Category Archives: Advocacy

#HighFunctioningMeans I Can Hold It Together Until Finally I Can’t

I had been doing quite well mental health-wise for a few weeks. I was in fact doing so well that I was beginning to doubt anything is wrong with me. Maybe I don’t have autism and borderline personality disorder after all.

Then on Thursday, I started feeling a bit cranky. I thought I was coming down with the flu again, as many people seem to get it a second time around. The self-doubts also became worse. Maybe I am too “high-functioning” to be in an institution, like so many parents of “low-functioning” autistic children used to say when I still had stronger opinions on autism than I do now. Maybe I fake the whole of my mental illness and developmental disability.

Then on Friday night all came crashing down. I had this huge autistic, borderline meltdown. I ran off the ward with just socks on my feet not realizing it was too cold and rainy for not wearing shoes. I was actually very confused. When a few people came by, I called out for help, but they went on chatting and, I thought, filming me. I have never been truly psychotic, but psychotic-like symptoms are common with both some forms of autism and borderline personality disorder.

Long story short, after melting down more on the ward once the staff found me, I spent the night in seclusion. I don’t advocate forced seclusion on anyone who isn’t physically harming anyone, and I wasn’t at the time, but I was confused enough that I could physically harm myself. I went into seclusion voluntarily.

About a week ago, some autistic bloggers launched a hashtag on Twitter: #HighFunctioningMeans. They meant to raise awareness of what it is like to be (seen as) high-functioning but still be autistic. I would like to contribute to this hashtag with this post.

I don’t have meltdowns everyday. Not anymore since going on a high dose of an antipsychotic. Before I went on medication, a day without meltdowns was indeed a rarity. Though I don’t become physically aggressive towards other people anymore, I have broken a huge amount of objects and become self-injurious. I in fact have done all the things parents of “low-functioning” autistics say their child does while in a meltdown, including as a teen becoming physically aggressive towards people. Now that I’m an adult, I still hand-bite, head-bang, throw objects, run into the streets, etc.

I am not proud of these behaviors. I wouldn’t medicate myself with heavy duty medications if I were. I do advocate finding better treatments for autistic irritability. The reason I write this, however, is to demonstrate that those who appear to be “high-functioning” on the Internet, or even those who appear “high-functioning” when you first meet them, can be severely disturbed when eventually they can’t hold it together anymore.

New Definition for ME/CFS: Exclude People with Mental Illness?

I follow a few blogs by people with chronic pain and fatigue conditions. On one of them, I came across the new Institute of Medicine (IOM) report on the diagnosis of chronic fatigue syndrome / myalgic encephalomyelitis (CFS/ME). In this report, the IOM propose a new name and criteria for CFS/ME. Most people in the CFS/ME community are mildly positive about the new proposed name, which is systemic exertion intolerance disease (SEID). They don’t like the emphasis on only exertion intolerance, but they consider it better than the dreaded term “fatigue”.

What remains controversial is the definition of SEID. It is defiined by the following core criteria:


  • A substantial reduction or impairment in the ability to engage in pre-illness levels of activities that persists for more than six months and is accompanied by fatigue—which is often profound—of new or definite onset, not the result of ongoing excessive exertion and not substantially alleviated by rest.

  • The worsening of patients’ symptoms after any type of exertion—such as physical, cognitive, or emotional stress—known as post-exertional malaise

  • Unrefreshing sleep.


In addition, a person must either experience cognitive impairment or orthostatic intolerance (symptoms being worse when in an upright position and lessening when lying down).

Problems with these new proposed definition include it ignoring common additonal symptoms, such as gastorintestinal symptoms, sensitivity to stimuli, pain, etc. I heard that these symptoms are included in an addendum to the IOM report somewhere.

What is further said to be problematic is that the definition is overly broad. Particularly, a psychiatric diagnosis does not preclude a diagnosis of SEID. Why this is a problem, I wondered, and it led to a heated debate.

I have written about this before, and got many defensive comments from ME/CFS sufferers saying that a physical illness requires different treamtent than a mental one. I agree, and I think (and just checked to make sure) I said that there is evidence that ME/CFS/SEID/whatever is physical in nature. The fact remains, however, that no blood test or whatever can diagnose it, so there is no way to distinguish it from somatization (psychological problems leading to physical symptoms).

I understand that there is a huge stigma associated with mental illness and that ME/CFS/SEID sufferers don’t want to face the same stigma. I also understand that bloggers cannot advocate for every single person or group of people in the world. Then again, the solution isn’t to purposefully exclude groups of people from the treatment or rights you advocate for.

So let’s get the facts straight. ME/CFS/SEID leads to profound physical symptoms. There is, however, no test to diagnose it, like a blood or urine test or whatever. No mental illness precludes people from falling ill with physical symptoms, though people with certain mental illnesses are more likely to suffer with physical symptoms. This does not mean these symptoms are due to the person’s mental illness. Furthermore, the current edition of the psychiatric manual, DSM-5, does not require a thorough physical examination and exclusion of all physical illnesses in order to diagnose somatization. Therefore, there is basically no way to differentiate an illness with physical symptoms for which there is no objective diagnostic tool, such as ME/CFS/SEID, from somatization. Whether ME/CFS/SEID is seen as mental or as physical, is largely an issue of politics.

Let me be clear that I side with the people who say that ME/CFS/SEID is physical, simply because it causes profound physical symptoms. Unless a person is faking their symptoms for external gain, there is no way to deny that they are real. But this is still a political opinion, not a medical one.

The reason people want ME/CFS/SEID to be seen as physical, is because of its treatment. Sufferers have often experienced the horrors of graded exercise and cognitive-behavioral therapy, which quite often do not work. At the same time, they seem to want people with mental illness, including those wiht comorbid physical symptoms, to get graded exercise and CBT. Fine with me if it works, but what if it doesn’t? Again, there is nothing in a mental illness that precludes its sufferers from falling ill with a physical illness too. Since there is no way to tell somatization and ME/CFS/SEID apart, you choose whether they’re both physical or mental, or you treat each person based on what works for them individually. I advocate the latter.

I have a diagnosed mental illness and largely unexplained physical symptoms, including exertion intolerance. My diagnosis for the symptoms that have been given a label, is irritable bowel syndrome, which similar to ME/CFS/SEID, is not diagnosable through an objective test. CBT has not worked for me. I tried exercise, though not a graded exercise therapy (GET) program, and it made my symptoms worse. Maybe if I did actual GET, it’d help. That would mean that, in my individual case, my symptoms (at least the ones responding to GET) are treatable with behavioral change. It would not even say whether my symptoms are physical or mental in nature, if there’s even such a distinction. However, for the sake of simplicity let’s assume that, for those for whom GET/CBT works, their symptoms are mental. That doesn’t mean that, for those whose symptoms are judged as mental, CBT/GET should work, and again, this is a political choice. It wouldn’t say anything about the next patient with my diagnosis and my symptoms. It certiinly wouldn’t say anything about a person with much more severe physical symptoms than mine who happens to have a diangosed mental illness. It’s complicated, but until an objective test for ME/CFS/SEID (and all other such illnesses) is found, that’s the fact we need to deal with.

Asperger’s as Mere Genius

Just came across a question on an Asperger’s page on Facebook. Someone asked whether we could name any historical genius without Asperger’s. Most people couldn’t, but this made me think of the validity of the whole Asperger’s concept in highly intelligent people, and whether it’s not just their genius that makes these people appear autistic.

If everyone who is a little quirky gets labeled with Asperger’s, it erodes the meaning of Asperger’s as a disability. I know that probably the people who can’t name a genius without Asperger’s, don’t see Asperger’s as a disability. That’s fine with me, but I for one do see it as a disability, having an Asperger’s diagnosis and clear difficulty functioning.

That’s in my opinion what it boils down to. Most geniuses can function quite well in life. They may have some trouble making friends with the average person, but that’s because they are highly intelligent and the average person isn’t. I did not start suspecting an autism spectrum disorder in myself until I found out that I couldn’t interact with my classmates at the high level high school either, while around 30% of them were gifted. In this sense, I feel the fewer labels the better, and I don’t see why you need a disability label if you’re going to see it as all positive. We already have the label of giftedness for that.

The reason I eventually sought an autism diagnosis, was not that I had a hard time making friends actually. It was because I was overwhelmed with even the simplest of daily tasks. If I didn’t have this many problems, I would be fine just being gifted. It wouldn’t mean I’d have absolutely no issues, because after all I’d still be a misfit among all average peers. But autism isn’t about fitting in or being able to make friends. If that were the case, many more people would qualify for the label of autism than is currently the case.

I was discussing this whole labeling thing with my parents yesterday. My father, who says I’m merely gifted and not autistic, said that Hans Asperger probably didn’t intend merely quirky kids to get his label. Rather, the kids he intended the label for were most likely unable to have any form of meaningful interaction and were completely preoccupied with their own special interest. I wouldn’t be an Aspie in this situation, but neither would anyone on the Facebook page. Now I don’t necessarily agree with this analysis of what Asperger intended his label to mean, and I don’t have his study at hand to look it up. However, DSM-5 backs up this portrayal of autism spectrum disorder in its description (and to some extent criteria) of ASD. I am not sure myself that I meet DSM-5 criteria for ASD, and I can see that many people diagnosable as Aspie under DSM-IV, don’t.

In my case, this has nothing to do with the criterion about the symptoms limiting people’s independent functioning, like many parents of severely autistic children say. I am most definitely impaired in my functioning. The problem areas I’m having are just not the core ASD impairments. But I am impaired.

For most all-genius-people-are-Aspies proponents, the opposite is true: they do have core ASD symptoms as their primary reason for being misfits, but they aren’t limited in their daily functioning. In this sense, I can totally see why parents of severley autistic children would not want them on the autism spectrum. Why lump people with no impairments together with those with severe impairments? That’s either stigmatizing the people with no impairments or invalidaitng the people with severe impairments. One of the main reasons people are fighting to keep Asperger’s on the autism spectrum, is because we most definitely have impairmetns and are in need of support. If Asperger’s is reduced to mere genius and the accompanying and inherent misfit status, I am not saying I want no part in it. Identifying as an Aspie would then be similar to identifying as my Myers-Briggs personality type, after all, and I do participate in places for that. It would, however, mean that I and many others who do have significant impairments, would need an additional label to justify their need for support.

Beyond Autism Acceptance

We often hear about autism acceptance, and I am all for it. Autism acceptance means accepting the autistic person in your life, whether it be yourself, your child, spouse or whoever, including their autistic differences. Autism acceptance does not mean not wanting to change anything about yourself or the autistic perosn in your life. After all, we all want to change and move towards teaching our full potential, and I remember from I believe it’s Eriksonian psychology that only a small percentage of people truly reach their full potential at the end of their lives.

Unfortunately, many parents of “low-functioning” autistic children say that they cannot accept their child’s autism because it’s rendering them incapable. I understand their point of view, but I do not see why there is nothing about their child’s autism that they can accept. As Suzanne over at Rarer in Girls says, she sometimes actually delights in her daughter’s autistic behaviors even though Janey is labeled “low-functioning”. At the same time, Suzanne wants Janey to learn functional communication and to become toilet trained. I totally see why.

I myself do my best to change certain aspects of my autism. For example, I watn to become less irritable and less easily overloaded. This is not because I don’t accept myself, or because I feel autism is bad. It is because I feel I could have a better quality of life if I learned strategies to regulate my sensory sensitivity and emotions.

I honestly believe that no person, autistic or not, has nothing they want to change about themselves, and for parents of all children, I don’t believe there’s nothing they want to change about their child. For this reason, I dislike the dichotomous perspective on which autistics need to be “fixed”. As Suzanne says, her child is “low-functioning”, but there are still aspects of her autism that she cherishes. In this respect, let’s move from which autistics need to be fixed on to which symptoms of autism need to be treated so that people can have a good quality of life.

There are other reasons I dislike the autism dichotomy. I am not allowed to complain about any of my difficulties, because I am more capalbe than some autistic children ever will be. These same parents are advocating for fulltime support for their children once they become adults, but I, being more capalbe in only a few areas, should deal without support. It’s that simple in the Netherlands. If you don’t require institutional support (which I do require, but people not working with me don’t get this), you fall under the local government in terms of funding for support, and care is no longer a right (which it is if you need institutional care).

Nothing in autism is dichotomous. It isn’t like, if a person crosses a certain, arbitrary line between “low-functioning” and “high-functioning”, they suddenly become completely acceptable and not in need of any treatment or become completely unacceptable and in need of a cure. There are people who can speak and write coherently who feel they’d want all their autistic symptoms to be cured. There are also (parents of) people who don’t have functional communication who don’t wish (their child) to be cured. That doesn’t mean these parents don’t want their child to learn. All parents want their child to learn and grow. As I said in my first paragraph, even neurotypicals often want to change. Change is inherent in a person’s process of aging, but that doesn’t mean that a person at any stage of their life isn’t acceptable.

Self-Reliance Is Overrated, Self-Determination Is Underrated

In his post on cripple identity, William Peace talks about the fact that non-disabled bodies with their non-disabled functions are seen as the norm, and disabled people never fit in. As Peace gets older, he develops an increasingly carefree attitude regarding these ideas, thereby embracing life and his disabled identity in life.

As I read Peace’s post, several points came to mind with regards to how his reasoning can be applied to those with cognitive disabilities or mental illness. He explicitly writes about walking as an overrated function, but what about such functions as speech, language or cognitive processes such as logical thinking and organizational skills?

I am reminded of a discussion I had with my old psychologist when I had only been in my current institution for a short while. She was discussing the “can” vs. “can’t” attitude as presented by physical rehabilitaiton patients as well as the mentally ill. She tried to explain the importanc eof having a positive attitude towards learning practical skills such as cuttign up my food (which I am physically nable to do) and cleaning my room (which I am unable to do due to executive dysfunction). What she didn’t realize is that my refusal to learn these skills is only partly out of lack of self-efficacy (low self-esteem). It is more out of a feeling that these skills are not as important. I didn’t go hungry when I lived independently, and though my house did go dirty, if I lived with my husband, it wouldn’t be much harder for him to do most cleaning whether I lived there or not. In my opinion, self-regulation skills and self-directedness are much more important. I did, after all, end up in a psychiatric crisis when living on my own.

As disabled people – and as abled people too, but they don’t seem to realize it -, we need to set priorities. I might’ve wanted to learn to cut up my food or clean my room, if I had the energy to do this amongst all the energy that it costs me to manage my anxiety, regulate my fluctuating emotions and basically stay as close as possible to mentally stable.

Let me say this very bluntly: self-reliance is overrated. Self-determination is underrated. Too often, disabled people are trrained in the skills necessary to appear as non-disabled as possible. They are rarely trained in the skills necessariry for being as self-determined as possible. This goes especially for cognitively disabled and mentally ill people, who are still presumed to have a reduced capacity for self-direction.

Even today’s psychiatric rehabilitation movement, with its focus on recovery groups, (ex-)patients as support workers, and the strengths method, still teaches that mentally ill people can live normal lives in spite of their mental illness. It does not teach that it is possible to live a normal live while embracing your mental illness, let alone that the entire idea of “normal” is hugely overrated. The recovery group I participated in in 2010 was groundbreaking in the respect that it consisted of institutionalized patients, some of whom (like myself) weren’t moving into less restrictive environments.

Less restrictive. Boy, need I talk about that? Less restrictive should mean that a person has more choices over how they live their life, not that there is less support. In this respect, the physical disability movement has already paved the road with their independent living centers for example. Unfortunately, the law here in the Netherlands is not in favor of mentally ill and cognitively disabled people in search for self-determination, because, besides needing constant supervision, the only ground for long-term care with 24-hour availability is “severe self-direction problems”.

Autism Speaks: Why We Need Autistic Representation

Through the week-end blog hop over at Single Mother Ahoy!, I came across a post supporting Autism Speaks and debunking the argumetns people have against it. The first of these is that Autism Speaks has no autistic people on the committee. That doesn’t bother Melissa Hopper, the post author, presumably because she’s a parent. It does, however, bother me. Since every autism blog (and though I don’t really write an autism blog, I sometimes write about autism, so…) should have a post for or against Autism Speaks, here’s mine. It isn’t, by the way, directed just at Autism Speaks, but at every parent-run organization aimed to represent the entire community of people with a particular disability.

Suppose, I wrote to Melissa, that your son were gay. Would you raise money for an organization that had only parents and families of gays on its committee? I realize that there are organizations like PFLAG (Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), and Melissa might in this hypothetical scenairo want to join them. I mean, there’s nothign wrong with parents of children or teens or for that matter adults who are different wanting a place to be represented too.

The thing with Autism Speaks and possibly other organizations is that 1. they pretty explicitly exclude autistics from the committee, and 2. they don’t support the inclusion or equality of autistics, choosing instead to support their eradication.

Now I do realize that autism is a disability whereas homosexuality is not. People may disagree here, but I do see autism as a disability. However, that still doesn’t mean that social inclusion and equality shouldn’t b primary goals of an organization claiming to speak for that disability population, particularly since the majority of adults with this disability advocate this.

Once Melissa’s son grows up, I asked her, does she want to be his representative for the rest of her life, or does she want him to be able to speak for himself? I am hoping for the latter, as most parents want their children to grow up to be able to speak for themselves. Now I can totally see why at age three Melissa’s son can’t speak for himself and he needs his mother to do so. I totally also see that right now the number of autistic children (who need their parents to speak for them) is greater than the number of autistic adults. In twenty years or so, this will not be the case anymore. And while there will still be autistic children, and hence the need for a parent organization, an autistic-run organization should have far more to say. And just for your information: there are already a number of adults who grew up with parents supporting the likes of Cure Autism Now, who are now old enough to speak for themselves and vehemently disagree with the cure position. Christine Motokane, whose book I reviewed on Wednesday, is one of them.

In the Netherlands, there ae two organizations for the schizophrenia community. One, Anoiksis, is run by people with schizophrenia themselves, while the other, Ypsilon, is run by families. I can see why there’s a need for both, but they cooperate on some level. Same for the Dutch Autism Society and Persons on the Autistic Spectrum. (The Autism Society has autistic members, like myself, but I don’t know if they have anyone autistic on the committee.) Autism Speaks has never sought any form of cooperation with autistic-run organizations. It will never do so, because Autism Speaks advocates the eradication of autism rather than the equal rights of autistics.

Now I do know there are autistic people who support Autism Speaks, and John Elder Robison used to be a token a =utistic for them. I don’t even have strong opinions against all of Autism Speaks’ positions – I used to read their blog and it wasn’t too bad. I also wouldn’t mind Autism Speaks existing if a major organization representing autistic people themselves were getting as much support. Like with the Anoiksis/Ypsilon thing, I can see the need for a parent organization. But Autism Speaks aims to speak for autistic people without having a single autistic person on the committee, without cooperating with autistic people, and without advancing the inclusion of autistic people. If just one of these were the problem, oh well, but now that all of them are, I have major concerns.

Melissa’s son is just three. She doesn’t likely think of him representing himself. But he’ll eventually reach that point, and by that time, I can only hope he has his mother’s support rather than opposition.

Sensitivity Is a Good Thing

“You are too sensitive.” I and other people with mental health problems hear it all the time. I was raised with the idea that I should be more laid-back. Now I can see that being laid-back is good, but when it’s used to mean not to react to wrongs in our environment, it’s not so good.

Over at Pride in Madness, there’s a post on being sensitive. Its main point is that sensitivity used to be a positive trait. People who care about the world around them, used to be described as sensitive. Now, it’s used to mean “overreactive”. We easily forget that people who fought for the rights we now have, used to be seen as sensitive and overreactive, too. Women’s rights activists were diagnosed with “hysteria” as a way to silence them. This is a way for the dominantly male, White, heterosexual, non-disabled culture to keep its members in a privileged position. And this is exactly why we need sensitive people.

Everyone is privileged in some way. I remember last year considering the Black people protesting the St. Nicholas celebration in the Netherlands because of its association with Black slaves, overly sensitive. That was a mistake. I don’t promise I will never make this mistake again, and so I can see why men make the mistake of calling women overly sensitive and non0disabled people make the mistake of calling the disabled overly sensitive. This is, however, exactly why we need reminders from people like the author of Pride in Madness that sensitivity is a good thing, and that we need people who are sensitive to the wrongs in the world in order to make them rihgt.

“You’re an Adult.”

Last Tuesday, I went to the dentist. I have trouble taking care of myself, including brushing my teeth. I can’t remember to do it regularly, and when I do remember, I find it hard to motivate myself because I’m sensitive to the feel of the toothbrush and the taste of the toothpaste. The dentist gave me a mouthwash with a relatively neutral taste and told me to rinse with that after toothbrushing. I am allowed to brush my teeth without toothpaste for now to get used to the feel of the brush and into the habit of brushing first. The dentist instructed the nurse who was with me, a nurse from another ward, to tell the staff they needed to actively remind me to brush my teeth. The nurses on my ward, however, didn’t feel like this, saying I’m an adult so should take responsibility for my own self-care.

The phrase “you’re an adult” is uttered time and time again when I (or other patients, but I’m speaking for myself now) require help or display a problem that is not normal for a healthy adult. Saying we’re not healthy is not an excuse, because what are we in treatmetn for then? A nurse told me yesterday that if I had a low IQ or had been floridly psychotic, this would’ve been an excuse not to be able to remember my self-care. As if people with an intellectual disability or psychotic disorder are not adults.

The thing is, whether you’re physically or mentally capable of taking care of yourself, does not determine whether you’re an adult, and whether you’re an adult, does not determine your respectability. The idea that an adult should be capable of caring for themself, is ableist. The idea that an adult (at least, one who displays adult abilities) is more respectable than a child, is not just ableist but ageist too.

Honestly, I don’t care whether I’m an adult. I don’t care whether my abilities reflect my age. I care that I’m an individual and have individual needs. In some areas, I’m self-reliant. In other areas, I require practical care. In others, I require guidance. None of this makes me deserve less human dignity. Similarly, children and persons of any age with intellectual disabilities deserve as much human dignity and respect as a healthy adult does. We treat them differently, of course, but that is because they have different abilities, difficulties and needs. A child is different from an adult, and an adult with a disability is different from a non-disabled adult, but that doesn’t make them a child. Everyone is an individual who deserves to be treated like an individual with dignity and human rights.

Autistic Pride Day: Everyone Has a Reason to Be Proud

Today is autistic pride day. It’s been celebrated since like 2005 and was controversial from the start. Joel Smith, oen of the editors of Autistics.org, wrote a post explaining why he didn’t want to be associated with the “oh so intelligent” autism stereotype. Neither do I. I may be intelligent, but this is not something I’m proud of, and basing autistic pride on people’s supposed intelligence, is discriminatory towards those with intellectual disabilities.

To be honest, I’m not generally proud to be autistic. I know many autistics and parents of autistic children who do not find pride in autism. Really, why should we be proud of a disability? We should be proud of ourselves, our families, the communities we belong to. This may include the autistic communty. We should be proud of what we contribute – and everyone contributes something. I am proud of my creativity and my perseverance. Whether these are related to autism, is beside the point.

In my opinion, pride in autism derived from positive autistic characteristics, discriminates agianst autistics who do not share these characteritics. Like, not all autistics are good writers (or can write at all), perseverant, or as I said intelligent. You can be proud of these characteristics in yourself, but saying these make up your autistic pride, is ableist.

I want to reach out to all autistics, whether they have the skills necessary to participate in a pride event or not. I also want to reach out to the parents and carers of those who cannot participate in autistic pride day. I’m pretty sure all of them find something in the autistic they care for that they are proud of. After all, everyone has a reason to be proud.

The Realities of an Asperger’s Diagnosis

A few weeks ago, I read an article in a women’s magazine about autism. It started out by explaining that autism is a spectrum and then went on to say that Asperger’s Syndrome is the mildest form of autism. Someone sent in a response saying that Asperger’s can be severely disabling too and, because it is often misunderstood, may be more severe in some ways than classic autism.

I have an Asperger’s diagnosis. I also have a high IQ. I can attest to the common misconcetpions surrounding an Asperger’s diagnosis. For one thing, the ability to speak does not necessarily mean that someone can communicate effectively. Even if speech on the surface makes sense, that doesn’t mean the Aspie’s words come out of their mouth as they were intended. However, because we have normal to above-normal intelligence, we’re assumed to “know better” and our miscommunicatin is understood to be willful misbehavior.

Speaking of behavior, it is a common misconception that Aspies don’t have as severe or as frequent aggressive or self-harming outbursts as those with classic or “low-functioning” autism do. H.L. Doherty, a father of a child with classic autism and an intellectual disability, often makes this mistake. He does so again when he talks about shards of severe autism reality. In this post, Doherty describes the consequencces of his son’s self-injurious meltdowns, and accuses autistic advocates of ignoring this reality. He connotes that those with “high-functioning” autism, ie those who can disagree with Doherty on the Internet, do not have these experiences. I, for one, do.

When I still lived in independence training, I had meltdowns almost everyday. An experience like the one Doherty describes is quite familiar to me and occurred regularly until I went on medication in 2010. My last episode of severe self-injury was two months ago, and it was so scary that I went into seclusion for a night.

Now I for one agree with Doherty on some controversies. I disagree on others. My agreeing or disagreeing and how eloquently I can put this into writing, does not change anything about my functioning level in any other area than written communication about a specific topic. I am too ashamed to write about some of my Aspie realities. The details of my severe self-care difficulties, for example. I know that Doherty and his supporters would not believe me anyway. After all, I’m so intelligent. Yes, I am. Relative intelligence is required for an Asperger’s diagnosis. That does not cause any of my difficulties to go away.