Table Of ContentBRIDGING
PARALLEL
PLAY
IN
ASPERGER
MARRIAGE:
PARTNERING
IN
EXCITING
AND
NOVEL
ACTIVITIES
OF
PLAY
BY:
EVA
A.
MENDES
A
THESIS
Presented
to
the
Department
of
Graduate
Psychology
and
Counseling
of
The
Vermont
College
of
Union
Institute
and
University
in
partial
fulfillment
of
the
requirements
for
the
degree
of
Master
of
Arts
in
Clinical
Mental
Health
Counseling
March
31,
2011
ABSTRACT
This
thesis
explores
the
particular
etiology
and
symptomatology
of
crises
in
marriages
where
one
partner
has
Asperger
Syndrome
(AS)
and
the
other
has
a
typical
neurology
from
a
solution-‐oriented,
behavioral
marriage-‐counseling
perspective.
A
brief
collection
of
AS
traits
that
can
challenge
marriage
with
a
neurotypical
(NT)
partner
is
presented.
A
literature
review
is
undertaken
on
the
topics
of
marriages
where
one
partner
has
AS
and
the
other
is
NT,
shared
activities
of
exciting
play
as
a
treatment
intervention
in
couple’s
counseling,
group
therapy
intervention
model
for
couples,
the
role
of
psychoeducation
on
AS
and
AS
marriage
and
the
benefits
of
concrete-‐action-‐behavior-‐based
interventions
in
marriage
counseling.
The
question
is
posed
as
to
the
efficacy
of
utilizing
exciting
and
novel
activities
of
play
as
a
treatment
of
choice
for
addressing
the
challenges
faced
by
partners
in
an
AS-‐marriage,
in
particular
the
issue
of
parallel
play
in
particular.
A
model
is
presented
of
a
twelve-‐week
Asperger-‐Syndrome
Couple’s
Recreational
Group
action
project
targeting
isolation,
disconnection
and
distance
that
partners
in
an
AS-‐NT
marriage
can
experience
as
a
result
of
parallel
play.
The
research
design,
implementation,
and
assessment
of
the
action
project
are
described.
The
need
for
further
research
on
the
topic
of
Asperger
Syndrome
and
marriage
and
the
use
of
action-‐based
and
solution-‐oriented
therapies
to
treat
marital
challenges
and
conflicts
is
underscored.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I
wish
to
extend
the
most
sincere
thanks
to
Dr.
Walter
Stephaniv
and
Dr.
Phil
Gosselin
for
their
support,
encouragement,
and
patience
during
the
various
phases
of
my
graduate
school
experience.
In
addition,
thanks
are
extended
to
my
supervisors—at
the
Asperger
Association
of
New
England—Dania
Jekel,
Jamie
Freed,
Erika
Drezner
and
Grace
Myhill
for
their
mentorship
of
me
during
the
last
year
where
I
pursued
my
internship
for
this
program.
Special
thanks
are
offered
to
Antra
Borofsky
at
the
Center
for
the
Study
of
Relationship
who
is
simply
a
therapist
par
excellence
and
has
been
a
valuable
support
and
resource.
Most
of
all,
I’d
like
to
thank
The
Hussies—Sylvia,
Heather,
Lara,
Brant
and
Julie—members
of
my
cohort
group
who
made
my
experience
in
Brattleboro
a
true
joy
and
reminded
me
with
genuine
compassion,
commiserating
and
humor
that
being
a
therapist
is
journey,
not
a
destination.
TABLE
OF
CONTENTS
I.
INTRODUCTION
1
Statement
of
the
Problem
1
Understanding
an
Asperger
Marriage
6
Bridging
Parallel
Play
6
Driving
Questions
9
II.
REVIEW
OF
LITERATURE
10
Language
and
Phrasing
12
Asperger's
Syndrome
(AS)
12
Diagnosis
16
Married
Men
with
Asperger’s
Syndrome
(AS)
19
The
AS
Marriage
Courtship
21
Understanding
an
AS
Marriage
within
the
Framework
of
AS
24
Parallel
Play
in
an
AS
Marriage
27
Bridging
Parallel
Play
in
an
AS
Marriage
31
Couples
Group
Counseling
34
III.
ACTION
PROJECT
37
Rationale
37
Goals
39
Description,
Selection,
Setting,
Procedures
and
Implementation
40
Role
of
the
AS-‐Couples’
Recreational
Group
Leader
46
Issues
for
Consideration
47
IV.
EVALUATION
OF
ACTION
PROJECT
51
Proposed
Evaluation
Method
51
Measurement
Instrument:
Asperger
Marital
Adjustment
Test
53
Evaluation
Design
53
V.
SUMMARY
AND
RECOMMENDATIONS
56
Summary
56
Further
Considerations
64
Recommendations
66
APPENDIX
A.
Recruitment
Email
for
the
AS
Couple’s
Recreational
group
68
B.
Asperger-‐Syndrome
Couple’s
Recreational
Group
Curriculum
69
Organizations
and
Experts
Serving
the
AS
Population
72
C.
Adult
Participant
Informed
Consent
73
D.
Asperger
Marital
Adjustment
Test
74
REFERENCES
75
Statement
of
the
Problem
1
CHAPTER
ONE:
INTRODUCTION
Ever
since
Asperger’s
Syndrome
(AS)
was
included
in
the
Diagnostic
and
Statistical
Manual’s
fourth
edition—DSM-‐IV
in
the
year
1994,
there
has
been
an
800
percent
increase
in
the
diagnosed
cases
(Gander,
2011)
of
children
with
AS
and
other
Autism
Spectrum
Disorders
(ASD)
particularly
in
boys,
where
the
most
recent
CDC
data
show
that
one
in
110
children
are
affected
by
AS
or
ASD
(Insel,
2009).
What
we
know
of
AS
and
ASD
at
the
present
moment,
leads
us
to
believe
that
the
etiology
of
AS
and
ASD
are
largely
genetically
linked
(Insel,
2009).
As
the
numbers
of
children
diagnosed
with
AS
and
ASD
have
risen,
so
has
the
ascertainment
and
recognition
of
many
of
their
parents,
particularly
fathers
as
having
AS
and
being
on
the
Autism
Spectrum.
Diagnosis
is
higher
in
fathers
as
the
gender
ratio
for
diagnosis
is
four
males
for
every
one
female
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
Typically,
it
is
the
non-‐AS
or
neurotypical
(NT)
spouse,
the
wife,
that
seems
to
figure
out
pretty
early
on
in
her
relationship
or
marriage
that
something
is
different
or
unusual
about
her
spouse
and
his
atypical
interactions
with
her
(Newton
and
Hendrickx,
2007).
If
there
is
a
diagnosis
with
a
child
on
the
spectrum,
then
her
investigations
can
lead
her
to
stumble
upon
AS
primarily
on
the
Internet
and
from
the
current
albeit
limited
literature
existing
on
AS
and
marriage,
she
can
typically
make
an
informal
diagnoses
of
her
partner
as
having
AS
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
The
diagnostic
criteria
for
a
AS
in
DSM-‐IV
is
somewhat
limiting
and
does
not
lend
itself
to
diagnosing
AS
in
individuals
who
may
have
enough
social
skills
that
has
allowed
them
to
achieve
the
milestone
of
marriage
and
career
success
in
the
fields
of
technology,
science,
math,
music
and
art
(Lovett,
2005).
The
existing
literature
reveals
that
the
wives
and
partners
of
men
with
AS
have
been
increasingly
vocal
about
their
experience
of
being
married
to
a
man
with
AS
(Stanford,
2002;
Bentley,
2007)
and
so
have
an
increasing
number
of
AS
experts
and
couples
counselors
specializing
in
AS
in
adults
as
well
(Attwood,
2007;
Lovett,
2005).
Nevertheless,
the
research
and
literature
in
this
area
is
still
in
its
infancy
and
so
it
is
vitally
important
that
AS
in
adulthood
is
studied
and
understood,
in
particular,
interventions
for
marriages
where
one
individual
has
AS.
An
AS
marriage
can
have
many
challenges,
that
are
above
and
beyond
the
difficulties
seen
in
non-‐AS
marriages
or
marriages
where
both
partners
are
neurotypical
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
Problems
in
an
AS
marriage
can
range
from
emotional
deprivation
for
the
NT
partner
and
chronic
communication
breakdowns;
however,
the
primary
problem
for
such
couples
is
loneliness
and
isolation
resulting
from
parallel
play,
whereby
the
partner
with
AS
is
prone
to
spending
the
majority
leisure
time
or
time
spent
not
working,
immersed
in
his
own
interests,
leading
to
the
isolation
of
the
NT
partner,
even
when
in
the
same
house
(Aston,
2009;
Stanford,
2002).
A
partner
with
AS
does
not
seek
to
spontaneously
share
his
pleasure
in
everyday
things
and
can
be
satisfied
with
his
own
company
for
long
periods
of
time
and
conversations
may
be
few
and
largely
be
based
on
the
exchange
of
information
rather
than
the
pleasure
of
being
in
each
other’s
company
and
sharing
experiences
and
opinions
(Attwood,
2007;
Stanford,
2002).
The
isolation
and
feelings
of
loneliness
resulting
from
parallel
play
can
manifest
symptoms
of
depression,
a
lack
of
self-‐worth,
hurt
feelings,
loneliness,
etc
for
the
NT
partner
in
the
marriage
and
bridging
the
phenomenon
of
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage
seems
to
be
of
critical
significance
(Aston,
2003,
2002,
2009).
There
have
been
a
number
of
research
studies
done
with
groups
of
[non-‐AS]
couples,
where
they
were
assigned
to
spending
time
with
each
of
the
couples
engaged
in
“novel
and
arousing”
activities,
which
resulted
in
a
significant
increase
in
the
quality
of
marital
satisfaction
for
both
partners
in
the
couples
(Aron
et
al.,
2000).
Interviews
with
[non-‐AS]
married
couples
have
revealed
that,
a
majority
of
them,
say
that
spending
scheduled
quality
time
with
their
spouse
leads
to
them
feeling
loved
and
that
time
spent
with
their
partner
can
even
equate
to
sharing
positive
emotions
with
their
spouse
(Chapman,
2004).
Even
though
the
research
study
was
conducted
with
non-‐AS
couples,
it
stands
to
reason
that
such
a
program
would
work
with
an
AS
marriage
as
well;
to
quote
Aston
(2002),
a
leading
Asperger’s
couple’s
expert
counselor,
“Many
NT
women
say
that
if
only
they
could
have
quality
time
with
their
partners
when
they
were
together,
then
they
would
be
able
to
tolerate
the
times
when
they
were
apart
or
their
partners
were
distant.
The
problem
of
not
being
able
to
offer
their
partners
quality
time
was
also
voiced
by
most
of
the
men,
who
described
it
as
one
of
the
disadvantages
having
AS
caused
them”
(Aston,
2003).
There
are
no
research
studies
on
AS/NT
marriages
and
that
this
is
a
largely
unrecognized
area
in
the
clinical
field
due
to
the
challenges
in
diagnoses
of
what
are
considered
to
be
high-‐functioning
individuals
with
AS,
particularly
so
if
they
are
married
(Lovett,
2007).
Current
literature
on
the
subject
of
AS
marriage
are
mainly
written
reports
of
spouses
or
partners
of
professional
men
with
AS.
The
number
of
clinicians
that
have
written
on
the
subject
amount
to
a
handful
and
there
seem
to
be
virtually
no
research
studies
on
AS
marriages.
Based
on
this
epidemiological
and
demographic
information,
it
can
be
inferred
that
an
increasing
percentage
of
adults
married
with
AS
and
their
spouses
will
continue
to
seek
mental
health
services,
in
particular
counseling
services
for
their
marriage.
Given
the
dearth
of
information
on
the
subject
both
in
the
research
and
clinical
field,
it
is
vitally
important
to
identify
and
implement
marital
therapeutic
interventions
that
effectively
address
the
psychological
needs
of
this
population,
including
their
non-‐AS
partners
and
spouses.
The
often
severe
and
chronic
marital
problems
in
AS
marriages
require
efforts
to
identifying
and
implementing
successful
treatment
interventions
(G.
Myhill,
personal
communication,
October
15,
2010)
through
action-‐based
research
that
attempts
to
understand
AS
and
the
problems
it
sometimes
creates
in
marriage
or
relationships.
A
key
goal
of
such
studies
would
be
to
understand
both
the
typical
characteristics
of
an
AS
marriage
as
reported
and
experienced
by
the
individuals
with
AS,
primarily
men
and
their
non-‐AS
or
NT
spouses,
primarily
women
and
the
clinical
interventions
that
are
effective
in
directly
addressing
the
specific
problems
in
such
marriages.
The
focus
of
this
paper
is
on
what
is
considered
to
be
high-‐functioning
or
mild
autism,
AS
and
the
overlap
of
AS
and
marriage.
The
bias
that
informs
this
paper
aligns
with
the
increasingly
evolving
view
of
many
experts
on
AS,
AS
individuals
and
their
family
members—including
spouses,
that
AS
is
not
a
disorder
but
a
difference
in
neurology
or
neurodiversity,
whereby
an
individual
with
AS
is
seen
as
someone
who
is
differently-‐abled
rather
than
disabled
due
to
their
unique
neurological
makeup
(Page,
2009;
Simone,
2009).
AS
experts
and
counselors
and
individuals
with
AS
and
their
partners
are
asking
how
they
can
compensate
for
the
relational
deficits
and
obstacles
that
an
individual’s
AS
creates
in
a
marriage
and
identify
creative
solutions
to
enrich
and
sustain
marital
relations
long-‐term
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
This
notion
not
only
helps
to
destigmatize
the
label
of
AS,
but
also
helps
the
partners
of
the
individuals
with
AS
to
understand
their
marriage
within
the
framework
of
an
alternate
or
atypical
neurology
(Simone,
2009;
Newton-‐Hendrickx,
2007)
rather
than
personalizing
their
partner’s
seemingly
negative
behaviors
and
then
being
motivated
to
collaboratively
seek
solutions
around
them
(Attwood,
2007).
The
couples’
group
model
further
serves
to
arrive
at
solutions
to
problems
in
a
supportive,
non-‐judgemental,
non-‐stigmatizing
environment,
which
helps
foster
cohesion
and
a
sense
of
community
(Coche,
2010;
Yalom,
2005).
The
mood
in
group
sessions
have
been
reported
to
get
more
optimistic
when
group
members
hear
from
one
another
of
successes
from
therapy
or
from
trying
new
strategies
in
their
relationships
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
The
knowledge
that
there
are
other
couples
in
an
AS
marriage
can
normalize
each
couple’s
experience
and
help
couples
to
feel
comfortable
in
the
group
(Coche,
2010).
Coche,
a
psychologist
specializing
in
couples
group
psychotherapy
and
a
professor
at
the
University
of
Pennsylvania,
states
that
group
work
provides
accountability
and
motivates
couples
to
find
solutions
for
even
the
toughest
issues
that
are
faced
in
the
marriage
because
they
see
everyone
else
working
towards
a
similar
goal.
The
inherent
accountability
structure
of
group
counseling
influences
fulfillment
of
the
homework
assignments
by
the
group
members
as
there
is
an
expectation
that
the
experience
of
the
homework
assignments
will
be
shared
in
group
(Bieling,
McCabe
and
Anthony
2009).
Understanding
an
AS
Marriage
When
the
difficulties
in
an
AS
marriage
are
not
understood
with
the
AS
framework,
neither
partner
is
able
to
understand
why
the
problems
in
their
marriage
exist
and
persist
and
what
to
do
about
them
short
of
being
frustrated,
resentful
or
angry
with
their
partner
or
blaming
themselves
for
the
difficulties
in
the
relationship
(Slater-‐
Walker,
2002;
Bentley,
2007;
Simone,
2009).
Many
of
the
NT
wives
in
AS
marriage
report
that
typical
couple’s
counseling
where
the
therapist
wasn’t
aware
of
AS
and
its
impact
on
marriage
was
actually
damaging
to
a
marriage
already
in
crisis
and
that
a
therapist’s
direction
of
the
husband
in
the
course
of
therapy
is
necessary
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008).
By
learning
to
compensate
for
the
intrusion
of
AS
behaviors
in
their
marriage,
the
couples
are
able
to
improve
the
quality
of
their
relationship,
personal
growth
and
the
maturation
of
their
relationship
rather
than
defensiveness
or
distrust
of
their
spouse
(Yahr,
2001).
Understanding
the
marriage
within
the
framework
of
AS
is
thus
imperative
for
the
marriage
counselor,
the
NT
spouse
and
also
the
partner
with
AS.
Bridging
Parallel
Play
Mutually
shared
interests
are
an
important
factor
in
choosing
a
dating
and
marriage
partner
for
individuals
with
AS
(Aston,
2003),
so
it
stands
to
reason
that
re-‐
igniting
the
passion
for
these
shared
interests
by
designing
an
AS-‐Couple’s
Recreation
Group
would
re-‐establish
positive
feelings
in
both
partners
in
the
marriage.
Music,
theater,
sporting
activities,
a
love
of
animals,
shared
beliefs,
travel,
humor,
etc
are
some
mutual
interests
shared
by
an
AS
partner
and
their
NT
spouse
as
reported
in
interviews
(Bentley,
2007;
Aston,
2003).
A
study
that
examined
the
connection
between
shared
activities
and
marital
satisfaction
revealed
that
couples
themselves
see
spending
quality
time
with
each
other
and
engaging
in
shared
projects
together
as
a
key
aspect
of
keeping
their
relationship
together
(Reissman,
Aron
and
Bergen,
1993).
As
reported
by
the
wife
of
an
AS
man,
traveling
to
a
new
and
unique
destination,
which
involved
researching
and
planning
the
trip,
brought
them
closer
together
and
fostered
feelings
of
love
and
togetherness
in
both
partners
(Bentley,
2007).
While
it
is
important
that
an
NT
partner
seeking
to
have
a
fulfilling
relationship
with
her
partner
accommodate
her
AS
partner’s
need
for
solitude
by
having
her
own
hobbies
and
social
life
that
maybe
independent
of
her
partner,
it
is
also
important
for
the
couple
to
schedule
spending
quality
time
with
each
other
by
negotiating
what
an
acceptable
schedule
for
engaging
in
fun,
recreational
activities
for
both
partners
(Newton-‐
Hendrickx,
2007;
Aston,
2002).
The
results
of
a
research
study
of
couples
who
were
assigned
novel
and
arousing
recreation
activities
state
that
since
shared
activities
were
more
likely
to
involve
cooperation,
and
a
sense
of
interdependence,
the
assignment
reinforced
closeness
between
the
partners,
created
the
opportunity
for
meaningful
conversations
which
led
to
increased
bonding
and
reinforced
the
relationship
between
the
partners
(Aron
et
al.,
2000).
Even
though
this
study
was
presumably
conducted
with
non-‐AS
couples
where
both
partners
were
NTs,
due
to
the
fact
that
common
interests
were
listed
as
one
of
the
primary
reasons
for
bringing
couples
together
in
an
AS
marriage
during
the
initial
stages
of
the
relationship
(Aston,
2002),
it
stands
to
reason
that
to
sustain
the
marriage,
spending
time
engaged
in
exciting
activities
would
bridge
the
loneliness
and
isolation
that
partners,
primarily
the
NT
partner,
feels
in
such
a
marriage.
For
the
partner
with
AS,
creating
a
structured
schedule
to
spend
recreational
time
with
their
spouse
would
potentially
remove
or
reduce
anxiety
around
feelings
of
inadequacy
that
they
aren’t
pleasing
their
spouse
or
that
they
aren’t
doing
the
right
things
to
please
their
spouse
(Aston,
2003;
Hendrickx,
2009).
Additionally,
the
fact
that
individuals
with
AS
generally
like
to
have
a
predictable
and
organized
schedule
(Attwood,
2007),
planning
their
calendars
around
these
shared
activities
could
result
in
a
sense
of
safety,
security,
and
calm.
In
alignment
with
the
contemporary
trends
in
exploring
inclusive
and
integrative
methods
of
marriage
counseling
and
the
recent
interest
in
the
effectiveness
of
shared
recreational
activities
and
marital
satisfaction
and
the
couples’
group
counseling,
this
thesis
will
present
an
action
project
in
the
form
of
a
recreational
couples’
therapy
group
specially
for
couples
in
relationships
or
marriages
where
one
partner
has
AS,
either
officially
or
unofficially
diagnosed.
This
action
model
is
designed
to
serve
as
a
complimentary
intervention
to
further
educate
the
individuals
in
the
couple
on
the
traits,
deficits,
and
strengths
of
AS.
In
developing
the
action
project
the
typical
risk
factors
of
the
severe
isolation
and
loneliness
encountered
by
NT
women
in
AS
marriages
from
emotional
deprivation
and
lack
of
time
spent
with
their
partner
will
be
considered.
The
challenges
couples
encounter
while
planning
and
scheduling
spending
quality
time
with
each
other
will
be
highlighted
as
a
central
component
of
the
treatment
plan.
Focus
will
be
placed
on
both
partners
in
the
marriage
coming
up
with
solutions
to
compensate
for
the
deficits
that
exist
in
the
relationship
as
a
direct
result
of
one
partner
having
AS.
The
predominant
intent
of
this
thesis
is
to
offer
psychologists,
counselors
and
social
workers
treating
clients
in
a
marriage
where
one
partner
has
AS
solution-‐focused,
behavioral,
AS-‐specific
interventions
for
addressing
the
unique
challenges
that
couples
face
in
navigating
an
AS
marriage.
Driving
Questions
The
central
questions
informing
the
inquiry
of
this
paper,
as
well
as
the
creation
of
the
proposed
action
project,
are
as
follows:
§ What
are
the
AS
traits
that
precipitate
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage?
§ Can
an
AS-‐Couple’s
Recreational
Group
intervention
help
a
couple
to
bridge
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage?
§ If
so,
how
might
the
idea
of
novel
and
exciting
recreational
activities
in
a
marriage
be
used
to
bridge
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage
along
psychoeducation
on
AS
and
group
discussions
based
on
supportive
sharing
of
relational
experiences
and
AS
psychoeducation.
CHAPTER
TWO:
REVIEW
OF
LITERATURE
Asperger
Syndrome
(AS)
is
a
mild
form
of
autism—a
neurological
condition
defined
by
a
collection
of
cognitive
and
behavioral
traits
that
are
manifested
by
exceptional
abilities
in
the
fields
of
math,
science,
technology,
music,
and
art
and
serious
disabilities
in
the
area
of
social
interactions
and
personal
relationships
(Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008;
Boyd,
2010).
Due
to
the
complex
and
nuanced
nature
of
the
syndrome,
there
have
been
challenges
in
the
diagnosis
of
adults
with
AS;
in
particular,
“high
functioning”
adults
with
AS
leading
more
or
less
normal
lives
with
academic
success,
jobs,
romantic
relationships,
marriage,
etc
(Lovett,
2005).
The
exceptional
abilities
that
many
individuals
with
AS
possess
also
serves
to
make
them
attractive
partners
to
certain
women
who
value
intelligence
and
the
passionate
pursuit
of
specific
interests
(Lovett,
2005;
Simone,
2009).
Attwood
(2007),
an
internationally
recognized
(Boyd,
2010;
Sacks,
1995)
expert
in
AS
states
that
given
that
AS
is
primarily
characterized
by
deficits
in
human
interactions,
it
shouldn’t
be
difficult
to
understand
that
many
marriages
where
one
partner
has
AS
are
fraught
with
conflicts
and
challenges
that
may
be
more
severe
than
what
is
typical.
Understanding
AS
is
key
to
problem-‐solving
issues
in
relationships
where
one
partner
has
AS,
as
many
AS
traits
can
be
inherently
opposed
to
the
framework
of
a
romantic
relationship
or
marriage
(Stanford,
2002)
and
if
not
understood
in
the
context
of
AS,
any
attempts
to
resolve
issues
can
backfire
and
cause
more
damage
not
only
to
the
marriage,
but
also
to
the
well
being
of
the
partners
in
the
relationship
or
marriage
(Jekel
and
Myhill,
2008).
A
primary
issue
that
presents
itself
in
couples
in
an
AS
marriage
is
the
one
of
parallel
play,
where
partners
in
an
AS
marriage
or
relationship
engage
in
separate
activities
even
when
in
the
same
house
or
environment
for
hours,
days
or
even
weeks
at
a
time
(Stanford
2002;
Simone,
2009).
When
a
husband
continually
spends
time
by
himself
and
doesn’t
seek
his
wife’s
company,
she
is
often
left
feelings
rejected
and
unloved
(Aston,
2003).
The
effects
of
parallel
play
on
the
NT
spouse
in
a
marriage
can
be
loneliness
and
isolation
oftentimes
resulting
in
depression
(Aston,
2003)
and
therefore
bridging
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage
can
be
a
key
intervention
in
restoring
the
relationship
and
treating
the
feelings
of
loneliness
in
the
NT
spouse.
Understanding
what
AS
traits
precipitate
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage
is
important
if
we
are
to
explore
strategies
to
bridge
parallel
play
within
an
AS
marriage.
There
have
been
a
number
of
research
studies
done
with
groups
of
couples—not
identified
as
having
AS,
where
these
couples
were
assigned
to
spending
time
with
each
other
engaged
in
“novel
and
arousing”
activities,
resulting
in
a
significant
increase
in
the
quality
of
marital
satisfaction
for
both
partners
in
the
couples
(Aron
et
al,
2000).
Given
that
the
presenting
problem
in
many
couples
where
one
partner
has
AS
is
the
one
of
parallel
play
(Stanford,
2002;
Myhill
and
Jekel,
2008)
the
driving
question
is:
can
an
AS-‐Couple’s
Recreational
Group
intervention
help
a
couple
to
bridge
parallel
play
in
an
AS
marriage?
Literature
also
suggests
that
educating
both
partners
around
AS
in
order
to
bring
about
self-‐
awareness
and
understanding
what
is
AS
and
what
are
gender-‐related
traits
that
cause
challenges
in
a
marriage
is
imperative.
Therefore,
an
AS-‐Couple’s
Recreational
Group
intervention
based
on
novel
and
exciting
recreational
activities
be
used
to
bridge
parallel
play,
along
with
in-‐group
discussions
based
on
psychoeducation
about
AS
and
supportive
sharing
of
relational
experiences.
This
review
of
literature
contains
many
first
person
accounts
of
AS
marriages
and
perspectives
of
individuals
with
AS—both
male
and
female,
NT
women
married
to
men
with
AS,
and
AS
experts—psychologists,
psychotherapists,
clinical
social
workers
with
extensive
knowledge
of
AS
from
an
academic
and
experiential
perspective.
Language
and
phrasing
AS
is
increasingly
being
used
interchangeably
with
the
term
autism,
high-‐
functioning
autism
or
an
autism
spectrum
disorder
(Page,
2009).
The
writer
of
this
paper
will
stick
with
the
term
AS.
Given
the
higher
prevalence
of
AS
men
and
the
fact
that
existing
literature
leans
heavily
in
the
direction
of
a
male
with
AS
mated
with
a
non-‐AS
or
NT
partner,
this
writer
will
refer
to
the
AS
partner
as
the
male
spouse
and
the
female
spouse
as
the
NT
partner.
The
writer
will
include
all
manner
of
romantic
relationships,
including
same-‐sex
relationships,
between
neurotypical
and
AS
individuals
under
the
umbrella:
AS
marriage.
This
is
additionally
due
to
the
idea
that
often
folks
who
are
married
may
often
have
more
of
an
incentive
to
work
on
their
relationship
(Weiner-‐
Davis,
1992).
Asperger’s
Syndrome
Diagnostically,
AS
is
understood
to
be
a
mild
form
of
autism
and
even
though
the
existing
DSM-‐IV
(2000)
lists
it
in
a
category
different
from
autism,
the
DSM-‐V
is
primed
to
include
AS
under
autism
spectrum
disorders
(Insel,
2009).
AS
is
characterized
by
the
complex
interactions
of
restricted
and
rigid
thinking
and
repetitious
behaviors
in
addition
to
levels
of
high
IQ
and
exceptional
aptitudes
in
the
fields
of
technology,
science,
math,
music
and
art
(Lovett,
2005).
Gifted
scientists
and
artists
such
as
Albert
Einstein,
Andy
Warhol,
Beethoven,
Michaelangelo,
Mozart,
Vincent
van
Gogh
and
W.B.
Yeats
are
posthumously
thought
to
have
AS
based
on
information
examined
in
biographical
accounts
(Boyd,
2009).
As
we
can
see,
AS
seems
to
have
been
part
of
the
human
story
for
as
long
as
we
know
and
the
neurological
condition
of
AS
can
be
a
valuable
asset
to
society
and
human
development
(Attwood,
2007).
In
spite
of
the
long-‐time
prevalence
of
AS,
it
is
a
relatively
new
syndrome
to
be
included
in
the
DSM-‐IV
which
reflects
a
lack
of
understanding
of
AS,
in
particular
as
it
presents
in
individuals
that
are
professionally
successful—both
in
the
clinical
community
and
the
world
at
large
(Stanford,
2002).
Hans
Asperger
first
published
an
account
and
diagnostic
framework
of
what
is
now
known
as
Asperger’s
Syndrome
(AS)
in
1944
(Attwood,
2007);
however,
the
Diagnostic
and
Statistical
Manual’s
fourth
edition
(DSM–IV)
in
the
United
States
didn’t
recognize
AS
until
1994.
Below
is
a
summary
of
the
DSM-‐IV
(2000)
criteria
for
AS.
The
criteria
is
divided
into
five
different
categories:
1.
Impairment
in
social
interaction
(meeting
criteria
for
more
than
two
traits)
-‐use
of
nonverbal
behaviors
ex:
eye
contact,
facial
expression,
gestures,
body
language
-‐
failure
to
develop
appropriate
peer
relationships
-‐
lack
of
spontaneous
sharing
of
enjoyment,
interests
-‐
lack
of
social
or
emotional
reciprocity
2.
Restricted,
repetitive
and
stereotyped
behavior,
interests
and
activities
-‐
preoccupation
with
intense
special
interests
-‐
inflexible
adherence
to
routines/rituals
-‐
stereotyped
and
repetitive
motor
mannerisms
3.
Clinically
significant
deficits
in
social,
occupational
domains
4.
No
delay
in
general
language
development
in
childhood
5.
No
delay
in
the
development
of
cognitive
ability,
self-‐help
skills,
adaptive
behavior,
or
curiosity
about
the
environment.
The
above
DSM-‐IV
diagnostic
criteria
was
primarily
used
for
children
who
showed
mild
autistic
traits
and
although
AS
has
been
widely
recognized
in
children
and
these
children
grow
into
adulthood,
for
some
reason
the
medical
community
has
long
ignored
adults
with
AS
(Lovett,
2005).
AS
in
adults
born
prior
to
1994,
when
AS
was
officially
included
in
the
DSM-‐IV
remain
unidentified
and
up
to
50%
of
adults
with
AS
may
currently
be
undiagnosed
(Attwood,
2007).
AS
is
understood
as
being
a
developmental
delay
that
unlike
many
other
impairments
or
disabilities
is
largely
invisible
due
to
the
fact
that
there
are
few
obvious
physical
signs
of
a
person
having
AS
such
as
a
lack
of
the
use
of
non-‐verbal
gestures,
physical
clumsiness,
staring
or
insufficient
eye
contact
(Page,
2009;
Lovett,
2005;
Stanford,
2002).
The
syndrome
is
characterized
by
a
nuanced
set
of
traits,
which
aren’t
always
easy
to
identify
or
categorize
even
with
the
help
of
the
diagnostic
manual
criteria
(Hendrickx,
2008;
Myhill,
2010).
AS
traits
are
more
varied
and
subtle
than
what
appears
in
the
DSM-‐IV
criteria
and
not
everybody
will
have
all
the
traits
that
make
up
the
syndrome
and
they
are
manifested
to
different
degrees
in
each
individual
with
AS
and
may
include
qualities
such
as:
•
Being
naive
and
gullible;
•
Little
or
no
awareness
of
other
people’s
feelings;
•
Little
or
no
emotional
connections
with
others;
•
Overt
sensitivity
to
the
stimuli
of
sound,
lights,
smell,
color
or
touch;
•
Literal
in
speech
and
cognitive
understanding
of
matters;
•
Needing
more
than
usual
amounts
of
solitary
time;
•
Ability
to
focus
on
one
task
for
hours
at
a
time;
•
Difficulty
with
transitions;
•
Unable
to
fluently
participate
in
a
conversation;
•
Lack
of
affect
or
emotional
processing;
•
Trouble
with
theory
of
mind;
•
Slower
than
average
auditory,
visual
or
intellectual
processing;
•
Lack
of
organizational
skills;
•
Normal
to
very
high
intelligence;
•
Good
verbal
skills,
including
rich
vocabularies;
•
Originality
and
creativity;
•
Honesty
and
ingenuity;
•
Careful
attention
to
details;
•
Strong
work
ethic,
with
particular
attention
to
accuracy
and
quality
of
work;
•
Narrow
and
focused
special
interests;
and
•
A
tendency
to
focus
on
details
(Simone,
2009;
Sanford,
2002;
Attwood,
2007;
“What
is
asperger,”
2010).
The
more
extreme
symptoms
of
individuals
with
autism
such
as
no
language,
low
IQ,
asocial,
hand
flapping
and
dysmorphic
facial
features
(Insel,
2009)
lead
to
the
myth
that
individuals
with
Asperger’s
Syndrome
or
mild
autism
didn’t
have
social
relationships
outside
of
their
families
of
origin
or
caretakers,
let
alone
having
romantic
relationships
and
getting
married
(Ramsay,
et
al.,
2005;
Stanford,
2002).
The
work
of
AS
experts
such
as
Tony
Attwood
(2007),
Maxine
Aston
(2003),
Sarah
Hendrickx
(2007,
2008)
and
the
large
numbers
of
married
adults
that
seen
at
the
Asperger’s
Association
of
New
England
demonstrate
that
individuals
with
AS
do
get
married.
Many
individuals
with
AS
or
Aspies
as
they
are
want
to
call
themselves
(Page,
2009)
are
just
very
good
at
adapting
or
hiding
their
behaviors
or
grew
up
in
environments
where
being
idiosyncratic
or
extremely
bookish,
computer
obsessed
and
academic—some
typical
AS
traits—were
valued
and
encouraged
(Slater-‐Walker,
2002).
Given
that
individuals
with
AS
typically
have
a
high
IQ,
they
can
learn
and
train
themselves
in
certain
rudimentary
social
skills
to
the
point
where
they
can
even
come
across
as
funny
and
charming
thus
misleading
many
doctors
and
clinicians
(Wilcox,
2011).
Additionally,
individuals
with
AS
are
often
at
ease
in
situations
that
draw
upon
their
expertise,
so
the
aspie
professor
of
physics
would
be
quite
at
ease
at
a
physics
conference
or
in
a
classroom
in
front
of
a
large
group
of
students
(M.
Wilcox,
2011).
Diagnosis
Even
if
an
individual
with
AS
desires
a
diagnosis
of
his/her
condition
based
on
intuitive
insight
of
their
own
developmental,
behavioral
and
psychological
Description:Special thanks are offered to Antra. Borofsky at the Center for the Study of Relationship who is simply a therapist par excellence and has been a valuable support and resource. Most of all, I'd like to thank The Hussies—Sylvia, Heather, Lara, Brant and Julie—members of my cohort group who made
