Not at all an inappropriate question. And I'm always glad to talk about any of this stuff and hopefully help in any way that I can.
Side note: Vyvanse has been life-changing for me as well. There's a simultaneous grieving for what could have been all those years, with excitement about what's finally possible.
To your main question, I had the exact same question for years. And I see many people articulating the same sentiment, online and in person. In fact, several years before my diagnosis, I saw a far less-qualified therapist about a diagnosis. I firmly disagreed with her principles in how I should answer questions. In hindsight, my disagreement was correct. (As a basic example, if I was able to learn how to make eye contact - no matter how hard and extreme it was to teach myself, and how much effort it now takes - then that is not an issue/symptom in that therapists mind. I know now that is completely wrong, given how masking works, especially for adults.)
After that initial meeting, I suspected the diagnosis would come up negative (it did). And I was left to consider for several what would be the point in getting a diagnosis from someone far more qualified.
By the time I decided to actually seek out a far more qualified professional to do a far more thorough assessment, I was very clear on why a diagnosis was important: I needed to understand if I had multiple symptoms to address individually (irregular sleep, executive function issues, anxiety, social challenges, etc), or if that collection of symptoms would be better worked on if I understood that it may actually be one thing - autism - and should be approached as such.
So, for me, the utility was because I needed to know what I was working on, in order to work effectively on it. For example, executive function issues stemming from autism would be approached differently than "you just never learned how to prioritize and start things." Or, social/emotional issues stemming from autism are approached very differently (ie: I may start at more basic and fundamental places, and fill in very different knowledge gaps) than if I was neurotypical.
That said, I know of people who don't have official diagnoses, and they're okay with that. Some have fully adopted the diagnosis and researched how to approach it. Some haven't and have chosen to recognize that they're different. And both of these paths seemed to work for these people. For me, I would just much rather know.
Let me know if that helps or if it begets any other questions.
Side note: Vyvanse has been life-changing for me as well. There's a simultaneous grieving for what could have been all those years, with excitement about what's finally possible.
To your main question, I had the exact same question for years. And I see many people articulating the same sentiment, online and in person. In fact, several years before my diagnosis, I saw a far less-qualified therapist about a diagnosis. I firmly disagreed with her principles in how I should answer questions. In hindsight, my disagreement was correct. (As a basic example, if I was able to learn how to make eye contact - no matter how hard and extreme it was to teach myself, and how much effort it now takes - then that is not an issue/symptom in that therapists mind. I know now that is completely wrong, given how masking works, especially for adults.)
After that initial meeting, I suspected the diagnosis would come up negative (it did). And I was left to consider for several what would be the point in getting a diagnosis from someone far more qualified.
By the time I decided to actually seek out a far more qualified professional to do a far more thorough assessment, I was very clear on why a diagnosis was important: I needed to understand if I had multiple symptoms to address individually (irregular sleep, executive function issues, anxiety, social challenges, etc), or if that collection of symptoms would be better worked on if I understood that it may actually be one thing - autism - and should be approached as such.
So, for me, the utility was because I needed to know what I was working on, in order to work effectively on it. For example, executive function issues stemming from autism would be approached differently than "you just never learned how to prioritize and start things." Or, social/emotional issues stemming from autism are approached very differently (ie: I may start at more basic and fundamental places, and fill in very different knowledge gaps) than if I was neurotypical.
That said, I know of people who don't have official diagnoses, and they're okay with that. Some have fully adopted the diagnosis and researched how to approach it. Some haven't and have chosen to recognize that they're different. And both of these paths seemed to work for these people. For me, I would just much rather know.
Let me know if that helps or if it begets any other questions.