Hmmm. I see your point. Music or TV is my noise of choice, too--I need varying, unpredictable sounds around me in order to allow me to focus (illogical as that sounds), but I suppose that a ticking clock could do the same thing for some folks.
To me it sounds entirely logical as I do exactly the same thing - I will also have the same song on a loop for weeks, annoys my husband lol If I don't watch TV for an hour or two a day my brain exhausts me as it never switches off.
I play (I almost said "watch", but I'm not watching, it's just on) the same TV show or movie over and over and over, but sadly I don't know of a video device that loops--I have to restart it myself. ChickenFreak
MythTV does - its a Linux based media unit You create a playlist and it plays it over and over. My kids found the function a few weeks ago.
All I meant was that the way medical experts view autism and the way laymen view autism is very different. A doctor would probably tend to see autism as a specific "disease" with "symptoms." As a layperson, I'm not concerned with whether an autistic person meets some kind of criteria or doesn't; if a person tells me he/she is autistic, I will be interested in autism only insofar as it effects our relationship. Likewise, if I meet a person and get to know him or her over a long period of time, I may conclude spontaneously that he/she probably has autism. My diagnostic criteria will not be the same as a doctor's criteria, although given the amount of contact I have had with autistic individuals, I may very well be right. The main thing, however, is that clinical data is of limited value in writing a book unless your subject matter is exclusively about autism in the medical sense. Rather, the OP seems interested in how an autistic individual fits into society, which is a very different question from how he/she fits into biology, psychology, or any other field of medicine. At the moment, I am writing a story in which one of the characters has polio. I could get bogged down on all of the virology and biological data...but that's not really what I want to know. The point of my character having polio is to talk about the way society treats him as a result of the condition and what kind of self-image results on the part of the character. How the doctors see him is pretty irrelevant except to say that he is little more than a "case-study" to them. As for the "schizoid" personality, that is entirely irrelevant in discussing autism. But yes, I know the definition of "schizoid" and those I know who have autism don't meet it. Withdrawal from social relationships, a tendency toward solitary activity, and an apparent emotional coldness may seem to resemble autism on the surface, but the two conditions are not comparable at a closer glance. The people I know who have autism WANT to have social relationships and even seek them out. I have never met a person with autism who could be described as "solitary". People with autism just tend not to know how to act appropriately in social contexts. One of the biggest issues is with personal space, but others include inability to understand what topics should or shouldn't be discussed in a certain venue.
Firstly, I post as myself here as my website is my name, so with that being said, I've work in psychology for just about 22 years. In that time, during the early part of my career, I worked exclusively with autistic clients. Since then, the description hasn't changed. Let's take a look: The bolded term "qualitative impairment" is the key term here and it means severe impairment without alternate explanation. The condition needs to come from within and not be explained by abuse, teasing, being the odd person, and so on. Also, we're talking about odd behavior here: (a) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus I love to exercise and that's "abnormal" for many people as is my interest in writing and so on. However, they're all "functional" behaviors that might be eccentric, but not pointless. If some person likes to read comics twelve hours a day, it's abnormal, but he's still doing something functional because he's reading, learning stories, generations topics to talk about, enjoying art, ect. An abnormal interest that not function, doesn't add quality of life, is say staring at a doorknob for twelve hours a day. As an example, I once knew a semi-recovered autistic woman who enjoyed the connection between lint and geography. That kind of thig is well out of the range of normal little habits. Almost every mental problem has a normal range analogue like sadness is a tiny version of depression. So, you have to watch confusing something like shyness, or not liking people, with the severe range that's autism. Asperger's has all the same restrictions that autism does only people with this mysterious problem tend to be more verbal. They're famous for saying things like, "My couch reminds me more of my grandmother, than my grandmother does," or "My roller skates remind me of a Barbi, but my Barbi doesn't remind me of a Barbi." Both are classic criteria and I've heard the exact quotes I gave. Meanwhile, there's a comedy show on American TV called Community where one character has "Asperger's" and he's like a Vulcan more than anything, and that's not how it works.
So, if I tell you I'm a super sexy genius with telepathic powers and caused by a positive form of brain cancer, will you treat me as if that's true, or will you call BS? To me, that attitude is akin to racism. It's like writing that all people in say the black community have their own private spear collection and eat only chicken. If you wrote that you'd hear about it from the black community ASAP. Meanwhile, autistic people are defenseless and can't complain about uninformed and stupid portrayals of them. If you're writing about real people you don't just make up whatever crap happens to be in your head, especially when they're a population who can't defend themselves. They meet it almost exactly, but autism has unknown causes while a schizoid personality does. That's why it's extremely important to not jump to the conclusion that someone is autistic.
In this order: 1) No; but I would probably treat you a certain way as a result of your saying that. Likewise, if a person told me they had autism, while I would try my utmost not to allow that to effect my judgment of the person, this fact would no doubt make me see their behavior and speech in a certain light. I might come to the conclusion that they don't seem autistic, but overwhelmingly it would not really be my business. However, I think that as a layperson focused on having a meaningful, longterm relationship with the person as opposed to seeing them for a few hours each month or year for the purposes of evaluating their health, I would naturally have a different view of the person than would a doctor or psychiatrist. Since the OP does not appear to be writing about the medical aspects of autism, I would think that information about autism from a less scientific point of view--for instance, personal stories of individuals who have autism--would probably be more useful than the rather technical and rather pedantic diagnostic criteria you suggest. 2) Where the hell do you get off comparing what I have said with racism in any way, shape, or form? In the first place, I have a brother who is severely autistic. I am not making these judgments from a lack of experience. But in any case, I was not stating AT ALL that autistic individuals have some kind of stereotypical symptoms. In fact that's exactly what YOU'RE DOING!!!!!!!! I'm stating the precise opposite: individuals with autism are INDIVIDUALS--no two are alike. It would be nice if you, oh, I don't know, actually read and understood my statements before making such a ridiculous accusation. 3) Who said anything about making crap up? Just because I don't think scientific data would be all that helpful in writing this novel doesn't mean I think the OP should not get outside information to help him/her. I just think he/she should get different information than what you suggest. Personal accounts from people who have been diagnosed with autism as well as accounts by persons who have had a lot of experience working with and interacting with autistic individuals would be exceptionally useful for a project like this, and the more the better. 4) Frankly, if you disagree with me, that is your problem. But there is no reason to presume that you are the only person who knows anything about autism. I have seen other research forums in which you do the exact same thing--you hijack the forum as though every question was posed to you. Meanwhile, if anyone posts a dissenting opinion, you immediately counter whether or not the opposing opinion is well-supported or not. This is not only irritatingly condescending, it is also a waste of time. The OP is never interested in dumb feuds; he/she is interested in getting actual help on the topic. So I propose you stop discounting what I have to say, keep in mind that I and the others who post on these forums probably have a lot of experience with the topic or we would not be answering, and acknowledge that it is really up to the writer to decide what information is credible and what is not. This is not the time or place to argue, and I think I will go off and stop wasting my time now; that is, until you post something else that declares that I am a racist or that every single thing I have ever said is wrong.
A better summation would be "Allegro van Kiddo does not actually listen to what others have to say and thinks this virtue makes him better than everybody else; however, I'm done arguing for the present because I have said all I needed to say." I hope that's very clear. I also hope it's very clear that arbitrarily throwing around labels like "racist" is a very bad idea, the kind that will not earn you much respect in any community at all, much less one that is trying to understand the nature of autism.
It seems to me that you're arguing that only severe autism counts as autism, and that people who once fit the diagnostic criteria for severe autism but have learned to overcome their issues, have "recovered" from autism and are no longer autistic. As I see it, those people are indeed autistic, they're just higher functioning than they used to be. I don't see autism as something completely disabling, I see it as a spectrum. And, well, it is referred to as a spectrum disorder, so I don't think I'm alone in that view. By my definition, you don't "recover" from autism, you cope with it. By your definition, once you've coped with it, you're no longer autistic, you've "recovered." I don't know how much of our disagreement is fundamental, and how much is purely terminology. ChickenFreak
On top of everything else I have ME/Fibromyalgia/CFs so excuse me if I am not overly fond of psychologists diagnostic criteria. I've spent the past 13 years of my life justifying myself to people because of mistakes they made over that and still continue to do so. Not to mention if I had listened to one experienced psychologist I'd have let my daughter be abused. Also not sure why your 22 years experience allows you to discount the 30 years plus psychologist that is my source of diagnosis. Fact is psychology tends only to be as good as the time and society it is discussed in, generally psychologists take longer to catch on than the rest of the population.
Hey guys. I really appreciate all the help and advice that you'd given to me, and I have decided to change my character, mainly because I don't know enough, and won't guess. I still plan to learn more though, and will remember what you've told me. So thanks again. On a side note, I didn't intend for this thread to become a battleground.
Fight! Fight! Fight! Ahem. Sorry. Just joking. You could start with something simpler, like ADHD. Or, actually, if you don't understand shyness, that alone could be a really interesting thing to explore and depict. I think I have ADHD _and_ shyness, which is something of an annoyance ChickenFreak
I really hope this discussion didn't deter you from choosing to make an autistic character. I actually still think it's a fantastic idea. The forum only became a battleground because the issue of autism is so interesting, and I think readers would really like to read about an autistic character. But, of course, it is always the writer's decision.
but wait a minute. as recent as january 26, 2011, the american psychiatric association has come up with a possible revision for the autism disorder: did you miss this? or are you one of those people so hung up on the good ol' days you just refuse to change? quit being a condescending prick (and don't you dare bring up the topic of racism in front of me). if you don't respect people enough that you view them as something to pity as opposed to real people with their own thoughts and feelings, you have absolutely no right to speak on their behalf. i could only find a couple links on such a short notice (click here and here), but autistics can "defend" themselves. oddly enough, though, the ones who do are ALWAYS dismissed as "not autistic enough," making their opinion less valid than the opinion of someone who got their degree in psychology 22+ years ago. as for obnoxious tone and your self-righteousness, all it does is remind me of my experience with a psychologist when i was in eighth grade. she asked questions, i answered. when she misinterpreted everything i said and i didn't even know what to say anymore, she was so sure all her experience with "troubled" kids has turned her into a mind-reader who knew exactly what went on in my head. end result? i was labeled a delinquent and had detention for the whole week. some people just should never consider a career as a psychologist, but i guess these are the same people who never listen anyway. i pity the fool who ends up consulting them.
Hey Earphone -- I just had a look at this thread, and I thought I should pipe in about something. There's definitely a danger in creative writing like this to worry too much about "learning more" before you get the groundwork laid out. Obviously autism is a sensitive issue and you need to have some working knowledge of it to flesh out a realistic character. But I don't think it's a good idea to go forward with a fear of offending people. You need to think about Chiara, and what kind of person she is before anything else. You need to come back to your own life experience and draw on that before you do any kind of research. Now there is some sense to being well-informed and sensitive, but I don't like the idea of paying so much careful attention to all the little details of autism that you can no longer create the character you wanted to create. So you might be stepping on a few toes and portraying autism in a way that some people don't entirely approve of. So what? That kind of approach can only make the work more vital and interesting. I'm not suggesting that you be insensitive, but don't let a raging debate about the nature of autism define your character. There's no way you can please everybody, so just make sure what your writing is fundamentally real. Offending people can be a good thing, if you do it the right way. I have part of this in my signature, but here's what Philip K. Dick said when he was asked about the most important quality for a writer to have: And that's the key there -- just make sure it's not garbage. You're bound to have a lot of garbage in your first draft, and that's when awareness of the issues is going to start becoming important. Weed out the garbage as you go, and definitely don't just take something out because it offends people. Don't let other people define your characters for you. Stay true to yourself. Maintain your sense of critical judgment, and keep up the good attitude of learning what you're writing about. But don't put "not offending anyone" on your list of things to do. The end result will just be bad writing.
