I haven't yet seen the documentary but I expect I will agree with your interpretations. Such programmes can be useful in showing how autism affects "ordinary people" (i.e. non-celebrities) and the challenges for families with autistic children. However the focus on celebrities - while it brings in viewers - is generally not helpful. As you and others have suggested I would seriously doubt that someone who works in the entertainment industry and is a high-profile figure could be autistic because the social skills required for a successful career in the public eye would be lacking. The seemingly superficial way in which she was diagnosed is concerning but doesn't surprise me. Real-life diagnosis is long and arduous and very rarely is done by top researchers like Simon Baron-Cohen. There are many genuinely autistic people struggling to be diagnosed and maybe a documentary looking at those sorts of individuals and the difficulties they face would be more useful.
Cant remember if I took an AQ test when I was diagnosed as a child so decided to do one now and scored 40 out of 50. I totally agree some of those questions could apply to a lot of people that arn't autistic like scientists or eccentric people. There's no was Christine has it she has no social imparements as she is in the lime light all the time and has been able to marry a celebrity like Paddy Mcguiness and she would have had to have been around a lot of social circles to do that, along with living a normal life getting married having kids etc. Though it is strange that all 3 of her kids are on the spectrum as it is a heridatary condition but she herself shows no signs at all.
I hadn't heard about that programme, I shall take a look at it in light of your review. I completely understand your annoyance with the rationale given for the Autism diagnosis in the programme. Again I think about it in terms of OCD. There are people who have sub-clinical 'Obsessive Compulsive symptoms' as I believe they are called in the literature - often the relatives of people who actually have OCD. I wouldn't like it if people are who are not significantly clinically impaired referred to themselves as having OCD because it plays into the stereotype that 'everyone is a bit OCD' which really does minimise the disabling nature of OCD and the suffering it brings.
Yeah the ''everyone is a little OCD'' annoys me too as someone who has this debilitating condition alongside my autism. And I worry that autism is going the same way as OCD in terms of being trivialised.
Professor Baron-Cohen's own data doesn't even support his theory. He seems very attached to his little theory , I don't know why. Worse, noone seems willing to challenge him, so now his views are being broadcast to a wider audience appearantly. His nephew is definately the better Baron-Cohen.
I haven't yet seen the documentary but I expect I will agree with your interpretations. Such programmes can be useful in showing how autism affects "ordinary people" (i.e. non-celebrities) and the challenges for families with autistic children. However the focus on celebrities - while it brings in viewers - is generally not helpful. As you and others have suggested I would seriously doubt that someone who works in the entertainment industry and is a high-profile figure could be autistic because the social skills required for a successful career in the public eye would be lacking. The seemingly superficial way in which she was diagnosed is concerning but doesn't surprise me. Real-life diagnosis is long and arduous and very rarely is done by top researchers like Simon Baron-Cohen. There are many genuinely autistic people struggling to be diagnosed and maybe a documentary looking at those sorts of individuals and the difficulties they face would be more useful.
I agree, we do need more documentaries looking at the lives of ordinary autistic people just struggling to get by in a world not made for them.
Cant remember if I took an AQ test when I was diagnosed as a child so decided to do one now and scored 40 out of 50. I totally agree some of those questions could apply to a lot of people that arn't autistic like scientists or eccentric people. There's no was Christine has it she has no social imparements as she is in the lime light all the time and has been able to marry a celebrity like Paddy Mcguiness and she would have had to have been around a lot of social circles to do that, along with living a normal life getting married having kids etc. Though it is strange that all 3 of her kids are on the spectrum as it is a heridatary condition but she herself shows no signs at all.
Yeah I agree she shows no signs.
I hadn't heard about that programme, I shall take a look at it in light of your review. I completely understand your annoyance with the rationale given for the Autism diagnosis in the programme. Again I think about it in terms of OCD. There are people who have sub-clinical 'Obsessive Compulsive symptoms' as I believe they are called in the literature - often the relatives of people who actually have OCD. I wouldn't like it if people are who are not significantly clinically impaired referred to themselves as having OCD because it plays into the stereotype that 'everyone is a bit OCD' which really does minimise the disabling nature of OCD and the suffering it brings.
Yeah the ''everyone is a little OCD'' annoys me too as someone who has this debilitating condition alongside my autism. And I worry that autism is going the same way as OCD in terms of being trivialised.
Professor Baron-Cohen's own data doesn't even support his theory. He seems very attached to his little theory , I don't know why. Worse, noone seems willing to challenge him, so now his views are being broadcast to a wider audience appearantly.
His nephew is definately the better Baron-Cohen.