or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Special Needs Parenting › Any PARENTS with Asperger's Syndrome?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Any PARENTS with Asperger's Syndrome? - Page 2

post #21 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post



Do you ever feel like this: joy.gifblahblah.gifwild.gifenergy.gifhammer.gif



all the freaking time!!! sometimes all at once!

post #22 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post


 

Our school is definitely more urban, I guess. I like your use of that word. Our previous school in this same city and same district was not anything like this one. It was a good school and I felt like the kids mattered. The staff knew the kids & their parents by name, despite having nearly 1000 students. The teachers were wonderfully helpful and supportive of whatever your kid needed, etc. It was good. I'm looking forward to moving next month because we'll be back in the same area and he'll be going to the new middle school there, but with the same kids he knew in elementary school. 

 

Max has done very well socially, as long as he has that one friend who clicks with him. You know?

 

 

  I think that's the key for everyone, just maybe more so with ASD.  I actually work in the school system (no one when I was a kid would have guessed I would work with people) with special needs kids.  There really is someone for just about anyone, it's just hard to find the someone at times. 
 

 

post #23 of 65
Thread Starter 

umamai - I have a picture of me flapping, my hands are all a blur. LOL!

 

Beth - I absolutely agree. Finding that someone is key. :)

post #24 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post



I am familiar w/ WrongPlanet. I lost my login info, though. *facepalm* 

 

I'll check your blog, Erin. Thanks for sharing!

 

I posted a new article tonight, cowritten by my friend Mateo. :)

 

http://parentingwithaspergers.blogspot.com/2012/01/heterism-autism-and-neurodiversity.html


Liked the article!  I always find the NT label confusing.  My "NT" daughter is also gifted, so can she be NT? and what if someone is just very untypical in an unspecified way. My son's friend must draw or sing while explaining things (I mean must ).  This isn't typical, but what do you call it, anyway?

 

post #25 of 65
Thread Starter 

Did any of you watch the show TOUCH last night? It stars Keifer Sutherland as the dad of an 11 yr old boy w/ autism. I found it PHENOMENAL. The woman who worked with the director and the boy on how to portray autism is on my fb friends list. :) She's lovely!

post #26 of 65

RE: Touch. I recorded it and am looking forward to watching it. So glad to hear it is well done!

post #27 of 65
Thread Starter 
post #28 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarmerBeth View Post


Liked the article!  I always find the NT label confusing.  My "NT" daughter is also gifted, so can she be NT?

 


I like the labels NT or "typically developing." I don't see what giftedness has to do with it -- some one can be gifted and also have special needs, so why not be gifted and be NT?

 

To me, it's just nicer to refer to people as "typical" rather than "normal."  My ASD DD isn't "abnormal."  She's completely normal for a girl on the autism spectrum. But she sure isn't a "typical" teenage girl!

 

post #29 of 65
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post


I like the labels NT or "typically developing." I don't see what giftedness has to do with it -- some one can be gifted and also have special needs, so why not be gifted and be NT?

 

To me, it's just nicer to refer to people as "typical" rather than "normal."  My ASD DD isn't "abnormal."  She's completely normal for a girl on the autism spectrum. But she sure isn't a "typical" teenage girl!

 



And that's why I propose we move to using the word heteristic/heterist/heterism instead of typical. Who defines typical? How is it defined? You know what I mean?

post #30 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post



And that's why I propose we move to using the word heteristic/heterist/heterism instead of typical. Who defines typical? How is it defined? You know what I mean?



The point of any word is to communicate clearly, and made up new words or low frequency words seldom do that.

 

Everybody knows what "typical" means.

post #31 of 65

"typical" refers to the middle of the bell curve. 

 

"most" people fall somewhere in the middle of the bell curve. that's what makes it typical. it is more rare to be at either end of the bell curve. that makes them "non-typical." 

 

i'm more interested in what causes my family problems though... not if it's typical. 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_deviation_diagram.svg

post #32 of 65
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post


I like the labels NT or "typically developing." I don't see what giftedness has to do with it -- some one can be gifted and also have special needs, so why not be gifted and be NT?

 

To me, it's just nicer to refer to people as "typical" rather than "normal."  My ASD DD isn't "abnormal."  She's completely normal for a girl on the autism spectrum. But she sure isn't a "typical" teenage girl!

 



But you can't be NT AND be gifted. That's contradictory. Giftedness is outside of typical. 



Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post



The point of any word is to communicate clearly, and made up new words or low frequency words seldom do that.

 

Everybody knows what "typical" means.


It's not made up. Someone else actually coined it last summer at a conference, but I've yet to find his name. I keep finding references to this random dude saying heterism would be more fitting than NT, but nobody has named him. It's a little frustrating. And at one point, NT, Asperger's, and Autism were also low frequency words.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by umami_mommy View Post

"typical" refers to the middle of the bell curve. 

 

"most" people fall somewhere in the middle of the bell curve. that's what makes it typical. it is more rare to be at either end of the bell curve. that makes them "non-typical." 

 

i'm more interested in what causes my family problems though... not if it's typical. 

 

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Standard_deviation_diagram.svg

 

But what IS typical? Who defines it? As far as I'm concerned, I'ma  typical aspie.... You know what I mean?
 

 

post #33 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post


It's not made up. Someone else actually coined it last summer at a conference, but I've yet to find his name. I keep finding references to this random dude saying heterism would be more fitting than NT, but nobody has named him. It's a little frustrating.
 

 

yes, that person made it up, so it doesn't communicate with others.

 

I do think that *just* gifted is NT. Very much so. Gifted people are still like most people in most ways -- they just catch on to certain types of information easier are able to manipulate that information with more ease, but there basic emotional set up and their responses to normal life are still very typical.

 

post #34 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post

 

yes, that person made it up, so it doesn't communicate with others.

 

I do think that *just* gifted is NT. Very much so. Gifted people are still like most people in most ways -- they just catch on to certain types of information easier are able to manipulate that information with more ease, but there basic emotional set up and their responses to normal life are still very typical.

 



I get what Linda's saying here.  I don't think the new terms that have arrived are any less confusing.  I think where I personally fall into trouble is that many terms used, not just NT, are very broad.  Bi-polar, ASD, schizophrenia, Down's Syndrome, anxiety disorders and even dyslexia are all disorders where in some circles (especially various special needs boards) people may not be considered neurotypical.  The issues those people and their families have can be very different.  Even within one disorder, ASD, the difficulties are within a huge range, not just in terms of severity but in terms of what people have the most difficulty with.  Similarly, some people with no diagnosed disorder may have something very untypical about them.  I have a mother with no diagnosed reason who literally cannot catch a ball.  As a teenager in youth orchestra, I worked alongside a 6 year old who already had performed with professional symphonies.  Yes, her emotional set up was typical, but in no way was she typical of a 6 year old in terms of ability or goals or how she spent her spare time.

 

I don't have political issues with words, including neurotypical, but all broad sweeping statements and terms leave a lot of potential for confusion.  It's a lot better than just saying "normal" and maybe it's the best we've got for now, but before the world of special needs boards, it's not a term I heard frequently (despite working with special needs kids) and it's not a term that tells me a whole lot about how to approach a person.  I guess it does when it's OK to be broad, but the rest of the time I'd just describe a person or situation rather than label a mindset.

post #35 of 65
Thread Starter 

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, but my thinking on it is that neurology in general is a spectrum. There's autism and there's the direct opposite, heterism.

 

I keep going back to defining typical. Not any one person is typical. It's defined as Having the distinctive qualities of a particular type of person or thing and synonymous with the words characteristic, representative, distinctive, and exemplary. Again, how is any of that defined? What makes it characteristic or representative of all people? Of all neurological expectations?

post #36 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post

I guess I can see what you guys are saying here, but my thinking on it is that neurology in general is a spectrum. There's autism and there's the direct opposite, heterism.

 

I keep going back to defining typical. Not any one person is typical. It's defined as Having the distinctive qualities of a particular type of person or thing and synonymous with the words characteristic, representative, distinctive, and exemplary. Again, how is any of that defined? What makes it characteristic or representative of all people? Of all neurological expectations?



It is a very circular definition, isn't it?  That's why I find the NT label confusing at times.  I find it mostly useful for basically saying that I have one NT child who can mostly fit in to the world's expectations with few accommodations and an ASD child and a learning disabled child who cannot fit in with expectations.  It is far from a definitive description, though, which is why I liked the article.  It was good food for thought about how we use labels and how that affects people's perceptions.  One thing that didn't quite work for me with the autism and heterism thing in the article is that if you use the literal "oriented towards the self" definition of autism, introverts, schizophrenics and people with borderline personalities can fall into that category but that would not make them diagnostically autistic.  If heteristic means "oriented toward others" then all extroverts may seem so, even though there are some very extroverted people on the spectrum. 

 

It's still great to revisit definitions even if it might take awhile to find good alternatives.  Definitions are tools to point people in the right direction, and even thinking about them might get us to question inaccurate viewpoints.

post #37 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by Linda on the move View Post


I like the labels NT or "typically developing." I don't see what giftedness has to do with it -- some one can be gifted and also have special needs, so why not be gifted and be NT?

 

To me, it's just nicer to refer to people as "typical" rather than "normal."  My ASD DD isn't "abnormal."  She's completely normal for a girl on the autism spectrum. But she sure isn't a "typical" teenage girl!

 



The reason why I brought up giftedness is that developing ahead of the curve can sometimes affect emotional needs for the age.  Now that my daughter is 10, I can easily look at her as NT and her giftedness is just another aspect of her.  But at age 22 mos, for example, I had to deal with some very non-typical behavior caused by giftedness.  All NT kids mind Mom going to work, but how about this approach?  (I journaled this one when it happened)

DD: "How come you go to work instead of stay home with me?"

me: "Well I need to make money for food and the house."

(DH was a stay at home Dad at the time)

DD:Well, why doesn't Dad go?

me: I make more money at my work than he does at his.

DD: Couldn't he get a higher paying job?

me: There aren't a lot of high tech jobs to choose from here right now.

DD: Well, if Dads were meant to stay home, they'd have breasts for feeding babies just like Moms.  When I grow up, I'll try to have a job I can do with my kids around, so that I don't have to leave them like you."

 

No, not nearly as difficult as dealing with a special needs child, but definitely not something anyone else I knew with toddlers at the time was dealing with, and pretty exhausting.  Add reading (and understanding) at a young age (before 3) and having to explain scary things she read on the front pages of newspapers while standing in the grocery isle ("Why would someone kill their own baby, Mom?") and the feeling is not of having a typical child.  In our case, this ironed out with age and there's not such a huge gap, now, but some parents have highly gifted kids and may be pretty lost with the "untypicalness" at an older age.  Take dealing with early college entry when someone is barely past puberty.  Not a very typical situation.

post #38 of 65
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by FarmerBeth View Post



It is a very circular definition, isn't it?  That's why I find the NT label confusing at times.  I find it mostly useful for basically saying that I have one NT child who can mostly fit in to the world's expectations with few accommodations and an ASD child and a learning disabled child who cannot fit in with expectations.  It is far from a definitive description, though, which is why I liked the article.  It was good food for thought about how we use labels and how that affects people's perceptions.  One thing that didn't quite work for me with the autism and heterism thing in the article is that if you use the literal "oriented towards the self" definition of autism, introverts, schizophrenics and people with borderline personalities can fall into that category but that would not make them diagnostically autistic.  If heteristic means "oriented toward others" then all extroverts may seem so, even though there are some very extroverted people on the spectrum. 

 

It's still great to revisit definitions even if it might take awhile to find good alternatives.  Definitions are tools to point people in the right direction, and even thinking about them might get us to question inaccurate viewpoints.


Hmm..... You've given me something to think about regarding the definitions.

 

If heteristic/heterism as words and definitions doesn't take off, that's ok.... It's giving people something to think about. And it's opened up an interesting dialogue here on this thread, too.

 

post #39 of 65
Quote:
Originally Posted by HarperRose View Post

 

 

But what IS typical? Who defines it? As far as I'm concerned, I'ma  typical aspie.... You know what I mean?
 

 



it depends on the group you are looking at. if you are looking at a group of AS adults... yes. if you are looking at a bunch of random people shopping at trader joe's.... you're going to get something different. 

 

it's ALL about the group. that's why researchers work so hard at finding what they can call a "random sample." 

post #40 of 65
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by umami_mommy View Post



it depends on the group you are looking at. if you are looking at a group of AS adults... yes. if you are looking at a bunch of random people shopping at trader joe's.... you're going to get something different. 

 

it's ALL about the group. that's why researchers work so hard at finding what they can call a "random sample." 



Good point.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Special Needs Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Special Needs Parenting › Any PARENTS with Asperger's Syndrome?