Talk:Pathological demand avoidance

So what is PDA?

The article needs to say, preferably in the lead, what PDA is.

The first paragraph of the article says it is a "pattern of difficulties". This is not a description, it is maybe an attempt at an etiology.

The second paragraph says what it is not.

The third paragraph starts "these children". WTF? No children have been mentioned. If PDA is a condition afflicting children, this should have been stated in the lead, along with characteristic symptoms.

 Fixed See what you think, edit if you feel it's necessary. Lova Falk talk 10:04, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. What I see is a huge improvement. I am not involved in this field myself, so I don't have anything to contribute myself - but the start of the article now makes sense. Maproom (talk) 10:12, 20 January 2013 (UTC)

Oh my God. Psychiatry is out of control. What a joke! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.161.251.45 (talk) 03:39, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

I have some sympathy with 71. I have spent much of my life avoiding demands, and have developed techniques more effective and more socially acceptable than panic attacks. I believe that there's nothing pathological about this. Maproom (talk) 06:24, 7 April 2014 (UTC)

Perhaps it should be clearer that PDA is only a proposed condition at present. It isn't in the DSM-5 or ICD-10. I'm not saying it doesn't exist, but it shouldn't be portrayed as a well-established and reccognised condition when it's not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.222.3.135 (talk) 19:21, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

I've edited this to make it clearer that PDA is a proposed condition, not a recognised one. There were some misleading statement, for example describing recognition by the National Autistic Society in a way that could imply official recognition rather than acceptance by campaigners. I've edited these to make it clearer. I've also added a section on criticisms.

I'm making changes as this text is now out of date, and not in line with current practice. NICE relates to processes and expectations and isn't a diagnostic manual. The first paragraph in 'criticism' is the view of the author, and the second relates to a paper from 2003. The PDA Society now list almost 20 peer reviewed articles. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.0.36.104 (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2018 (UTC)

So soft

We're all this way! Especially me.

The criteria, it seems, are a bunch of intriguing mild character flaws, projected onto an overhead screen in a self-help seminar.

Or a horoscope!

Is this science, or something softer, kookier, and more fluffy? 84.226.185.221 (talk) 18:12, 10 October 2015 (UTC)

can it get better or worse over time

if so, what factors determine that 2001:558:6045:F:78DF:261:A8D5:F46F (talk) 04:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)

I feel that this is harmful, incorrect representation of autism

I feel that this article is reinforcing harmful, out dated stereotypes about autism and should be reviewed 46.135.66.61 (talk) 09:19, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

TLDR: I agree, the article should be reviewed.

Full comment: I'd like you to be more specific on what parts of the article you are referring to, but I have also seen a few things that are concerning from this article, (mentioned below) and I support the article being reviewed. (If I understand what you mean by reviewed correctly)

The sections coming from this article refer to those with the sub-type as "socially manipulative", and states, "If the demand persists, they may strategically escalate to intentionally shocking behaviour, such as deliberately kicking someone to get out of doing something; afterward, they feel no shame for inappropriate or infantile behavior." as well as having "an appearance of social skills that are superficially acceptable but which have odd features, such as a belief that the normal rules apply only to other people, or that they have the same authority as adults or people in positions of authority;"

Moosetwin (talk) 11:02, 26 August 2023 (UTC), edited 5:18, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Psychology Capstone

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 9 January 2024 and 26 April 2024. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Nicolemicha (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Kmcmiche, Crimson Kai, Jalyn547, MPHILLI.

— Assignment last updated by Rahneli (talk) 17:30, 11 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't know what it means that this article is the subject of a course assignment, and I'm a bit concerned. Are students expected to review the subject, including strengths and weaknesses of this article? This article is obviously not a scholarly source, and this issue is still being discussed and studied for validity. Nothing on this page can be considered authoritative. Is this a critical thinking exercise? (FWIW, I like that idea.) Will students be taking into account criticisms of this article, such as those on this talk page? Thanks for any info. Dcs002 (talk) 04:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Adult features?

This article is written almost entirely as if this proposed condition involves children only. There is almost zero information or acknowledgement of how this applies to adults. (Does it apply to adults?) I only learned of this proposed condition/disorder/ASD subtype yesterday, and I'd like to learn more, but as an adult on the spectrum I've encountered many roadblocks because of perceptions that ASD is something that happens to children. I think that same bias pervades this article. If this is a proposed condition for pediatric patients, the article should say so. If it is not, then the article needs drastic expansion to describe it in adults too. Dcs002 (talk) 04:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)