Economist and conservative columnist Thomas Sowell published a book in 2001 titled Einstien Syndrome: Bright Children Who Talk Late. The book was inspired by his son who had a speech delay. Sewell, and a subsequent study, found a group of children who fit the following list of characteristics. He did not believe that these children had an Autism Spectrum Disorder, but others feel that it is just a renaming of a small group of high IQ children who have Asperger's.
Sowell listed the following attributes to "Einstein Syndreome":
Family Pattern
Close relatives in analytical occupation (engineer, scientist, mathematician)
Close relatives who are musicians, sometimes professionally
Close Relatives Who talked late
Parents have high education level (59% four years of college)
Individual Pattern
Majority are boys
High IQ
High analytical and/or musical abilities
Extremely good memory (to photographic)
Unusual concentration and absorption in what they are doing
Highly selective interests with achievement in some areas and ineptness in others
Precocious ability to read and/or use numbers and/or use computers
Late in socializing with their peers
Delayed Speech Development (Two years and up for full sentences)
27 % of boys dislike meeting new people
Late in being toilet trained
Fascinated with mechanical things
Like building things
Like putting puzzles together
Strong-willed
Overlaps with characteristics of intellectually gifted and autism spectrum.
“Poetry, art or social skills seldom figure prominently among their interests or achievements, either as children or adults.’
----------------------------------------------
I read both of Sowell's books carefully. What he doesn't seem to understand is the concept of an autistic SPECTRUM where some children with autistic symptoms (including late talking which is (wrongfully IMO) excluded from the AS criteria) "turn out ok" in that they are able to function pretty much independently, hold down jobs, have relationships, etc..
His books are drawn from anecdotes only and not real studies.
I did enjoy the books, don't get me wrong, but he TOTALLY misses the mark when it comes to the idea of there being an autistic spectrum with varying levels of functionality.
On the subject of the Autism Spectrum, I totally agree with Apatura, and something sticks in my mind that I read early on in my research of the subject. Its a quote by Lorna Wing explaining the theory that autism "ranges from the most profoundly physically and mentally retarded person . . . to the most able, highly intelligent person with social impairment in its subtlest form as his only disability. It overlaps with learning disabilities and shades into eccentric normality." (Quoted by Steve Silberman in Wired Magazine, Dec. 2001).
Ultimately, Kanner's, Asperger's, Pervasive Developmental Disorder, the unofficial "Einstein Syndrome", or other labeling, is the result of how brains are wired and how effectively neural impulses are transmitted. Much like cancers have dysfunction of cell division in common, brain developmental disorders / differences have a dysfunction of neurological impulses in common, without having psychosis. Those who Sowell groups as having "Einstein Syndrome" are very likely at the "higher functioning" (in some areas loosely functioning) edge of the autism bell curve, but because there are many more people nearer the center of the curve, the diagnostic criteria were written to fit the center as well as those at the lower functioning end who can't communicate and are often institutionalized.
If you are at the "functioning" end of the curve, there is often little understanding or assistance even when you have difficulties with communicating, relating to people, learning, obsessive thinking, focus, and sensitivity. You're told to tough it out, buck up, try harder, don't be so anxious, and maybe take some medications.
I read an interview with Dr. Tony Attwood not long ago, and the interviewer seemed to notice unusual behavior in him that was similar to the Autism Spectrum such as his single-mindedness. Dr. Attwood said something like, "I'm not on the spectrum, I'm just eccentric." I suppose that Autism is so incredibly debilitating, that even Dr. Attwood prefers to not have that label, even if he has enough of the wiring to include him on the end of the spectrum as Lorna Wing described it.
I vote for a new category for those spectrumites who have the wiring but don't fit the current criteria, called Spectaculum Ora Syndrome, meaning, in Latin, The Edge of the Spectrum.
------------
I think it was Temple who said that "geeks" are where Asperger's and Autism crosses over into normality, i.e., a spectrum. "Geek Syndrome" is synonymous with "Einstein Syndrome".
----------------
I've read Sowell's two books, and while some of his subjects may be on the spectrum, he emphasizes repeatedly that most of these kids are socially normal - they just don't talk on schedule. This is completely different from people who are on the spectrum, who may or may not be speech delayed, but who are not socially normal regardless. There is a world of difference between being speech-delayed and being autistic.
I agree that he doesn't understand autism very well, and that some of these kids may well be autistic. But I think you miss the point of this book if you miss the part where speech delay (+ analytical giftedness) do not equal autism.
It is possible to fit the criteria of Einstein Syndrome and not be on the spectrum at all or need any intervention at any point in your life. If you are not willing to consider this possibility, you are wasting your time reading his books, since this is the point he is trying to make. He's worried about late talkers being misdiagnosed and subjected to unnecessary and potentially harmful "treatment" when all they need is to be left alone to develop at their own pace. And while I also believe that much "treatment" that is out there is probably also harmful to people on the spectrum, nevertheless people on the spectrum do need some sort of help at some point, and Sowell's late talkers mostly don't.
--------------------------------------
*Normal* is just a setting on the dryer.
-------------------------------------
I read somewhere that Einstein had problems counting small change from his pockets and couldn't tie his shoes very well, yet he could work out complex math problems in his head. Shouldn't these traits make him more of a very high-functioning autistic?
-------------------------------------------
Here is an interesting quote on evaluating and diagnosing autism spectrum disorder by Lorna Wing in an Autism Connect (United Kingdom) interview:
Lorna Wing wrote:
What we want to know is what makes this person tick in the way they are ticking? It´s fascinating disentangling; it´s a piece of detective work, how this person has reached this point.
It seems to us from our experience that it is far more important than deciding whether or not someone fits the classic criteria. We have come across a lot of people who don´t fit any of the classic criteria, but deep down they actually have poor development of their social understanding and their capacity for planning. These two things (they may not have anything else) in life are going to be hellishly difficult for them, and they´re going to get into all kinds of silly situations and terrible trouble, even legal trouble as a result. This, to us, is what matters.
Full interview at www.autismconnect.org/core_files/interviews/transcripts/lorna_wing.htm
---------------------------