Post by stephaniemi116 on Dec 4, 2012 20:17:07 GMT -5
In every generation, there is a way of colloquial speaking in which the majority of the society takes part. The 1960s preached anti-war; the 2000s the chit-chat of instant messaging. But as time changes, so does the consensus to which the era conforms. It seems like everyone nowadays has a social dysfunction that they have taken upon themselves to diagnose, instead of having a doctor break the news. Not only are people giving themselves their own P.H.D.s, doctors are also fueling the misdiagnoses by handing out labels like flyers on New York City corners. But when and where did this trend begin?
With the apparent “outbreak” of autism in the last few years, people have been seeking answers for themselves and their children in order to write off social abnormalities as something that they could not control, that was bred into them and that they can wear like a name tag. Autism is defined as neural development disorder characterized by impaired communication skills and repetitive ticks or behaviors. The problem with this definition is that when a parent hears about it, they immediately begin observing their child to see whether they fit the “autistic mold” so they can send them to a doctor to confirm the diagnosis. The idea is that if the symptoms are caught early, the label can follow closely behind, as can the special attention in schools and the pity for having to manage such a burden.
But the so-called symptoms are easily misinterpreted, as children often exhibit speech or other developmental delays commonly related to the spectrum during early years. The premature diagnosis is one of the reasons why the number of children on the spectrum has risen so quickly over the past few years. Speaking the rhetoric of autism has lead to a rise of people being diagnosed with the disorder, leaving some wondering if the concept of the spectrum is a hoax.
Not only is autism a victim of the new rhetoric, but other social dysfunctions such as ADD, OCD, and bipolar disorder are being thrown around in everyday speech as though they do not seriously plague our society. Quirks like having an especially hyper day or preferring things in some order beg the comment “I’m so ADD today!” and “I can’t help that I’m so OCD!” The 1950s were full of men with “frigid” wives in the same way that people who have mood swings today are bipolar. The rhetoric shifted, but the consensus followed along with the times.
Anti-diagnoses like these can have lasting effects on people who believe that these disorders are part of their lives. They fall so hard into the consensus that a change in characteristics of the disorders can send them into identity crises. For example, people diagnosed with Asperger’s, whether they truly have it or not, often feel relieved with their diagnosis because they find comfort in their “abnormalities”, but in recent years, psychologists have been debating whether Asperger’s truly is a branch of autism. These “Aspies” now reach an internal dilemma: are we still what we think we are?
According to them, yes. They stay true to their labels despite the change in the consensus, and will most likely continue to watch their diagnoses crumble around them, so long as there are others like them to support their thinking. Speaking in the times may help people feel like they belong, but when the norms change, where does that leave those that were in the center of it all?
Therein lies the question: When does the consensus fall?
The answer? When people stop obsessively fitting in.
Word Count: 599
Wallace, Benjamin. "Is Everyone on the Autism Spectrum?" New York Magazine 28
Oct. 2012: n. pag. Print.
With the apparent “outbreak” of autism in the last few years, people have been seeking answers for themselves and their children in order to write off social abnormalities as something that they could not control, that was bred into them and that they can wear like a name tag. Autism is defined as neural development disorder characterized by impaired communication skills and repetitive ticks or behaviors. The problem with this definition is that when a parent hears about it, they immediately begin observing their child to see whether they fit the “autistic mold” so they can send them to a doctor to confirm the diagnosis. The idea is that if the symptoms are caught early, the label can follow closely behind, as can the special attention in schools and the pity for having to manage such a burden.
But the so-called symptoms are easily misinterpreted, as children often exhibit speech or other developmental delays commonly related to the spectrum during early years. The premature diagnosis is one of the reasons why the number of children on the spectrum has risen so quickly over the past few years. Speaking the rhetoric of autism has lead to a rise of people being diagnosed with the disorder, leaving some wondering if the concept of the spectrum is a hoax.
Not only is autism a victim of the new rhetoric, but other social dysfunctions such as ADD, OCD, and bipolar disorder are being thrown around in everyday speech as though they do not seriously plague our society. Quirks like having an especially hyper day or preferring things in some order beg the comment “I’m so ADD today!” and “I can’t help that I’m so OCD!” The 1950s were full of men with “frigid” wives in the same way that people who have mood swings today are bipolar. The rhetoric shifted, but the consensus followed along with the times.
Anti-diagnoses like these can have lasting effects on people who believe that these disorders are part of their lives. They fall so hard into the consensus that a change in characteristics of the disorders can send them into identity crises. For example, people diagnosed with Asperger’s, whether they truly have it or not, often feel relieved with their diagnosis because they find comfort in their “abnormalities”, but in recent years, psychologists have been debating whether Asperger’s truly is a branch of autism. These “Aspies” now reach an internal dilemma: are we still what we think we are?
According to them, yes. They stay true to their labels despite the change in the consensus, and will most likely continue to watch their diagnoses crumble around them, so long as there are others like them to support their thinking. Speaking in the times may help people feel like they belong, but when the norms change, where does that leave those that were in the center of it all?
Therein lies the question: When does the consensus fall?
The answer? When people stop obsessively fitting in.
Word Count: 599
Wallace, Benjamin. "Is Everyone on the Autism Spectrum?" New York Magazine 28
Oct. 2012: n. pag. Print.