If you were doing an MA in asd, and had to choose between the following modules which would you choose?

[IUsedToBePeachy]

A) Aetiology and definitions

B) Diagnostic tools

I ahve to decide by the 12th; am certainly taking the one on treatments and input (TEACCH etc), and have to do one on methodology etc as well as dissertation.

Background is charity support work, would like to do similar for famillies with spectrum kids eventually plus have my two also.

It is by no means certain- just attended intial event today, interviews etc to pass yet- but apaprently tutor will call me to ask.

aetiology and definitions sounds more interesting to me - more of an overall view of the spectrum, whereas diagnostic tools seems a little specialised to the period around diagnosis.

Hi It sounds really interesting. I'd go for diagnostic tools, myself. More practical. I think if you tested my ds it would depend on which diagnostic tool you used as to whether he got a dx or not. (We don't have a dx yet.) I'm interested in definitions HFA vs Aspergers etc. But the aetiology makes me feel mildly uncomfortable. Can't put my finger on why. All really interesting tho.

Wots aetiology

As a family with a gentic link aetiology does interest me, but so does diagnostics test- after all, couldn't a definition of asd be 'someone who has scored a set score on ADOS or a similar tool'?

I want to do both

causes and origins

Why can't you? Even if you just sit in on lectures for one.

can't really afford to pay for the extra module yet, though suppose I could do after finishing- depends what Teacher says. Might enquire, though will be a future aim thing.

Oh I see! Id do the first one then - we were trying to track aspergers back through my family the other day, most interesting discussion on which great grandparent was most annoying obsessive similar to ds and my dad

Where are you training peachy?

It'll be Newport if I get in

Pipn, before the whole carer thing I worked for homestart as an Organiser: my dream is to enable something similar for people dealing with the first two years post DX (so help with DLA, statements etc).

have had long chats with Adrian before- couldn't afford to hire him but he is a great bloke.

Bet you'll keep the tutor on their toes!

Hi

Aetiology and definitions would probably be more interesting but as they are still 'searching for the cause' I suppose it would be an unbounded subject i.e. genetics?, birth complications? etc etc. Have you read Lorna Wing's paper?

Diagnostic tools would probably be of more practical use - however as the experts all disagree amongst themselves as to the necessary diagnostic criteria and the dx has become so elastic that Asperger himself probably wouldn't recognise many of those who currently have a dx of Aspergers
it could be quite a contentious / subjective area of study.

Admire you for doing this - I live it evry day so couldn't bring myself to study it academically

You're right about genetics. I can see some ASD/aspergers in every generation across my family tree. Once you can recognise it yourself it explains a hell of a lot!

oooh that's a very good point Pipin made Peachy - try and do some digging as to how open-minded they are as to considering environmental/vax triggers as well as genetics on the aetiology option.

WA we have 2 asd kids ourseoves (one as / hfa one more severe) but we're a good few years in now- boys are 9 and 6- so am 'used' to it iyswim

And yes TC that IS a good point- chap running it atm very open minded but new person taking over next term

B)

We don't really know enough about the causes to come up with anything useful, whereas knowing how it is diagnosed will be pretty helpful.

Remember though that a diagnosis is only someone's opinion based on their perception that a group of symptoms manifest themselves.

I am of the thinking that aetiology might be more the way to go for me- I know we ahve genetic tendencies, bt I think a question a lot of people will ask is 'why' and although I can't say 'because' I can say 'current thinking is...'

IYSWIM

Aye, but knowing why something happens [which we don't] quite often imho detracts from doing something concrete and useful about the presenting difficulties.

In RL and on MN I see so many people desperate for a diagnosis and then what??? A diagnosis has very little impact on the [crap]provision available to most people with ASD and I often think energies could be more usefully directed to intervention.

Then again, as a behaviourist, I don't hold with labels as they do no more than paraphrase a presenting difficulty. It also leads people down a misleading quasi medical model type path.