What are your views of self diagnosis?

[Fridgemagnetman]

Fortunately, I am a research fiend, and this has shifted into Warp Drive thanks to the Internet.

I have tried a weighted blanket, binaural programming, and now anticipating a mini-trampoline in the next week or so. All scientific strategies that my local medical people know nothing about.

If I waited for authority to help me, I would wait forever.

Bounce.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

Fortunately, I am a research fiend, and this has shifted into Warp Drive thanks to the Internet.

I have tried a weighted blanket, binaural programming, and now anticipating a mini-trampoline in the next week or so. All scientific strategies that my local medical people know nothing about.

If I waited for authority to help me, I would wait forever.

Werebear, in the past, many traditional doctors thought we were crazy for even considering trying any alternative approaches on our sons, at that time in their lives, when we brought up to them anything about Organic Acids testing and like those Krebs cycle metabolites, Oxalate metabolites, Malabsorption and Bacteria markers, Neurotransmitter Metabolites, Ketone and Fatty Acid oxidation, Yeast and fungal markers, Amino Acid metabolites.

Most did not even know about gluten and casein peptide testing, and never even considered genetic testing and allergy testing, all of which are at least science based, and all these tests revealed very interesting information for each of our children. Regardless if people agree with any type of alternative approach, we were seen as bad for considering something not in their rigid manuals or rule books.

Most did not agree with our approach or did not know what we were talking about, so they changed the topic, or got their laptops out and tried looking those things up. And so I could just imagine their reactions if we had brought up some sensory items to use for the children, or used other type science for them. A bit behind the times most are. Traditional doctors pass down the same old traditional approaches, regardless of situation and even if those attempts already failed.

 

[WereBear]

Most did not even know about gluten and casein peptide testing, and never even considered genetic testing and allergy testing, all of which are at least science based, and all these tests revealed very interesting information for each of our children.

I have found that what I eat has a profound affect on my functioning, In addition, nutritional supplements and natural sleeping strategies brought me back from the nearly-dead.

I'm doing Niacin Therapy.

I am all about what works.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

I have found that what I eat has a profound affect on my functioning, In addition, nutritional supplements and natural sleeping strategies brought me back from the nearly-dead.


I'm doing Niacin Therapy.

I am all about what works.

Yes, agree. For vitamins, we believe in ANRC essentials vitamin powder for our children as it was designed for those on the Spectrum and has extra vitamins and minerals they lack from the limited foods they tolerate.

I am a big believer in niacin for my cardiovascular fitness, as have had a history of cardio problems in my family. LDL bad cholesterol went down from 130 to 80 in less than a year of taking about 2000 mg a day.

But, like the saying goes, "Check with your doctor first." Most would have me on statin drugs, though, and with more risks and side effects. The FDA must still need 30 more years to approve of niacin for heart cholesterol issues, as traditional doctors do not know about the benefits.

 

[MonolithImmortal]

Most did not even know about gluten and casein peptide testing, and never even considered genetic testing and allergy testing, all of which are at least science based, and all these tests revealed very interesting information for each of our children. Regardless if people agree with any type of alternative approach, we were seen as bad for considering something not in their rigid manuals or rule books.

Gluten-free, casein-free diet - Wikipedia

The majority of the available evidence does not support the use of this diet in the treatment of autism.

• American Academy of Pediatrics - Clinical Report (2007) In their report, the AAP did not recommend the use of special diets for children with autism spectrum disorder because of inadequate evidence.[3]
• Cochrane Library - Gluten and Casein-free diets in autism spectrum disorder (2008) The Cochrane review found that while relatively commonly used the evidence to support the diets use in children with autism was poor.[2] All studies as of 2006 had issues with them.[1]
• Research in Autism Spectrum Disorders - Gluten-free and casein free diets in the treatment of autism spectrum disorders: A systematic review (2009) It concluded that the results "reveal that the current corpus of research does not support the use of GFCF diets in the treatment of ASD. Given the lack of empirical support, and the adverse consequences often associated with GFCF diets (e.g. stigmatization, diversion of treatment resources, reduced bone cortical thickness), such diets should only be implemented in the event a child with ASD experiences acute behavioral changes, seemingly associated with changes in diet...and/or a child has allergies or food intolerances to gluten and/or casein."[4]
• Vanderbilt Evidence-based Practice Center - Therapies for Children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (2011) The review, commissioned by the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, concluded that, "the evidence supporting GFCF diets in ASD is limited and weak."[5]
• Clinical Therapeutics - The relationship of autism to gluten (2013) This review found one double-blind study, which did not find any benefit from the gluten-free diet, and concluded that "Currently, there is insufficient evidence to support instituting a gluten-free diet as a treatment for autism."[6]
• Journal of Child Neurology - Evidence of the Gluten-Free and Casein-Free Diet in Autism Spectrum Disorders: A Systematic Review (2014) This review found that "...the evidence on this topic is currently limited and weak," and noted that only a few randomized trials had been conducted on the efficacy of gluten-free diets as an autism treatment. The review also noted that even these trials were of questionable scientific merit because they were based on small sample sizes.[7]
• Current Opinion in Clinical Nutrition & Metabolic Care - Gluten-free and casein-free diets in the therapy of autism (2015) This review found "limited and weak" evidence that this diet was effective as a treatment for autism, noting that most studies that had been done to assess its effectiveness were "seriously flawed."[8]
• Autism Research Institute The Autism Research Institute recommends the GFCF/GFDF diet as a treatment for autism and related conditions.[1][2] The organization believes that, "Dietary intervention is a cornerstone of a evidence-based medical approach, and there is convincing empirical evidence that special diets help many with autism."[9]
  
  The diet may have a negative effect on bone health, although there is debate over whether this is actually due to the diet or caused by eating habits or bowel issues associated with autism.[10]

Be careful, there's no scientific basis for such things.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

Gluten-free, casein-free diet - Wikipedia


Be careful, there's no scientific basis for such things.

Tell that to the numerous persons with conditions who say such a diet helped them. I have yet to hear anyone that says they were hurt by a gluten-free, casein-free diet. The American Academy of Pediatrics does not speak for everyone, just like Autism Speaks does not speak for everyone.

 

[WereBear]

There are people who don't do a thing unless there is a giant double-blind study done with solid statistics properly set up. And you could say that there isn't enough support and you would be accurate.

But that has nothing to do with whether it works or not.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

A

There are people who don't do a thing unless there is a giant double-blind study done with solid statistics properly set up. And you could say that there isn't enough support and you would be accurate.

But that has nothing to do with whether it works or not.

Yes, I feel you are right on both points, and your conclusion, as it is along my lines of thinking.

I personally feel most people these days are not going to be waiting around forever for such large double-blinded studies to be done, and for certain government agencies or medical entities to give their seal of approval. That could take years, decades, or never occur, and if there are any biases, agendas,
pressure, or interference involved too to discredit anyone who tries to prove through study the opposing point of view.

Conditions can remain static, worsen, or people could die while waiting for a certain number of acceptable studies to be done. It is unrealistic to expect persons to wait to try such a specialty diet, for instance, when widespread talk says some persons can be helped by such, and in the absence of widespread talk of any harm of such. So, by that theory, that would imply nobody should try home remedies either that have improved or healed so many conditions, and on so many people, because the FDA, medical society or whoever has not approved it. Because nobody wants to do large double-blinded studies on those things, or timely, this should not mean we must wait.

So, yes I feel wear bear is right, as the issue seems to me to be whether something works or not, as just because there are not adequate double-blinded studies yet supporting a position, that does not mean that claim is not true. Let's not forget the public can have skepticism too from many studies done anyway as their beliefs could be either data could be manipulated, sample questions could be posed improperly or be misleading, or with cynicism that these supposedly reliable studies are being conducted by impartial parties from a distance.

Also, regardless if any belief is yet fully supported by science or not, true democracies empower the persons to have choices, and with regards to treatments obviously, too, if any at all are even desired. And so we choose to reject now many traditional treatments for our Autistic sons, regardless if any double-blinded proper studies of those treatments on a large sample showed any benefit or not, as having had our own extensive trials with each child with such is what mattered. This does not mean many others will not be helped by those treatments, as research says several have as well. Others could see no improvements from those therapies also.

I feel each person has a right to believe in whatever they want, regardless if science is involved, like religion for instance, too. I myself prefer things backed by science, but sometimes I define science my way. Sometimes all the science I need is to hear many across the nation tried such and it worked for several of them. Then I could test it to see if it worked on me or our children, if no large medical risk was involved. No doctor has ever told me of any medical harm of reducing or eliminating gluten and casein. So, there must be no scientific proof then of the harms either, or else they should have told me.

 

[WereBear]

In addition, people vary so much there are a few scientists out there stating that we might see the end of massive studies; our genetic diversity is so intrinsically varied that it is pointless trying to find One Treatment to Rule Them All.

This is marvelously illustrated in a fine book, Death by Food Pyramid, where the author finds that there are many "ancestral diets" scattered around the world, and one size does not fit all. This explains the earnest and sincere vegetarians who tried to coach me into eating the way they did. What made them slim and vibrant made me fat and sick.

The point of the book is that the Standard American Diet, with its heavy reliance on processed foods, grains, and sugar, isn't good for anyone. But the "right way to eat" can vary, person by person.

In my own case, an Atkins/Paleo kind of approach does wonders, giving me happy moods with good energy and sleep. I experience lower blood sugar, body weight, and blood pressure. Gluten gives me a tummyache like a bonfire, but high fat dairy, especially fermented kinds like yogurt and sour cream, works fine for me, while fish and red meat are my favorite protein sources.

But this doesn't work for Mr WereBear; who gets along with oats and chicken and his whole family can't handle fish.

In addition, I wouldn't be here now, typing this, if I hadn't experimented with some thirty kinds of nutritional supplements. I now have a "core" of seven that work for me:

1. niacin
2. B complex
3. vitamin C
4. vitamin D3 in oil
5. K2
6. chelated magnesium
7. pregnenolone

But three times that many fell by the wayside. I experimented on myself, read stories of people whose choice did wonders, and didn't seem to do anything for me; and did more research.

At this point, after five years of horrible suffering and trial & error, I arrived at an official diagnosis, more targeted strategies, and a semblance of a life forming around me again.

The danger of experimenting on myself in this way was like a drop of water in the ocean of the dangers of doing nothing. Which is what relying on experts had gotten me.

Physics has been studied since the time of the ancient Greeks and we can build super-colliders now. That, I trust. They have a track record, like getting to other planets and the microwave in my kitchen.

Autism? They have barely started acknowledging it, much less tell us anything solid or useful. And its form, unlike the Laws of Gravity, vary by individual. We can't sit back and let them do much of anything; we had a couple decades of what the experts said to do was hurting children, not helping them.

Do we have to "crowd source" this thing? Yes, I think we do.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

In addition, people vary so much there are a few scientists out there stating that we might see the end of massive studies; our genetic diversity is so intrinsically varied that it is pointless trying to find One Treatment to Rule Them All.

This is marvelously illustrated in a fine book, Death by Food Pyramid, where the author finds that there are many "ancestral diets" scattered around the world, and one size does not fit all. This explains the earnest and sincere vegetarians who tried to coach me into eating the way they did. What made them slim and vibrant made me fat and sick.

The point of the book is that the Standard American Diet, with its heavy reliance on processed foods, grains, and sugar, isn't good for anyone. But the "right way to eat" can vary, person by person.

In my own case, an Atkins/Paleo kind of approach does wonders, giving me happy moods with good energy and sleep. I experience lower blood sugar, body weight, and blood pressure. Gluten gives me a tummyache like a bonfire, but high fat dairy, especially fermented kinds like yogurt and sour cream, works fine for me, while fish and red meat are my favorite protein sources.

But this doesn't work for Mr WereBear; who gets along with oats and chicken and his whole family can't handle fish.

In addition, I wouldn't be here now, typing this, if I hadn't experimented with some thirty kinds of nutritional supplements. I now have a "core" of seven that work for me:

1. niacin
2. B complex
3. vitamin C
4. vitamin D3 in oil
5. K2
6. chelated magnesium
7. pregnenolone

But three times that many fell by the wayside. I experimented on myself, read stories of people whose choice did wonders, and didn't seem to do anything for me; and did more research.

At this point, after five years of horrible suffering and trial & error, I arrived at an official diagnosis, more targeted strategies, and a semblance of a life forming around me again.

The danger of experimenting on myself in this way was like a drop of water in the ocean of the dangers of doing nothing. Which is what relying on experts had gotten me.

Physics has been studied since the time of the ancient Greeks and we can build super-colliders now. That, I trust. They have a track record, like getting to other planets and the microwave in my kitchen.

Autism? They have barely started acknowledging it, much less tell us anything solid or useful. And its form, unlike the Laws of Gravity, vary by individual. We can't sit back and let them do much of anything; we had a couple decades of what the experts said to do was hurting children, not helping them.

Do we have to "crowd source" this thing? Yes, I think we do.

Unfortunately, sometimes that is what most persons will have to do: Trial by error approach. This could take time, effort and some setback, bit in the long run benefit us, for those willing or able to try new things.

Yes, we all can be very unique, and so regardless if something helps many or a few, we should not assume it will help us or not based on that. Even our two Autistic sons are so different with different preferences, needs, abilities and limitations. They thus have vastly different diets, too.

Each of our children has severe taste, texture and/or smell sensitivities. Our higher functioning 7-year old son used to be on gfcf diet for a year but once he became verbal at age two and a half he preferred other consistency and variety of foods.

Admittedly he likes starchy stuff, and grains and dairy mostly, like potato puffs, macaroni and cheese, breaded cheese sticks, sandwiches, chicken nuggets, cheese, and almond milk. We mix his Autism powder vitamins with extra Bs and other antioxidants and needed supplements in his orange juice.

Our youngest 5-year old nonverbal son refuses almost every food and drink, no matter our attempts, and he vomits at even just the site of any other food and drink besides his favorites. He lives on orange cream yogurt, crackers and chips. We have to mix his vitamins in the yogurt, as he drinks only water.

I am the most health conscious in the family regarding foods. I avoid sugars, high sodium foods and high saturated fat foods, and I avoid processed foods, enriched foods, and foods that could potentially harm if eaten too much, but these days it seems like there is something negative written about everything, so I keep that in mind too.

I too am into vitamins and supplements like niacin, vitamin c, vitamin D3, and magnesium (citrate). As I am likely not on the Spectrum, I do not focus much on B vitamins. I take other antioxidants too besides the vitamin C and vitamin K for instance, like alpha lipoic Acid. I eat things like oatmeal, shreddded wheat, cheerios, bland yogurt, 100% whole wheat with either olive, macadamia or avocado oil, lean turkey or chicken, etc. I used to have brown rice, then research scared me off about the arsenic.

Regardless what people eat, certain foods will affect people differently, as people eat foods based on a variety of different reasons, like taste, texture, smell, touch, aesthetic appeal, or because of culture, habit, cost, or even based on attitude. "I am not eating that supposedly healthier junk," my mother often told me. She died happy, eating her own foods, and in her ways, albeit passing on earlier than she likely liked. I, however, will try to eat healthier, but if it tastes yucky to me I will not eat it.

 

[MonolithImmortal]

I certainly didn't mean to say that if it seems to be working that you should abandon it. All I wanted to draw attention to is that there COULD (not certainly is) a possible risk to bone health to be aware of, and that more research should be done and is being done in that regard.

 

[Dadwith2Autisticsons]

Yes, I agree everyone should be careful for things. In general, I feel people should be proactive and not assume things, good or bad. Resort to medical opinions, much research, and careful deliberation to make well-informed decisions. Weigh the risks versus benefits of any path chosen in life.

Then monitor things closely to make sure any benefits or good occurs and any risks do not happen. In other words, do not assume any recommendations made or what worked for others will work for you. Be open minded to and aware of the harms and benefits of all treatments and life choices, and react accordingly.

 

[Manuheleku]

Professional assessment at 58 years old? Good f***ing luck. I pretty much gave up. Apparently the best thing I'll get is social anxiety with an upbeat note suggesting that I join a club or use my special interests to meet people. Right, just what I want, people. All because people who manage to survive in this society as long as I have are good at mimicking NT behaviors to make life a little more bearable. Maybe I'll try again to get someone to seriously try to diagnose my aspergers, at least my regular doctor believes me after witnessing a meltdown and is willing to prescribe meds to deal with it.

 

[icesyckel]

What are your views on self diagnosing?

First, I would be against the provision of tax-funded services to the self-diagnosed (whether for ASD or anything else for that matter). I would also be against laws offering special or different treatment to those who are self-diagnosed.

That probably will make me unpopular here, as there are many online tests and screening tools that can provide a more or less reliable indicator of what a professional Dx would probably be, but there would be too much room for abuse. While some would try their best to be accurate in self-diagnosing, many unscrupulous neurotypical people would do so if they saw an angle in it for self-advancement.

Second, as I have stated elsewhere, I do not believe one can be completely objective when self-diagnosing. Objectivity is key to accuracy.

Lastly, I think one can get a fairly accurate self-Dx using online tests/screening tools. If the self-Dx is not to be the basis of tax-funded benefits or legal status/benefits, then I don't have any issue with self-Dx. Some people have great reasons to avoid a Dx that might follow them in their med records, depending on where the live and what the privacy rules/laws are.

Do you think that more can be done by professionals to recognize and provide more accessibility for people who suspect they might have a form of autism?

Sure. There would be less of a need to self-Dx if ASD was being recognized and officially Dx'd at younger ages. I believe that discreet ASD screening should be implemented in grade schools with follow-ups for formal assessments when the screens indicate it is warranted. It is easier to Dx ASD before the child learns comping mechanisms that can mask it. However, I also think more needs to be done to screen the adult population as well.

Do you think that autism as a defined condition is in danger of becoming less significant because of a blurred perception of it? ... Or do you think that it's good to show that autism can be seen in seemingly allistic (non-autistic) individuals and therefore helps break the stereotype of certain perceptions of these conditions?

I don't know about "blurred perceptions," per se. However, I believe it could be argued that merging Asperger's into the Autism Spectrum is evidence of an attempt to lump all who are neurodiverse into one neat little category. Whether that is appropriate or desirable, I lack the credentials and expertise to truly say. I tend to think that, if ASD is going to be the primary Dx, then there need to be better defined subcategories. Just using one label for all, without any sub-labeling or further description would tend to blur things, I should think. It certainly provides less clarity.

I think that the big issue is whether autism is becoming less significant as it becomes more common. Granted, the neurodiverse remain a minority, but now that the NT's are learning that we are not all like Rainman with ASD being more and more common in the media, I think there is a growing sense that ASD is common and, perhaps, "no big deal." After all, NT's might start to think, "That guy on the Big Bang Theory seems to be doing okay," resulting in less gov't assistance and less funding for research.

On the other hand, if N's all think you are only autistic if you are like Rainman, then that's no good either. So... beats me.

And does a self-diagnosis carry the same weight of importance as an official diagnosis?

It depends on what you mean by "weight of importance."

To the individual, in isolation, what matters most is the diagnosis, self or otherwise, that s/he first accepted. It opened a whole new perspective on life for me when I took some online assessments; however, I was never truly able to accept my own diagnosis. I inherently feel that people are not objective about themselves. I know there are many things about me that other people see more clearly than I do, and so I needed an external confirmation to be able to embrace a Dx. Others may not feel the same.

However, from the perspective of gov't agencies, employers, and even just the NT people we live around and with, they're going to usually want a medical/psychological confirmation. We could debate all day whether that is "right," but it is what it is. People tend to be skeptical about conditions that they cannot see, especially when someone is applying for tax-funded assistance or disability benefits. I personally don't believe NT's should have to take us at our word/lay opinions when it affects them, directly or indirectly. Otherwise, what they think doesn't really matter.

Professional assessment at 58 years old? Good f***ing luck.

I am an adult. I've been legal to drink for more than a minute. Without divulging my precise age, let me just say that it was possible for me. Perhaps where you are it is not, but there's always the option to travel somewhere else.

 

[icesyckel]

This is an excerpt from this article that I think covers my concerns about the perils of taking self-diagnoses without any salt (context, this is about Moby claiming to have AS to seem cool and then retracting that claim when it no longer suited him):

Your brain is not Sephora. You don't get to walk in and pick a bunch of "trendy" **** to throw on in order to make yourself look better. And you don't get to accessorize with the "hip" disorder of the day just to make yourself seem "weird" and "fascinating" to your stupid friends. That's not how it works. And it's not fair to those of us who actually do have to deal with such diagnoses, and all the work, medication, and often times difficulties that come along with them, to act as if it's adorable or hilarious that you've declared yourself to have something that you don't. You're not helping the cause any, and you certainly aren't helping to research or de-stigmatize such things by wearing them as some kooky hipster badge of honor. Nor are you helping the public's perception of bipolar disorder by comparing it to your ****** movie options.

Many people are legitimately trying to self-diagnose with none of this Moby-style malingering. Still, with all the Moby's and Miley's in the world, how am I to know the difference? An official Dx from a professional is the only effective means we have to differentiate.

Ultimately, it probably doesn't matter if they aren't asking for government or non-profit assistance or seeking special accommodations, etc., but I'd be a little peeved if someone I knew told me they had ASD then all of a sudden decided that s/he didn't because it was no longer fashionable. Nothing about ASD has ever been fashionable for me or made me feel fashionable in the eyes of others, so the idea of people faking what I've had to struggle with all my life really, really pisses me off.

 

[Bella Pines]

I think it depends on requirements.

From the perspective of a child or adult without coping mechanisms in place or with significant difficulties, then a diagnosis and support network will clearly help.

From the perspective of older people who have already come to terms with themselves and their lives and have well established coping mechanisms that work, then a formal diagnosis doesn't really offer much.

From the perspective of the medical community, then diagnoses helps to bring realism to statistics and potential funding increases in projects that supply counselling or medication where needed.

From the perspective of an individual that is looking to explain themselves to friends and family then a diagnosis may aid communication.

 

[icesyckel]

From the perspective of older people who have already come to terms with themselves and their lives and have well established coping mechanisms that work, then a formal diagnosis doesn't really offer much.

User Danny74 and I were both diagnosed as adults (him later in life than me). I already had a career, and I think some of my coping mechanisms developed BECAUSE I hadn't been diagnosed as a child. In some ways, though, it seems better (albeit harder) to be diagnosed as an adult when I compare my experiences to those relayed here by those Dx'd at a younger age.

Regardless, I (and I think Danny74 would agree) have found being Dx'd of immense value in understanding why I am different, accepting it without guilt, and being able to relate better to NT's (like my family).

From the perspective of an individual that is looking to explain themselves to friends and family then a diagnosis may aid communication.

This is a lot of it right here, but it's hard to put it all into words. I had suspected or "self-diagnosed" myself as being on the spectrum, but I never really made peace with that understanding until I was professionally Dx'd, which caused my family to accept it.

As to friends, though, I don't tell them. Truth is, if I have to explain myself to someone in order to maintain a friendship, then I'd rather look for friends elsewhere. You pick your friends, but it helps having the old 299.0 in B&W to explain things to family.

 

[Thursday]

I don't think there is one concrete right answer to this as every person has a different situation. Professionals, like every other person, seems to be a wild card to me. Just because someone has the qualifications on paper, doesn't guarantee they will be able to find what needs to be found. I'm not sure where I've heard of it, but I remember a quote that goes something like "go to a heart specialist and they'll find heart issues"...so the professional may only see what they want to see. However, the really kind ones may be able to work with us with much patience and open-mindedness. At least, I choose to believe so.

If the diagnosis fits you and gives you peace of mind, it wouldn't be bad to learn how to use that to make dealing and coping with life a little easier. Loved ones who can be asked to forgive certain quirks like needing to be specifically told the time and/or plan for the day, may benefit from the information as they would not have to bear with someone who is stressed.

My husband and I limit ourselves to what is naturally available though. Scheduling things better, eating well, sleeping separately when it helps and together when we miss each other.

As to friends, though, I don't tell them. Truth is, if I have to explain myself to someone in order to maintain a friendship, then I'd rather look for friends elsewhere. You pick your friends, but it helps having the old 299.0 in B&W to explain things to family.

You know, I wrestled with the notion of telling friends myself. They're childhood friends who have been there since kindergarten and I've been in an on/off sister-like relationship with. However, they're not the most patient when it comes to in-depth discussions so I'm afraid their takeaway would be that I'm sort sort of special needs kind of person so I decided I won't.

I just kind of feel sometimes that my friends look to me for assurance that I still love them because I rarely communicate. In reality, I am just able to guess when they're truly into a topic or not so I try not to bother them with my inane ramblings.

 

[icesyckel]

You know, I wrestled with the notion of telling friends myself.

I seem to recall there was a thread about who to tell and when a couple years back that covered the pros/cons really well, but I can't recall the thread title to search for it.

 

[Thursday]

I seem to recall there was a thread about who to tell and when a couple years back that covered the pros/cons really well, but I can't recall the thread title to search for it.

Oh, thank you for the heads up! I'll look for that...so far I've only gone out of my way to tell my mom and my closest uncle. The latter, I told impulsively to explain why I preferred not to spend time with someone who told me her kids didn't like me a few years back. They explained it was a joke, but I was genuinely hurt.