Most people are expert at something – even if it’s something negative! Autism diagnosticians such as psychologists and psychiatrists, are, purportedly, the experts in assessing and diagnosing children for autism.
So those clinicians, are the ‘expert’ assessors in making decisions on your child either having, or not having autism. This is a person (along with colleagues), who most likely has never met the child before. The child will be in an unnatural clinic environment and with one or more strangers, so naturally will likely not behave in their usual, natural way (the older the child the more likely this is) and may actually be inhibited through anxiety. The diagnostician will information gather as part of the assessment process, from parents, school (nursery/playgroup/college etc.) and they really merit information that is deemed a ‘professional’ source.
Parents, the Government tell us, are experts in our own children. Yet all too often, parental evidence taken during an NHS assessment, is seen as inferior to school or other professional advice on the child. All children behave differently between school and home (and this can be an extremely marked difference in autistics), autistic children can mask a huge amount in school and there is so much autism ignorance among school staff anyway, why should they be relied upon to any degree and certainly not more heavily weighted than parental advice. What’s the preciousness about ‘professionals’? I mean think about it – a teacher in charge of a class of 30+ children, who sees an unnatural presentation of the child in an artificial setting that is focused on following ongoing instruction – or the parent who birthed that child, knew them all their life in multiple different settings and sees the best and worst of them while they are unmasked – who is more likely to have the more accurate evidence to provide!
The questionnaires (‘clinical tools’) diagnosticians use are standard, often they have the scoring key on the form (and when they don’t, these are easily obtained) and the rest is common sense, analysing traits, behaviours and difficulties from and in, a real life context. Anyone with half a brain can information gather. It’s just looking for a pattern of evidence, and knowing what to look for in the beginning. It doesn’t take years of training as a medical professional or psychologist to do this. The sad thing is, many of these so-called highly qualified people, are so clueless about autism much of the time (they don’t have to have specific autism expertise as a psychologist or psychiatrist to diagnose – basic ADOS administration training seems to be considered by CAMHS to be all they need), that this is why they over-rely on the clinical tools and sometimes ignore or minimise vital parental evidence. You can almost see the fear of diagnosing in their eyes.
And of course all the while they disrespect parents as people seeking diagnoses for the sake of claiming benefits, they will continue to overlook parental evidence. A little bit of respect here please!
What with the agenda not to diagnose in the first place, meaning they may attempt to derail the cause of the autism traits onto something else, such as anxiety or OCD, is it any surprise some autistic children are remaining undiagnosed. These conditions may be co-morbid to the autism, but there can be a deliberate avoidance of looking at the underlying condition that causes the co-morbidities.
An assessor does need to understand other conditions that could have some superficially similar traits as autism, hence a proper assessment should be differential. They would say that this is why it takes a qualified clinician, but there are also assessment tools for those conditions too and a little bit of the right questioning would tease out reasons behind certain behaviours, to know what they were attributable to. Autism is after all diagnosed as a syndrome of behaviours, it’s an entirely clinical diagnosis – meaning if you have the triad of impairments you are autistic (or as they say ‘meet diagnostic criteria’ or ‘meet clinical threshold’), so there is no reason why a lay person who has done a bit of reading and has the right insights, could not in theory be accurate in diagnosing. Some of the clinicians I have come across are so inept and so reliant on questionnaires, seemingly fearful of deviating from them and unable to give credence to parental information, that it wouldn’t be hard to do better.
Of course, they are also looking for other types of alternative cause for the traits, such as attachment disorder, trauma, or something amiss in the home environment. Whilst they do need to do this for an fully considered assessment, the parent blame culture ensures these avenues are pursued with far more regularity than they should be. It’s another stumbling block to diagnosis.
“An expert, more generally, is a person with extensive knowledge or ability based on research, experience, or occupation and in a particular area of study.”
Therefore, who better to know and identify the reason for the child’s difficulties – it is the child who is being assessed after all, not autism as a concept – than their expert parent. Of course this couldn’t be said for everyone, not all parents would have the ability to do the right reading, express their child’s difficulties in accordance with the concept or context of a condition, especially if it included analysing potential alternatives. But a fair whack of parents with reasonable intelligence and some research skills and insightful, analytical approach, could do as good a job of assessing their child (or someone else’s!) for autism as a clinician (and in some cases better). You can also pay to go on ADOS courses. Of course it will never be, that parents will be empowered with diagnosing their children, or that any such diagnosis would be accepted. Potential bias/ethical considerations, ulterior motives in a few bad eggs and all sorts of other reasons exist for that. But the point being made is, that parents are usually the first to recognise their child’s difficulties and ‘experts’ need to take that gold dust on board, value it and respect it.
The NHS has to stop misdiagnosing, failing to diagnose and making such a meal out of assessing children for autism. Why are there such ridiculously long waiting lists? NHS NICE states that children should be assessed within 3 months of referral! Trust what the parents are telling you, utilise their expertise and respect them. Realise that telling a parent “autistic traits but not enough for a diagnosis” is failing that child and their family. They will walk out of there without any support, unless they happen to have co-morbid mental health conditions which they are treated for. But any such treatment may be useless and even harmful, if their autistic neurology is not taken into account. And if you do fail that child, their already compromised outcomes may become dire. Get your autism act together NHS clinicians, or you might just find an army of parents at your doors, who can do a better job at it than you!