Quote:
Originally Posted by Zizu
As I understand there is a tremendous amount of crossover traits between dyslexia/ dyspraxia/ dyscalculia / Aspergers ADHD etcetcetc and huge misdiagnosis also .. so it’s a grey area I guess
|
Not necessarily. Individual neurodevelopmental disorders, I think, are no more inherently associated with each-other than other disorders are with each-other (like depression and OCD). It is very-much possible to be mono-neurodivergent and not have any overlapping traits of another category. People often forget that in all-this talk of pan-neurospiciness (irony not intended).
Many people with certain forms of Asperger’s (I’ll rope the putative archived entity of PDD-NOS), and people who may or may not be neurodevelopmentally autistic but do have certain corresponding clefts on top of being intuitive or an empath tend to have well-above-average verbal IQs, and, in-fact, high verbal IQ and relatively lower performance-IQ is very common in Asperger’s and dyspraxia, or non-verbal learning disability when there’s a discrepancy of more than 30 IQ points between both, even if the performance-IQ is still within the average or even above-average range. Such people often excel in writing and bla-bla-bla by very-virtue of who they are, not in spite of it. But going by the analogy that overlap is inherent, you could slide them closer to dyslexia than someone who doesn’t have a neurodevelopmental condition, even if they’re the extreme opposite and far less ‘dyslexic’ than the average person. Likewise for calm, quiet introverts with certain autistic clefts rejecting the notion of having ADHD when they’re sedentary, quiet, self-contained (again, because of who they are, not in spite of it), just-because others assume overlap and stereotype/make caricatures of people off the back of that, based on what they think is inherent to any-one label. Or the stereotypical Aspie STEM-genius being lumped in with a disorder (dyscalculia) they’re less-so than 99% of the population, A.-Level in Further Maths at the age of 14 to boot, just-because they’re both neurodevelopmental disorders but have nothing-else inherently in common.
So I just think it’s important to maintain that distinctness. And I think future research is going to back that up, even if jumping them together based on association-overreach is popular right-now. I don’t think that approach will age well and stand the test of time. I hope it doesn’t. And I say that as someone who appreciates your experiences. I’m sure they count for a lot, but I just don’t like this habit of association-inflation. Science will hopefully back that up one day and re-encourage differentiation with a bit more precision. The umbrella-framing and flattened identity-politics will hopefully look incredibly naïve in hindsight. And it is kinda ridiculous that you’re circling it as a big part of your argument. It doesn’t work as broadly as that. And personally, I think it’s a silly, reductionist idea.