Thread by @Richard_Autism

Something, I can take from the last few days, are positive messages I am receiving about my PDA work.

It means a lot, I am grateful to receive it.

My work might be contributing to ripples within vulnerable persons of the "PDA Profile of ASD" community. I empathise & have sympathy for.

I mainly do my PDA work to protect vulnerable persons from the seemingly many bold (my view erroneous & unethical) claims surrounding PDA.

Before this is taken out of context, from my perspective the harm is being done by prominent "PDA Profile of ASD" advocates, it seems to be routed in how they are pushing many bold (& in my view erroneous/ unethical) claims.

https://twitter.com/ChloeSApter/status/1610782880581443587

It is the main reason why I am so critical of how of "PDA Profile of ASD" is being propagated & aggressively pushed by some parties.

Broader context is do no harm, it is a reason why ethical one should be making balanced & accurate information about PDA. Partly why likes of @NICEComms @rcpsych @BPSOfficial @ArvidNK equally respected divergent opinion on PDA to prevent a "PDA" community prematurely forming.

I have been arguing for at least 15 months there should not a PDA community, if people were acting ethically on the topic of PDA.
researchgate.net/publication/35…

Likewise, I have argued there seems to be a community of practice on "PDA Profile of ASD" which has prematurely formed for at least 3 years:
researchgate.net/publication/33…

https://twitter.com/Richard_Autism/status/1610781658084433921

An indicator "PDA Profile of ASD" community of practice has its own ideology & terminology, which is different from accepted autism understandings. Two below images are asking if two aspects of "PDA Profile of ASD" discourse should be used to diagnose autistic persons.

The point is, that outside of "PDA Profile of ASD" community of practice, it seems those two aspects of "PDA Profile of ASD" should NOT be used to diagnose autistic persons. Indicates "PDA Profile of ASD" community of practice has constructed its own reality/ version of autism.

This kind of thing is again easy to predict if one stops to consider it.

What would happen if we convince ourselves all these non-autism features ARE autism features, while aggressively pushing those views on desperate vulnerable persons looking an explanation & support?

Oh wait, all of sudden we have a community of practice where things like:
impulsivity
anxiety
harassment
blaming others
stalking
refusing to engage with autism
etc
are ALL now indicators a person is autistic.
While claiming there is "classic"/ "more straight-forward" autism.

Why would those vulnerable persons, being told the above stuff question that is wrong or mistaken, when they are desperate for an explanation & something which might provide support?
Many-most of them are unlikely to not question such things by "reputable" looking parties.

Next thing you know, many-most of these vulnerable persons are then actively involved campaigning efforts, highly motivated to take part in research samples. Interest in "PDA Profile of ASD" far outstrips its evidence. "PDA Profile of ASD" becomes a "culture-bound concept".

I can literally quote where those people have stated that situation with PDA in the PDA literature.

Present situation regarding PDA should be unsurprising to anyone.

It should not take a sociologist like @Allison66746425 or @milton_damian to predict a "PDA Profile of ASD" forming.

It is about showing empathy for vulnerable persons, considering the power they have over said vulnerable persons & considering other might be correct.

On that note, I am ending this thread.

@threadreaderapp please can you unroll?

Thank you in advance.

"However, it would seem regrettable if new syndromes were to be used in clinical practice without consideration of whether an established psychiatric diagnosis would have been appropriate, as this will create confusion for parents and others involved."
Garralda (2003).

Link to Garralda 2003 article above.
adc.bmj.com/content/88/7/5…

"This is important because the (hard won) validity of clinical language matters; to promote a presumptive nosological label as a proxy lever to achieve a particular kind of treatment is, we suggest, turning nosology on its head and a recipe for clinical and research confusion."

Previous quote is from Green et al (2018b), link to the article below:
thelancet.com/journals/lanch…

"However, we do not think that achieving these goals requires use of additional unvalidated clinical terms, which might distract from joint efforts to understand the experience and complexity of autism spectrum disorder and the use of evidence-based interventions to address it."

Previous quote is also from Green et al (2018b).

So Garralda (2003) predicts PDA will cause confusion in 2003, so 20 years ago.

Garralda seems to be a clinician.
imperial.ac.uk/people/e.garra…

15 years later in 2018 seems some other clinicians, including @MAbsoud make similar predictions to Garralda (2003).

Image below shows academic points of contact for authors of Green et al (2018b).

Which supports the point I am making the present situation regarding a premature "PDA Profile of ASD" community of practice forming is predictable to prominent "PDA Profile of ASD" proponents, seems valid. It says a lot about said parties that they seemingly have not.

https://twitter.com/ChloeSApter/status/1610782880581443587

Either way it is spun by prominent "PDA Profile of ASD" proponents, present PDA situation was predicted 20 years ago. PDA has been controversial & consistently challenged since 2002...

... There is little to no excuse for not actively considering the prediction made by Garralda 2003 & Green et al 2018b; then attempting to make a robust ethical case for what they are doing.

On that note.

@threadreaderapp please can you unroll?

Thank you in advance.