Someone telling everyone I have autism when I don’t have it

[Winterinwonderland]

In addition to my full time job I am a volunteer and executive trustee for a charity.

The charity chair set up a chat with a large number of people in it and told them I have autism. I do not have autism.

He also told them I had incidents at home. This was news to me having had no incidents at home.

A third party replied on the chat stating that I do not have autism and that there had not been any incidents at home. He was getting me mixed up with someone else.

He refused to accept this and has carried on telling everyone I have autism.

I have issued a GDPR SAR and Article 16 notice.
He has now blocked my access to IT systems and suspended me not following the governing document.

The other trustees have told him to make a rectification notice and apologise but he has refused. He has also been told the suspension was illegal and not authorised by the trustees.

This man has several complaints against him lodged with the charity commission for a large catalogue of issues. We all have our interviews this week.

AIBU take legal action against him for defamation or should I let it go. I am not willing to pursue the charity for obvious reasons.

@DumboHimalayan I don’t think that you were rude at all. I think that those pp are being rude to you. But, that is no reflection of you. It is simply that the internet attracts all sorts.

I wouldn’t take legal action as it is rarely worth the money and the stress. The outcome can often be unexpected as well.

I f someone incorrectly perceives you have a protected characteristic and discriminates in that basis, it's still discrimination.

The key question that's not been answered op, is why with all the mass resignations and cc complaints, the charity has not begun the process of getting rid of him? When does his tenure as chair end?

First of all I'd be speaking to the executive director of the charity to understand what they are doing to get rid of him, or what can be done to get rid of him - there will be a process whether internal or external through the charity commission .

If the charity themselves aren't doing anything to make him go, or if they maintain he can't go, you have your answer - it's time for you to resign and move on.

Then I'd speak to a lawyer about the defamation claim, and also, whether the charity could be included as a defendant, because at the very least, becoming involved in litigation is a big thing for a charity so they may settle, which would involve issuing a public statement to correct the misstatements the chair has made. Another thing to remember is that it may be the charity can't take steps to get rid of him until he has done something serious like attracting a legal claim against the charity so they may actually welcome you suing them as well as him. Issuing proceedings doesn't mean it will go to trial, it can be done as a tactical measure.

I think you said you are an executive director, in which case you may also have a potential claim under employment law, so ask the lawyer about that as well.

The discussion around whether autism is a bad thing or not is a red herring - overall he's presenting you as helpless, which could have a big negative effect on people's perception of your professional competence and that is an issue.

I wonder if the poster may have been mixing me up with @slore, who made a heartfelt personal plea which contained several of the elements @Pinkyandthebrain96 chose to talk to me about. Either that, or Pinky didn't appreciate me suggesting that @PabloandGustheGreySquirrels look at the actual diagnostic criteria used in recent years to guide reputable assessments and diagnoses (like ICD-10, ICD-11, DSM-IV, and DSM-5), so that they could see that if they have an objection to how ASD is conceptualised and diagnosed, their argument is with the criteria, not with me.

But I'm sure they'll be back to explain what they found so rude.

It’s comments like yours and those of the previous poster that make me advocate for a separate diagnosis to autism that impacts signify versus those apparently, to whom it’s ´a breeze’.
Autism significantly impacts daily life in a vast majority of cases, be in struggling for all to see, or masking and then melting down at home, different frequency, etc etc

Did you notice the poster you replied to is actually autistic?

How have people got autism diagnosis when it’s not impacting their lives? That’s evidence to support the argument of people who claim the diagnosis is dished out willy billy these days.

This.

Frame your complaint from the point of view that regardless of whether or not you are autistic, he shouldn't be broadcasting private medical information to everyone.

@PostItInABook How dare you suggest my child - who you have never met - should not have been diagnosed!!!! Reported

She has a diagnosis thank you very much!

@DumboHimalayan I don't need to look at anything, my child has an NHS diagnosis thank you! I suggest you stop pontificating about how things should & shouldn't be!

It's true that impaired functioning is one of the diagnostic criteria for autism. Basically, if it doesn't affect you, the diagnostic criteria are not met and the diagnosis should not be made. Nobody is having a go at you, but this is demonstrably true.

In the UK NICE says that criteria from ICD-11 or DSM-5 should be used.

ICD-11 says:

"The symptoms result in significant impairment in personal, family, social, educational, occupational or other important areas of functioning."

DSM-5 says:

"Symptoms cause clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of current functioning."

I'm not pontificating. If your child has a reputable diagnosis then, no matter how nicely they phrased it to you, that means that the assessors believed that your DC meets criteria for impairments/deficits and impact on day to day life and functioning. It's not an insult. It's just how these things are conceptualised and phrased in the relevant frameworks. According to those frameworks, I have impairments and deficits which affect my ability to function. So do many other people. That doesn't make us inferior, it makes us autistic.

It's actually a little concerning that you respond so violently to the idea that your child might have these characteristics which are necessary for the diagnosis she has, because it implies you think less of those who have them. I agree that the language can be off-putting, but that's not my problem.

I'm afraid it's just a fact that in order to receive a diagnosis of autism spectrum disorder that meets the international criteria, then impairments (or "deficits", if you prefer, though to me that's no better) must be identified, and they must be substantial enough to affect day-to-day functioning. The assessors might soft-soap it for you, but that's why it's a diagnosable condition for which people are entitled to reasonable adjustments.

This is just a fact, to receive a diagnosis there needs to be impairments. This isn't just an autism issue it is quite normal among many of the neuro atypical disorders, ADHD for example.

Why reported?

If a diagnosis is meant to reflect the fact that the condition affects them day to day, and someone is not affected, it is reasonable to ask why the diagnosis was made.

MNHQ must spend all day responding to spurious reports.

Anyway OP I think you've had good advice on here, and I agree it's idealistic to say that someone telling other people that you are autistic isn't a negative thing.

Yes thank you to everyone for your input. Much appreciated.