Context for this: I spend substantial amount of time reflecting upon aspects of myself & actions, to try & better understand myself to regulate potentially problematic features. Some of communication style seems to be due to ADHD.
https://twitter.com/Richard_Autism/status/1441693580947558400
As I have not engaged much ADHD, & awaiting to be assessed for ADHD, there are potentially parts of myself I lack appreciation of how are viewed by others. Which then makes me on how we go about identifying aspects of persons.
So, yes, I accept that various diagnoses can be used to increase understanding for persons. Like how PDA pathologises different features to autism, hence why some persons find a PDA diagnosis better explains them than autism does.
The current approach of iterative, almost sequential assessment for different diagnostic categories holds persons back, & creates barriers to persons understanding themselves. Surely, we can do better than iterative, sequential assessment model practiced?
I already agree that there is a good case to stop using Disorder, & to abandon them. I think this is a few decades long cultural shift.
More recently, over the last 2 - 3 weeks, I have been increasingly thinking a transdiagnostic approach is probably best approach to mapping features typically associated with Disorders.
It makes sense, as approaches/ strategies tend to be issues/ symptom specific, not diagnoses specific. Surely, it makes sense to construct profiles for persons which are independent of categories?
Actually how a transdiagnostic approach should operate in practice? Should Disorders be used in a minority of cases to ensure "complex" cases receive adequate support?
I am still reflecting on. I think how we go about mapping features typically associated with Disorders & supporting persons, is not an easy answer. Any practiced has winners & loosers/ benefits & drawbacks.
I mean actual specifics of how a transdiagnostic approach would work, like what exact profiles of a person would actually be mapped in assessments, like sensory, to communication styles?
I need to be clear, it is not even my own experience with engaging with other diagnostic constructs. Reflecting on impact of giving persons few, several, dozen, or more diagnoses.
How is it a good thing to give persons so many constructs, with their own stigma, cultural misrepresentations & (manipulative) industries?
Presently I am thinking the current approach to mental health, relying on Disorders is simply not good enough, that its benefits do not outweigh its negatives. There do appear to better ways to approach mapping & supporting features associated with Disorders.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
