Well I was thinking about getting outside more when it's not raining. :) I imagine it wouldn't work as well in OR because of that. But I think you're right, I do think it's probably very individual -- but if we were just talking about teaching them a standardized set of job skills (and not any other individualized strategies), I would think outside jobs would be a better plan. But given the research I've done, it seems at least to me personally that learned optimism (cognitive therapy) likely has the best track record. Though my research into it as of yet is still not very deep.

"I think what it comes down to for me is...is it really a problem for autism/as to be considered a disorder...or is the real problem how people stigmatize disorders of the brain (and let's throw in sexual organs/sexuality because I see it hugely there too) "

I think it's important to remember that we're talking about categories of people here.

You and I may be autistic without being disordered. But some people who are autistic are disordered. In fact, they're the ones that stand out the most, that set the stereotypes, that are discussed in medical manuals and scientific studies, and lead the current public perception of autism. And many of them really do need that label, that treatment, that category and status in society.

As a general rule, I don't believe that much of society is stigmatizing you or me. I believe they're stigmatizing the 14yo heavily autistic kids who don't yet speak, periodically paint the walls with feces, and generally appear to be in another world akin to schizophrenics - and frankly, I think those kids are disordered too.

Most of society doesn't even know that you or I exist nor that we're autistic. Rather, they just see us as weird - odd - queer - eccentric. They simply don't have a mental category for "different, autistic, but not disordered".

I see it as one of my missions in life to teach them, (and us), about us.

I may not have experienced severe enough dyslexia to notice. I think I'd been diagnosed with it as a child, although I don't know if anyone would diagnose me with it now. I do still tend to read slowly. I remember when I was a kid seeing a therapist who would ask me to track the end of pencils with my eyes. In retrospect I think that was probably part of the diagnosis, rather than the therapy -- then I was given after-school therapy for a while where I was asked to do a bunch of physical tasks like a balance board or hitting a ball with a wood bat with colored bands (so the ball had to hit a particular color) to improve my hand-eye coordination and gross-motor skills.

my little one is always rubbing things on his face, but even more on his belly.

Oh the special noises. I've only been noticing that I do that recently.

What gets me is that people who have highly disturbing physical deformities get all the sympathy. Blind & Deaf people have tons of support.People with invisible disabilities are just not to be tolerated bacause bad behavior is clearly indicative of a bad person.I don't know how much flack I get from people whent I am trying my damndest not to go shooting off my mouth, but apparently me trying to be as inoffensive as possible is more offensive than just blowing up.

But yeah, Sunshine, you Totally Got It with the X-men analogy.Different is scary enough, the possiblilty that people like us have many characteristics that seem, to me anyway, to be superior to normal, that is to say, Above Average is Not to be Tolerated by the dominant paradigm..

"which makes me wonder if shamans weren't historically autistic? It would make sense. "

I'm very tuned to the shamanic paradigm. I consider myself a post-industrial shaman and have read and studied shamanism quite a bit.

I don't think that autism makes for a very good shaman as a general rule. I believe that what makes a shaman is trauma - experiences out of the norm that lead someone to think, see, and interact with the world in a different way. I think that childhood abuse is a much stronger predictor of shamanic ability in our current culture. And I believe that it's possible to manufacture trauma and therefor groom a normal person into being a shaman much like bees groom workers into being drones or queens.

In that sense, I think it's possible that autism can lead to a form of socially induced trauma, (bullying, lack of validation, lack of "belonging"). But since a large part of the shaman's role is interacting with the tribe, a total loner wouldn't generally be seen as a shaman, although a schizophrenic might.

Adding to TN's comments, specifically "non-disordered sadness (disordered sadness would be depression)"

I have disordered sadness: Depression.

Let's look at the DSM first, what is it?

"The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association, is the standard classification of mental disorders used by mental health professionals in the United States. It is intended to be applicable in a wide array of contexts and used by clinicians and researchers of many different orientations (e.g., biological, psychodynamic, cognitive, behavioral, interpersonal, family/systems). It also contains diagnostic codes (taken from ICD-9-CM) that can be used to satisfy record-keeping and reimbursement needs."

Source: www.dsmivtr.org/

It's from one group, the APA. It is for professionals. In the U.S.

Those diagnostic codes are used as shorthand for a group of symptoms, as it mentions the record-keeping and reimbursement. That's not just for professionals that diagnose, but also for medical care, health insurance.

An insurer won't cover anything for "teenager moping around the house". Or "fussy child flings vegetables". Or anything else like that. And there's NOTHING to treat. Because there is nothing identified to treat.

OMG, this is too funny not to mention...the TYPOS on their FAQ section...

"The DSM is a manual that contains a listing of psychiatric disorders and their corresponding diassgnostic codes."

Does that mean only an ass can diagnosis? Or that everyone is diagnosed as an ass?

"Diagnostic criteria have been included in the DSM because their provision has been shown to increase diagnostic agwreement."

So says Dr. Elmer Fudd, Ph.D.

Anyway, they have the perfect answer to the Depression on their FAQ page:

"For example, when a clinician making a referral uses the term “Major Depressive Disorder” to indicate the patient's diagnosis, he or she is communicating in three words a great deal of clinical information. One can expect that the patient's primary complaint is a sustained period of depressed mood or loss of interest in activities and that a number of other symptoms may occur as part of the depression, including sleep disturbances, changes in appetite or weight, low energy, difficulty concentrating, and very low self-esteem. The clinician should also be on the alert to look for suicidal ideas or plans because this feature is often present in patients with this diagnosis. Furthermore, use of the diagnostic term “Major Depressive Disorder” also indicates what NOT to expect. For example, using this term indicates the absence of significant manic periods now or in the past; otherwise, the clinician would have used the term Bipolar Disorder."

www.dsmivtr.org/2-1faqs.cfm

Other very important considerations from the FAQ page:

"Another important aspect of the DSM diagnostic system is that the diagnoses are described strictly in terms of patterns of symptoms that tend to cluster together; the symptoms can be observed by the clinician or reported by the patient or family members."

"Patients sharing the same diagnostic label do not necessarily have disturbances that share the same etiology nor would they necessarily respond to the same treatment. It is therefore critical to understand that the diagnostic terms and categories in the DSM represent only our current knowledge about how symptoms cluster together."

Yes, it seems just about everything can reach a "disorder" status:
www.psychiatryonline.com/resou...C.aspx

Laid out better with expanded subcategories via Wiki:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DSM-IV_Codes

It has to be of a certain level, though. It mentions eating and sleeping disorders. If you eat or sleep, or don't eat much or sleep much, does that mean you have a disorder?

I drink coffee, have consumed alcohol in the past, and smoke. Do I have those disorders? No. Because they are not pervasive. It actually lists that sleeplessness from caffeine ingestion is a "disorder".

Caffeine-related disorders

* Caffeine
o 292.89 -Induced anxiety disorder
o 292.89 -Induced sleep disorder
o 305.90 Intoxication
o 292.9 -Related disorder NOS

Check out alcohol...if you are intoxicated, you have a disorder! ;)

Alcohol-related disorders

* Alcohol
o 305.00 Abuse
o 303.90 Dependence
o 291.8 -Induced anxiety disorder
o 291.8 -Induced mood disorder
o 291.1 -Induced persisting amnestic disorder
o 291.2 -Induced persisting dementia
o 291.5 -Induced psychotic disorder, with delusions
o 291.3 -Induced psychotic disorder, with hallucinations
o 291.8 -Induced sexual dysfunction
o 291.8 -Induced sleep disorder
o 303.00 Intoxication
o 291.0 Intoxication delirium
o 291.9 -Related disorder NOS
o 291.8 Withdrawal
o 291.0 Withdrawal delirium

The DSM states again and again that it's not something for laymen:

"Cautions

The DSM-IV-TR states that, because it is produced for the completion of Federal legislative mandates, its use by people without clinical training can lead to inappropriate application of its contents. Appropriate use of the diagnostic criteria is said to require extensive clinical training, and its contents “cannot simply be applied in a cookbook fashion”.[14] The APA notes that diagnostic labels are primarily for use as a “convenient shorthand” among professionals. The DSM advises that laypersons should consult the DSM only to obtain information, not to make diagnoses, and that people who may have a mental disorder should be referred to psychiatric counseling or treatment. Further, people sharing the same diagnosis/label may not have the same etiology (cause) or require the same treatment; the DSM contains no information regarding treatment or cause for this reason. The range of the DSM represents an extensive scope of psychiatric and psychological issues, and it is not exclusive to what one may consider “illnesses”."

Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diag..._Disorders

Be sure to read the Criticism section at the above link. Yup, there are connections to Big Pharma. Yup, there is incomplete agreement from the Scientific and Political community. Not to mention the Religious community.

"We want to sell more drugs, so make more things a problem so we can treat them"

"We have proof, or no proof"

"Our voters don't like that, so it must be a disorder"

"Our holy book says it's a sin, so it must be a disorder"

Yes, a lot IS political, there ARE outside influences and pressures.

I frankly don't care what it's called. I really don't. What I care about is that there are other people that may be somewhat like me. That I can identify with in some way, or that can identify with me in some way. That we have some kind of name that we can use that indicates we may be similar in some fashion.