![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I recently linked to an article pointing out that the "symptoms" used as diagnostic criteria for autism are... actually symptoms of trauma, in many cases.
I don't actually have much to say, now, but I ended up reading the NAS's page on pathological demand avoidance, which notes that one of the reasons it's useful to have a specific dx of demand-avoidant profile because... it avoids incorrect assumptions and diagnoses, such as Personality Disorder.
("Although a person might have these as well," it concedes.)
Which, given that at least Borderline Personality Disorder can in a very great many cases be usefully modelled as an entirely predictable result of prolonged and cumulative trauma... seems to me to be missing the point, rather, actually. In that: allistic parents (& allistic society) aren't actually, by and large, very good at raising autistic children without traumatising them (with the best of intentions! and a great deal of love!); the failure to provide appropriate engagement and reciprocity throughout childhood is unequivocally known to be profoundly (and cumulatively!) traumatising; and, per the above, (i) the diagnostic criteria for autism rely to an alarming extent on trauma, and (ii) at least one "personality disorder" clearly results from prolonged trauma.
I'm just... really not convinced that "let's pretend autistic-flavoured long-term trauma is meaningfully and clearly distinct from this other (differently stigmatised) way we traumatise people" is a useful approach.
I don't actually have much to say, now, but I ended up reading the NAS's page on pathological demand avoidance, which notes that one of the reasons it's useful to have a specific dx of demand-avoidant profile because... it avoids incorrect assumptions and diagnoses, such as Personality Disorder.
("Although a person might have these as well," it concedes.)
Which, given that at least Borderline Personality Disorder can in a very great many cases be usefully modelled as an entirely predictable result of prolonged and cumulative trauma... seems to me to be missing the point, rather, actually. In that: allistic parents (& allistic society) aren't actually, by and large, very good at raising autistic children without traumatising them (with the best of intentions! and a great deal of love!); the failure to provide appropriate engagement and reciprocity throughout childhood is unequivocally known to be profoundly (and cumulatively!) traumatising; and, per the above, (i) the diagnostic criteria for autism rely to an alarming extent on trauma, and (ii) at least one "personality disorder" clearly results from prolonged trauma.
I'm just... really not convinced that "let's pretend autistic-flavoured long-term trauma is meaningfully and clearly distinct from this other (differently stigmatised) way we traumatise people" is a useful approach.