When philosophy does broach the limits of mental illness (ie. mental wellness/the Will to life ect.) it rarely extends very far, leaving much of that topic to the field of psychiatrists and psychologists which don't do much than observe and suggest treatment rather than explore the causes and benefits of a specific mental disruption, or even do much to consider the origin or use for such mental oddities, seeing them only as a malevolent anomaly that must be limited (hence the focus on research for what "causes" autism to prevent it, rather than better understand/utilize it).

My point is, what do you guys think can be considered when looking at such anomalies such as autism spectrum disorders, BPD, ODD, personality disorders ect.? As a female (women are much more likely to be misdiagnosed as men are) individual with high functioning autism (misdiagnosed as "gifted" as a child) who has spent of my life working to mask and camouflage my social and personal deficits and difficulties, I am only now realizing the extent of my strengths as an individual with high functioning ASD, a long with of course, better understanding my weaknesses and where those may have originated from. Some I certainly inherited from my parents, who are both super intelligent OCD overachievers; with my dad the super weird one. Some I think I'm naturally more sensitive or predisposed to, ie. sensory issues, my anxiety ect.
Did not mean to turn this into a personal monologue, my second point is, to what extent do these mental oddities relate to philosophy? As they are mental they raise interesting questions about the relation to the mind and body, and our relation between our internal/subjective states and the external world. Sensory issues in particular, are perhaps our first solid evidence on how relatively similar people can so radically experience the so-called 'objective' world differently, thus eroding our clear conceptions of a unified, absolute, and objectively true external reality, we cannot see past our internal realities. That being said, I can train myself to function in various sensory environments, but that's only after extreme and purposive practice, and my being able to put up with over stimulation (ie. from light, sound, exhaustion, or feel) is largely a testament to my willpower, social training, and good nature, rather than to the existence of said over stimulation. My overcoming it does not deny its initial existence.
Lastly, to what extent do such mental abnormalities BENEFIT rather than harm the individual, and in what ways are these potential benefits being (either purposively or unknowingly) overlooked? For example, especially in the disciplines of philosophy and science, there are a lot of very talented individuals who were waylaid or somehow impeded by their mental or developmental issues. That is recorded fact, ie. the suicides of Plath or Woolf, or the manic episodes of Shakespeare, or the social issues and ASD of Einstein; but in what ways did these abnormalities help these individuals? Or even on an evolutionary scale? For example, my friend posed a working theory that many of these abnormalities such as ASD are considered "issues" in the first place because they impede some kind of social function, such as ASD impedes empathy understanding, ToM, and expression of emotion or feeling-but to that extent that such social abilities are considering lacking in the ASD individual, there is that much more "space" available for the time and energy to be devoted elsewhere, such as intelligence, skill, ect. In simpler terms, having less ability and capacities in social interactions leads to decreased social interaction, which leads to an adaption to desire social interaction less = frees up time and energy for interest and involvement in other areas of life, such as extreme and focused interests (once considered the defining feature of a sub-disorder Aspergers, now encompassed as another potential characteristic of ASD. Meaning, ASD and other 'issues' are nothing more than an evolutionary balancing of skills and capabilities; less water in one cup = more water in another cup, and it can also be considered an evolutionary safeguard; such as my initial examples of mental illnesses (often resultant from or comorbiditating with such abnormalities as ASD) the natural limitations each deficit, such as the example ones in ASD result in issues that eventually do limit and curtail the strengths in another area, whether by way of secondary symptoms such as depression and substance abuse, or directly like ASD emotional expression, organization, and regulation deficits do cause real emotional turbulence in my life that impact my productivity, quality of life, and overall wellbeing-thus limiting my development even in my areas of strength such as school. The negative implications of such disorders and abnormalities act as a leveller and equalizer of extremes, preventing any one individual to become too extremely good or bad in certain capacities.

Anyways, not sure how much sense that made but as you can see I'm just interested even in opening up a general discussion as this is an otherwise non-existent in the field of philosophy, even in such focuses as philosophy of mind or philosophy of emotion ect.