Right-- I'm a record-keeper and fairly fastidious about recall/detail, both by natural inclination and also by training. I've been ASTONISHED by what others even within my own family tell me that I know isn't correct.

I look in DD's baby book, though, and at early photos, and I know. Those things were contemporaneous recordings of what she was doing. We have video.

I tend to default to "oh, I probably just don't remember" when I think of something that DD did extraordinarily early.


Quote
It's funny because I don't like talking to NT people about it, because then I have to explain why it isn't always desirable.

Isn't THAT the truth!?

I sometimes wonder if most kids shouldn't be screened for LD's, and then worry about the kids who have LD's and let the rest of them gravitate to what they seem to need, and not worry so much about IQ testing. That would be ideal, it seems to me... but then again, it's a paradigm shift that will probably never happen, so...

This is a great reason why we love to be able to state (truthfully) that we really don't KNOW what DD's test numbers are. Never seen a need to know, since she just does what she does, and having the number doesn't seem to matter all that much. Without a 2e issue on the table, it seems so straightforward... she seems EG/PG (in spite of some of her earliest milestones indicating more like MG/HG, probably because of chronic medical problems), so that's how we treat her, and it seems to fit perfectly.

That tends to shut down the "Ohhhhhh... you're one of THOSE parents... the test-shoppers... the ones INVESTED in your kid being gifted..." in a hurry, because it makes it much more clear that it's ultimately about what our child seems to need, and not what we do.

I still spend time explaining asynchrony and perfectionism and other quirks of being HG+ to people who need to know and don't seem to, but it does close off a lot of the casual playground competition between parents.

Schr�dinger's cat walks into a bar. And doesn't.