When it comes to autism, Grandin
argues we're paying too much attention to labels -- and not enough to
individuals
Excerpted from "The Autistic Brain: Thinking Across the Spectrum."
This piece was written prior to the publication of the new DSM-5, but Grandin
anticipated much of the thinking in the new edition.
I
had my eye on Jack. He was ten years old, and he had taken only three skiing
lessons in his life. I was in high school, and I’d been taking skiing lessons
for three years. Yet I would watch Jack pass me on the slope, and I would see
him execute these gorgeous stem christie turns, and, man, he could handle the
four-foot ski jump with no problem. Meanwhile, I was still working my way up to
one good christie, and every single time I tried the ski jump, I fell,
until I was scared to use it.
What
was so special about Jack?
Nothing,
it turns out. What was so special, instead, was me — me and my autism. The
connection between my autism and my poor athletic performance is pretty obvious
in retrospect. At the time, though, I didn’t see it. Not until I was in my
forties and I had the brain scan showing that my cerebellum — the part of the
brain that helps control motor coordination — is 20 percent smaller than normal
did I put two and two together. Now it all made sense! I couldn’t keep my skis
together without falling because —
Because
what? Because I’m autistic? Or because I have a small cerebellum?
Both
answers are correct. Which, however, is more useful? That depends on what you
want to know. If you’re looking for a label, something that will help you
understand who I am in a general sense, then “because I’m autistic” is probably
good enough. But if you’re looking for how I got that way specifically — if
you’re looking for the biological source of the symptom — then the better
answer is definitely “because I have a small cerebellum.”
The
difference is important. It’s the difference between a diagnosis and a cause.
My
research on subtypes of sensory problems got me thinking about the limitations
of labels. I realized that two different labels — underresponsive to sensory
input, and overresponsive to sensory input — can describe the same experience: too
much information! The labels might be useful, but, as in the skiing
example, their usefulness depends on what you want to know. Do you want to know
what the behavior looks like from the outside? Or do you want to know what the
experience feels like from the inside? Do you want a description for a set of
symptoms — a diagnosis? Or do you want a source for a particular symptom — a
cause?
No comments:
Post a Comment
PLEASE ADD COMMENTS SO I CAN IMPROVE THE INFORMATION I AM SHARING ON THIS VERY IMPORTANT TOPIC.