted to worrying a lot. I suggested he might have anxiety issues. He was uninterested and went for another opinion and, no surprise, received a diagnosis of Asperger's. NIMH states that almost 30% of adults will meet diagnostic criteria for anxiety in the course of their life. This is in comparison with 2.3% of adults who will meet diagnostic criteria for autism, and that's according to the highest rate recorded, which could well be an over estimate of the incidence. Didn't we all learn that "when you hear hooves think horses not zebras" because horses are much more commonly found than are zebras? I thought that was standard diagnostic practice. Look at what's more likely, not what's trendy or intriguing.
With the young man whose psychiatrist suggested autism testing, maybe it was the lack of effectiveness of the anxiety/anti-depression medications that were being prescribed. Not every kid responds so well, or so easily to medications. Why suggest autism testing and send mom into what seems an unnecessary tizzy when there are many other more obvious ways to understand his presentation? Why not look at the issues facing this guy, his strengths, his weaknesses, his family dynamics? It seems to me the answers are not to be found in finding (or is it creating?) an autism diagnosis for this kid.
I'm not opposed to testing, nor am I opposed to diagnoses. I refer for autism testing all the time and value my colleagues' input into how to best understand some kids. Yet I'm also in some agreement with the new DSM trend towards describing individual issues and challenges. But I'm becoming more interested in solving problems. I'm not at all sure chasing after a diagnosis is always the smartest move.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)