04-19-2007, 09:17 PM
04-19-2007, 09:34 PM
BUT... here's what another expert said:
Schizophrenia, which affects a half-percent of the U.S. population, is a mental illness that can be difficult to diagnose at its onset, Ochberg said. Those grappling with the early stages may become defensive as they recognize their own mental faculties are failing.
"Along the way it blunts your instinct for social behavior so you look a little like an autistic or Asperger's person," he said.
There's nothing I've read yet that sounds remotely conclusive on Cho vis-a-vis Asperger's or Autism. Killing 32 people sounds a hell of a lot more like Schizophrenia...
Schizophrenia, which affects a half-percent of the U.S. population, is a mental illness that can be difficult to diagnose at its onset, Ochberg said. Those grappling with the early stages may become defensive as they recognize their own mental faculties are failing.
"Along the way it blunts your instinct for social behavior so you look a little like an autistic or Asperger's person," he said.
There's nothing I've read yet that sounds remotely conclusive on Cho vis-a-vis Asperger's or Autism. Killing 32 people sounds a hell of a lot more like Schizophrenia...
04-19-2007, 09:51 PM
CNN is talking to a forensic psychiatrist who just said Cho was classic paranoid psychotic. She is completely dismissing all other sensationalized theories. NO, this is not a 'copy cat" killing. NO, this is not a result of the years of teasing and bullying. She made absolutely no reference to anything in the Autistic Spectrum.
She's really fascinating. She talks about the "You made me do this" that Cho repeated so many times -- all the references to "YOU" ... she says that the "you" is called a "paranoid pseudo-community" that psychotic paranoids create in their minds -- it consists, she says, of every person who ever teased or ridiculed him, plus everyone he IMAGINED ever teased him. It's the classic "You're all against me!" thing.
This makes me wonder why AutismLink and Autism Center of Pittsburgh is so quick to jump out in front and label Cho AS... are they just using him to promote "intervention" (CURE! CURE! CURE!)?
She's really fascinating. She talks about the "You made me do this" that Cho repeated so many times -- all the references to "YOU" ... she says that the "you" is called a "paranoid pseudo-community" that psychotic paranoids create in their minds -- it consists, she says, of every person who ever teased or ridiculed him, plus everyone he IMAGINED ever teased him. It's the classic "You're all against me!" thing.
This makes me wonder why AutismLink and Autism Center of Pittsburgh is so quick to jump out in front and label Cho AS... are they just using him to promote "intervention" (CURE! CURE! CURE!)?
04-19-2007, 11:34 PM
The bipolar label always gets thrown around, but I've read and heard nothing in the guy's history to suggest a pattern of manic episodes.
I can see why they might think schizophrenia, since he's at the age Schizophrenia tends to emerge, and early stages of schizophrenia often feature flat affect and social withdrawal (which resembles AS) and Schizophrenia can bring on the kind of psychotic break we just saw.
None of these conditions preclude the others. But I agree the principle features are of paranoid psychosis. I mean, it's pretty clear:
Paranoid psychosis : psychotic behavior accompanied by persecutory or grandiose delusions with few other signs of personality or thought disturbance.
Paranoid Personality Disorder
American Description
Diagnostic Criteria
1. A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by four (or more) of the following:
1. suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her
2. is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates
3. is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
4. reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events
5. persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights
6. perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack
7. has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner
2. Does not occur exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia, a Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features, or another Psychotic Disorder and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a general medical condition.
I can see why they might think schizophrenia, since he's at the age Schizophrenia tends to emerge, and early stages of schizophrenia often feature flat affect and social withdrawal (which resembles AS) and Schizophrenia can bring on the kind of psychotic break we just saw.
None of these conditions preclude the others. But I agree the principle features are of paranoid psychosis. I mean, it's pretty clear:
Paranoid psychosis : psychotic behavior accompanied by persecutory or grandiose delusions with few other signs of personality or thought disturbance.
Paranoid Personality Disorder
American Description
Diagnostic Criteria
1. A pervasive distrust and suspiciousness of others such that their motives are interpreted as malevolent, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by four (or more) of the following:
1. suspects, without sufficient basis, that others are exploiting, harming, or deceiving him or her
2. is preoccupied with unjustified doubts about the loyalty or trustworthiness of friends or associates
3. is reluctant to confide in others because of unwarranted fear that the information will be used maliciously against him or her
4. reads hidden demeaning or threatening meanings into benign remarks or events
5. persistently bears grudges, i.e., is unforgiving of insults, injuries, or slights
6. perceives attacks on his or her character or reputation that are not apparent to others and is quick to react angrily or to counterattack
7. has recurrent suspicions, without justification, regarding fidelity of spouse or sexual partner
2. Does not occur exclusively during the course of Schizophrenia, a Mood Disorder With Psychotic Features, or another Psychotic Disorder and is not due to the direct physiological effects of a general medical condition.
04-20-2007, 08:38 AM
Max the Bear Wrote:
BUT... here's what another expert said:
Schizophrenia, which affects a half-percent of the U.S. population, is a mental illness that can be difficult to diagnose at its onset, Ochberg said. Those grappling with the early stages may become defensive as they recognize their own mental faculties are failing.
"Along the way it blunts your instinct for social behavior so you look a little like an autistic or Asperger's person," he said.
There's nothing I've read yet that sounds remotely conclusive on Cho vis-a-vis Asperger's or Autism. Killing 32 people sounds a hell of a lot more like Schizophrenia...
Schizophrenia, which affects a half-percent of the U.S. population, is a mental illness that can be difficult to diagnose at its onset, Ochberg said. Those grappling with the early stages may become defensive as they recognize their own mental faculties are failing.
"Along the way it blunts your instinct for social behavior so you look a little like an autistic or Asperger's person," he said.
There's nothing I've read yet that sounds remotely conclusive on Cho vis-a-vis Asperger's or Autism. Killing 32 people sounds a hell of a lot more like Schizophrenia...
That's what I was going to say.
Perhaps he had "both things" going on, a bit autistic as a child, but began to develop symptoms of Schizophrenia in adolescence...
I knew a kid in high school, who was actually in our program for emotional support, who "everyone was afraid of" and who "scared others" for no good reason... well I later found out that he had some form of Schizophrenia, although it was made worse by his drug abuse.
There seems to be a "type" of Schizophrenia that might be mild enough for others not to see it as such, but manifests itself nonetheless and causes irrational paranoid tendencies. Certainly Cho fits the label of "paranoiac," all too well.
04-20-2007, 08:40 AM
Max the Bear Wrote:
CNN is talking to a forensic psychiatrist who just said Cho was classic paranoid psychotic. She is completely dismissing all other sensationalized theories. NO, this is not a 'copy cat" killing. NO, this is not a result of the years of teasing and bullying. She made absolutely no reference to anything in the Autistic Spectrum.
She's really fascinating. She talks about the "You made me do this" that Cho repeated so many times -- all the references to "YOU" ... she says that the "you" is called a "paranoid pseudo-community" that psychotic paranoids create in their minds -- it consists, she says, of every person who ever teased or ridiculed him, plus everyone he IMAGINED ever teased him. It's the classic "You're all against me!" thing.
This makes me wonder why AutismLink and Autism Center of Pittsburgh is so quick to jump out in front and label Cho AS... are they just using him to promote "intervention" (CURE! CURE! CURE!)?
She's really fascinating. She talks about the "You made me do this" that Cho repeated so many times -- all the references to "YOU" ... she says that the "you" is called a "paranoid pseudo-community" that psychotic paranoids create in their minds -- it consists, she says, of every person who ever teased or ridiculed him, plus everyone he IMAGINED ever teased him. It's the classic "You're all against me!" thing.
This makes me wonder why AutismLink and Autism Center of Pittsburgh is so quick to jump out in front and label Cho AS... are they just using him to promote "intervention" (CURE! CURE! CURE!)?
I'm not sure, but I'm very bothered by all this. Perhaps I should avoid official diagnosis after all...
04-20-2007, 08:42 AM
Wm Wrote:
Hello,
Wow, this worries me profusely on several levels. First of, alleging that Cho had autism is bad enough. Secondly, implying that without early intervention autistic children can turn into a person like Cho is horrifying to me. Also, I can not fathom that they would use such a horrible incident to trumpet their cause.
Will
Wow, this worries me profusely on several levels. First of, alleging that Cho had autism is bad enough. Secondly, implying that without early intervention autistic children can turn into a person like Cho is horrifying to me. Also, I can not fathom that they would use such a horrible incident to trumpet their cause.
Will
Why would you worry about such things? You're not a real Aspie as your profile states, as you only have a few aspects of Asperger's, and it's really "just ADD" that defines your neurodiversity.
04-20-2007, 08:44 AM
mick Wrote:
sarahjoke Wrote:
Wm Wrote:
implying that without early intervention autistic children can turn into a person like Cho is horrifying to me.
Yikes... grab your torch and pitch fork... I am SO not getting a diagnosis...
all of a sudden willful under-achiever doesn't sound so bad.
Oh, LOLski's... I agree... LOLski's again 
04-24-2007, 07:38 AM
SavedbyGod Wrote:
This website is for the sick, seeking freedom, is it not?
After reading the above, I hope we'll all be Saved by the Ban Button...
04-24-2007, 07:44 AM
rossco Wrote:
Saying "You are a good person you should believe in us. We have nice, wholesome values....of course if you don't you will never get into heaven when you die and you will spend an eternity burning in a hell of nightmare proprtions"
I was born and raised Catholic.
The above so colorfully explains the ludicrous "in you follow the clubhouse rules, you'll be saved", quite well. And it's certainly one reason I'm not much of a practicing Catholic, anymore.
04-26-2007, 09:33 AM
DogBrain Wrote:
Batman55 Wrote:
rossco Wrote:
Saying "You are a good person you should believe in us. We have nice, wholesome values....of course if you don't you will never get into heaven when you die and you will spend an eternity burning in a hell of nightmare proprtions"
I was born and raised Catholic.
The above so colorfully explains the ludicrous "in you follow the clubhouse rules, you'll be saved", quite well. And it's certainly one reason I'm not much of a practicing Catholic, anymore.
Neither Rome nor my own Church, the Orthodox Church, is a hardcore stickler to that "believe or be damned" attitude of Protestantism. Rome has the doctrine of "invincible ignorance"--if ones life circumstances simply do not permit one to accept Christ, due to abuse, upbringing, etc., then a merciful God would not be a legalistic git about it. Orthodoxy, being less legalistic than Rome, says things like "While I can say with some certainty who is in the Church, I cannot say with any certainty who is not."
I guess I haven't read enough about any of these things to state my opinion, in the first place.
I'm always left feeling like someone who lacks adequate knowledge about the very things I talk about in my posts, after reading "detailed re-clarifications" like the above by DogBrain.
I was under the impression that the Roman Catholic faith was quite strict about people in the faith following the tenets/rules and so on, or so I have been led to believe. I was UNDOUBTEDLY taught these things in a very binary way (mortal sins on your soul, poor relationship with Jesus/God, all this leads you to Hell for eternity) in grades 1-8, as I attended a Catholic school for all of that. I was taught to follow these "rules" literally, to follow the commandments and the many interpretations of the Commandments.. literally. And that, literally, you need to go to confession to get mortal sins off your soul or else you won't get into Heaven. I was "preached" all of these things.
Sorry for being "wrong." I am still under the impression that the Roman Catholic Church has a strong "believe or be damned" philosophy, although perhaps not as much as Evangelical Christians do. Am I fairly correct, now, at least?
04-26-2007, 10:31 AM
pikajedi3 Wrote:
SavedbyGod Wrote:
[quote=rossco]
All of us with varying degrees of Aspergers or Autism or other mental problems on this website are not ALL sick, just the ones that claim there is nothing wrong with them, do nothing to change, and demand that others stop reacting to their bad behaviors. I freely admit I needed help, and still do, and that I don't have all knowledge, and so should you and the other experts on this thread.
All of us with varying degrees of Aspergers or Autism or other mental problems on this website are not ALL sick, just the ones that claim there is nothing wrong with them, do nothing to change, and demand that others stop reacting to their bad behaviors. I freely admit I needed help, and still do, and that I don't have all knowledge, and so should you and the other experts on this thread.
there IS nothing wrong with me
i will do NOTHING to change
if,by bad behaviors,you mean things like Stimming,then yeah,i'l do that regardless of what anyone thinks
What about "being more empathetic and branching out within your community"? Doing community service because it's outside the self-interest zone? I think SavedbyGod may be suggesting that Aspergian self-interest (doing things you yourself are interested in, to the exclusion of the demands/expectations of those around you) is a bad behavior and that "it should be corrected."
That is just my guess of what he means.
I certainly won't do anything to change my Aspie-ness, in general. What's the point in "fighting your own identity." That's likely to cause more problems than it solves.
04-26-2007, 11:11 AM
Callista Wrote:
In fact, I'm less vulnerable to some sins simply because I'm autistic. I don't follow the crowd; I don't stab people in the back; gossip and slander are foreign to me. But there are some sins I'm more vulnerable to--pride, especially; laziness; bad management of time and resources, and failure to consider what effect my words might have on others. Everyone has bad habits and tendencies, as well as the responsibility to fight them. That doesn't change, no matter how your brain is wired.
I know you are not talking about me or anyone in particular here, but since I have not fought my malproductive Aspie tendencies (egomania; massive time-wasting/laziness; awful management of time and resources) am I now "supposed to feel bad?"
I thought such things were part of Asperger's, executive dysfunction and such things. Am I supposed to feel bad that I have these traits?
I don't really believe in fixing massive deficiencies; I believe Aspies should work toward their strengths. I feel the former approach is something that works well for NTs, that does not often work too well for Aspies.
Have I sinned by "giving in" to poor Aspie tendencies?
04-27-2007, 08:51 AM
Callista Wrote:
First, if you're working towards your strengths, it'll fill in your deficiencies eventually. That's a perfectly valid method.
Well I feel this is the approach which works best for Aspies. Usually are deficiencies are "in another dimension," meaning "so profound" you can't compare them to NT weaknesses... that's why my last therapist made me feel so bad... he was comparing me to normal kids, and the only neurodiverse thing he brought up was ADD. But he didn't seem to use ADD as an "understanding".. he almost seemed to use it as something against me. Or so I believed, in the end.
04-27-2007, 09:10 AM
Callista Wrote:
First, if you're working towards your strengths, it'll fill in your deficiencies eventually. That's a perfectly valid method.
Second, having Aspie traits means having tendencies that make it easier for you do do certain things--both good and not so good. Everyone, NT or not, has those tendencies; they just tend to point in different ways for Aspies. So that means, no, you shouldn't feel bad for having them.
Where natural tendencies become sins is when you give in to them without a fight. Sometimes those tendencies are so strong that there's very little you can do; that's when you have to ask for help. There's a difference between sin (a willful choice to do something you know is wrong) and making a mistake (messing up when you didn't intend to). You can help the first, but not the second.
Accidentally saying something that hurts someone: Mistake.
Saying something you know could hurt someone, because you can't be bothered to figure out something that won't: Sin.
Repeatedly and accidentally hurting people when you speak: Mistake.
Refusing to try to learn not to hurt people when you speak: Sin.
Anyway, that's my take on it, and that's where Christianity comes in... when sin is so inescapable, you need intercession if you want to interact with an absolutely perfect and sinless God.
Second, having Aspie traits means having tendencies that make it easier for you do do certain things--both good and not so good. Everyone, NT or not, has those tendencies; they just tend to point in different ways for Aspies. So that means, no, you shouldn't feel bad for having them.
Where natural tendencies become sins is when you give in to them without a fight. Sometimes those tendencies are so strong that there's very little you can do; that's when you have to ask for help. There's a difference between sin (a willful choice to do something you know is wrong) and making a mistake (messing up when you didn't intend to). You can help the first, but not the second.
Accidentally saying something that hurts someone: Mistake.
Saying something you know could hurt someone, because you can't be bothered to figure out something that won't: Sin.
Repeatedly and accidentally hurting people when you speak: Mistake.
Refusing to try to learn not to hurt people when you speak: Sin.
Anyway, that's my take on it, and that's where Christianity comes in... when sin is so inescapable, you need intercession if you want to interact with an absolutely perfect and sinless God.
Thankfully I can avoid all the narcissistic social aggression (a lot of it a sharp combination of nonverbal and "veiled" verbal... sarcasm supposedly, but it still bothers me) which is so common among NT males, because I'm not "part of that." I try to respect everyone as an individual, it seems this is more an AS approach than an NT approach as NTs don't seem to like folks who "separate themselves from the herd." I cannot respect NT folks who act snide around everyone and say negative things behind others back because it's "funny."
What I can't avoid is a continual urge to have set routines that hover around my self-interests with absolutely no regard for the expectations of others or even society, and these are non-functional routines that often interfere with what little motivational/executive function ability I have. I am bent on not losing them, despite obvious consequences.
Basically if I didn't have routines I wouldn't be able to control anything because my executive dysfunction is profound. I don't think this justifies wasting time and my unemployment (I have been unemployed for a "while") but if I don't have "set routines" there's really nothing else I have natural interest in (no socializing interest, no awareness of community, no desire to do what my family wants.) I just don't have any of that and to be honest I don't really want it.
I seem to want my routines despite what everyone else thinks. I think the only approach for me is to "cover up" these massive deficiencies by working to my strengths, doing things I like to do more than not... even if that's completely selfish. So that connects to the following:
The problem is in finding a genuine gift of mine that could be useful for making money or career-wise... I have not yet found even one. Therein lies the reason I am justified in saying that I have less intelligence than the average person. It's simply true.