Search
Program Calendar
Browse By Day
Browse By Time
Browse By Person
Browse By Session Type
Browse By Topic
Personal Schedule
Sign In
Deadlines
Policies
Updating Your Submission
Requesting AV
Presentation Tips
Request a Visa Letter
FAQs
X (Twitter)
Search Tips
Annual Meeting App
About Annual Meeting
The authority to diagnose is a distinguishing prerogative of modern medicine. While a growing body of research addresses various aspects of diagnosis, few studies analyze just how it is achieved through talk-in-interaction. This paper examines how clinicians assembled a diagnosis of a child who was evaluated for autism. Drawing on audio and video recordings at a clinic for developmental disabilities, I use a combination of ethnomethodology and conversation analysis to show how a critical fact about the child’s mental functioning was formulated, challenged, and transformed across three consecutive stages of his evaluation: (1) testing, (2) a case conference among clinicians, and (3) an informing interview where the diagnosis was delivered to the parents. I analyze how this fact emerged as an artifact of clinician-child interactions, and how clinicians used storytelling to render its diagnostic implications. In addition to examining how these stories are methodically produced, I argue that they frame the child’s behavior in ways that suggest a lack of competence while eliding the skills and competencies he may have been displaying.