There are big differences on the two condition and fragile x is worse so I wanted to know so we had the tests done in both children and they were negative. In fragile x there is a limit to how much the child progresses and possible IQ where with ASD there is no limit and a high functioning child can actually have a higher IQ than an NT child of the same age. This is the case with our son and his services at school and some good teachers have done wonders for him. He has a photographic memory and his visualization skills are amazing. His teachers have used this to his advantage and he is doing great in school. He still has his issues but that is being worked on.

In fragile x most of the time no matter how hard you work the outcome will not change because the child's brain is only capable of so much advancement so treatments are not the same. I agree with everyone else that this is not your fault either way and you did nothing wrong, but it is important to know so you can get the correct therapies for your child. Other than that it does not really matter in the long run because your child is still going to be who they are no matter what.

My answer is a lot like Skamath's: we had testing for Fragile X before we got an ASD diagnosis because we were looking for answers at that point too.

To me, ruling something out is better than always wondering if it does exist....just my opinion.

Good luck and thinking of you!

We had testing for Fragile X before we got an ASD diagnosis. We were really just looking for answers at that point.. We are still planning to have more kids, but hearing the negative results for Fragile X was a relief at the time. Though now of course, we will be on the lookout for ASD with future kids.

No blood test will ever change the way how we feel about our son. The hope will be that a blood test can explain shed some information on etiology of autism that we are dealing with (whether genetic or metabolic, autoimmune, or unknown), then it is extremely useful. Even for FragileX, there was a very promising drug under clinical trial (which stopped at phase 2 due to insufficient funding to do another phase 2). Say it was positive for one of the genetic mutation, then that gives is a more targeted approach to research in greater detail rather than looking at ALL autism research and figure out what other ways (other than traditional therapy) that we might be able to help. I think I would feel more guilty not knowing (if there was test) for years and decades, and then finding out later there was something that I could have done.