• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Asperger's has officially been dropped from the DSM. What now?

Arashi222 said:
People need to stop freaking out about the changes. They are actually moving moving toward a more spectrum stance on most diagnosis autism just happens to be the first because lets be honest it is a spectrum disorder. Honestly the criteria which I as someone who is educated to understand it is not really more strict it just seems that away. This will not last either there is always a revised version of the DSM . This is not about medication this is about making it easier and more streamlined to determine where you stand on that spectrum. I am not concerned. Really there is nothing to be so worried about.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree about it not being stricter. From what I Saul when I compared that two it is clearly stricter. I think it is also about the fact of the autism rates going so high lately. I think they want those numbers to go down. Although I really don't know why. I do agree that a revision maybe likely once they apply this to the real world and find out that there are people on the autism spectrum that have no diagnosis.
 
I found these remarks on a different site and they may give some perspective:

"There is a largely artificial distinction drawn between aspbergers and HF autism, and even the line drawn at language delay in autism leaves the two clinically indistinguishable by adulthood. I had a slight speech delay, and spent years in speech therapy overcoming assorted speech impediments, and I am diagnosed with Asperger's. I also had motor delays. I can be socially withdrawn when it suits me. My sensory issues are quite distressing under certain circumstances. HFA is thought to be a concrete and literal thought process than Asperger's, but I'm criticized all the time for being too literal. I have above average intelligence, but HFA by definition consists of autistics with average or above average intelligence. Other autistics are labeled LFA or maybe MFA. It is sometimes thought that an Aspie understands personal space while someone with HFA may not.I understand it only in the sense that I do not desire to be excessively close to other people- if I am in their personal space, it follows that they are in my personal space, and I don't like having someone in my personal space. Not only is there no fundamental distinction between AS and HFA, or indeed AS and LFA, there is no sharp line between autistic and non-autistic."

My thought is that before, as in now, diagnosis between these is dependent primarily on the therapist. It is not something that is easily quantifiable, but a subjective diagnosis.
 
Biblio-Love said:
My thought is that before, as in now, diagnosis between these is dependent primarily on the therapist. It is not something that is easily quantifiable, but a subjective diagnosis.
Click to expand...

This sums up the problem in a nutshell. And to be honest, it sums up the problem in a nutshell for any nut (no pun intended).

The problem with mental disorders is that they don't appear from the outside a lot. If I'm disabled because I lost a leg, that's visible. SOmeones thoughtprocess, how someone thinks, how someone acts in general, that takes more time and effort to figure out. And even then, it's still open to interpretation.

I wouldn't have a clue how to turn diagnostic tools into something more objective, but if we're taking it in terms of interpretation we can just as well claim there is no such thing as autism and people should just move on.

From pretty much every sentence I read listed in the new criteria (but also in the previous criteria) I see over half the words that are in fact open to interpretation. There's, from what I gathered, no distinct median that one can take as an objective benchmark. And it's clear that can't be done, since you have to cover "the grey area" as well. And since we're dealing with humans and not robots, development is a totally organic process.
 
What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;

from Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet
 
That was cute, Loomis & it's nice seeing you back out & about.

For those of us who are already well into adulthood, the implications of this change won't have much impact, probably. But, for people who have children on the spectrum who need resources medically & in school, they will feel the real brunt of this. Many kids will no longer qualify for badly needed support under the new standards since they will fall off the spectrum.
 
"Many kids will no longer qualify for badly needed support under the new standards since they will fall off the spectrum. "

If what I have read is correct all who have a diagnosis now will be switched to the new diagnosis.

the change will affect the people going in for a new diagnosis who have never been diagnnosed.
 
Undiagnosed I have to disagree and here is the main reason I am disagree with your assessment. Is that I am actually a clinical social worker. I have learned about the DSM in all of its good and bad. It has always been a guideline not the end all and be all. I have also read it in the context of a clinician and it is the same strictness as it has always been it just has new wording and trying to streamline it more because it is hard a clinician to determine between and HFA or Asperger's and most of the new diagnosis are not new they are just being shifted into a more spectrum orientated avenue to make it easier for clinicians to diagnosis. Now I am speaking as a clinician I am speaking as an Aspie too this is getting everyone all up in arms over something that is in the real world application will probably not affect those waiting diagnosis or not. I am not trying to argue I am trying to help people to understand that the revision is in essence actually better because it will be more on spectrum than it has been.
 
Arashi I have been looking into this in great detail and it has actually become an obsession becouse of the fact that my son needs an evaluation for a diagnosis and it is getting very close to the change date and so I have looked into the details of how this could affect his diagnosis. I am not saying the folloowing to srir anyone up but in hopes to imform then of what I have discovered in my research. Becouse I beleive people involved have a right to know the truth. I am not saying this change is wrong or bad but I am saying it is sure to cut the future numbers of autism diagnosis down.

I beleive what you are saying about it makeing it easier for clinitions to diagnose and all. Or at least that that is the way it is being presented to you. They are trying to present this to everyone in a way that will avoid stiring up controversy as much as possable. And I agree that people who already have a diagnosis have no cause to worry about anything becouse they will have the new diagnosis anyway (that is the imformation I have been getting by reaserching on internet anyway). And people who are in the 'grey' area and are excluded from a diagnoses in the future will surley survive without it just as we did before Asperger's.

However here are the resons I have for beleiving that the issue is being presented in a sort of 'sugar coated' way to clinitions and to all the population as to not stur up controversy ....
1. I looked up both the current criteria and the new one and went threw it applying it to myself, and did the same for my son (takeing into consideration that a lot of it is abjective in both cases) and My son clearley is a fit for ALL the current criteria, and I probably am too, however it is a much tighter fit for both of us on the new ciriteia and would take much more of a leanient veiw point of the clinition on the new criteria in the case of both myself and my son. (the difference is especiallly in the first part of both)

2.Then as I was researching in hopes of learning the facts for myself about what is going on I read a lot of information. One report I happened upon was about a group who did a study useing the current and the new criteria. They diagnosed a group of kids useing the current criteria... 25 fit the diagnnosis... they then took those 25 and applied the new criteria to them and i think it was like 12 of them who qualified for a diagnosis with the new ccriteria. Anyway I can't help but beleive there is merrit to this study becouse it fits what I saw when I went over the two lists in relation to myself and my son and the part of the criteria they pointed out as being the 'hold up' that disdqualified the other kids is the same part that stood out to me when I had gone over the two applying them to my son and myself. (as I said, it is in the first part).

3. In researching it come to my attention that this change may also have something to do with the fact that the autism numbers have skyrocketed in the past several years. the official Asperger's definition came into affect in 1994 and once Asperger's sort of 'coutht on' riseing numbers of autism foloowed bringing the count to what 1 in 115 people in the us? Anyway I can only assume that of those numbers many of the people are probably within the generation that were kids in the years that Asperger's 'cought on'. And I also would guess that many people in their 30's - 90's (such as myself ond some of the other older memebers here on AC) would not have considered Asperger's becouse Asperger's wasnt much of a 'thing' when they were grewing up. So we don't have a diagnosis and are not in the count. So anyway what I am getting at is this change surley has to be about stoping the riseing rates of autism. I mean imagion if this Asperger's deffinition and diagnostic driteria remained the same as it is now for enough years to include an entire life span of all generations. What would the number of autism in the US be then? The medical community is extreamley good at presenting thing in a 'pollitacly correct' way. They are not gonna put out reports saying "hey the autism rates are too high and if we don't make a change we are gonna have half the population of the US on disability or SSI" No instead they have to say " We are makeing changes that will streamline the diagnostic process and make accurate diagnosis easier and more effective" They have to say it that way as not to cause all kinda comotion.

These are the facts as I see them. To state that the changes will not cut down on the future number of people who will be diagnosed with some type of autism is just not true. And really since I have realized the issues I stated in #3. I don't see how they could not make a change that would cut the number of autism down.
 
Last edited:
Wow! this obsessing is getting way to intense. I really need to give it a rest. Before a couple weeks ago I had no clue what the word Asperger's even ment. It could have been a virus for all I knew. I have taken in way too much information over a short time. Hourss and hours and hours and hours....obsessivley....I am beginning to wonder if Asberger's is even a disorder at all now, or just a different type of 'operating system' . ... Well whateverr ... I gotta give this a rest for a while.
 
This is just my observations on the matter:

I don't know enough about the DSM or psychology in general to say whether the changes were justified or not. As I said before, I do suspect that politics sometimes plays a part in determining what is or isn't a disorder. And the fact that these things are subjective makes it even more difficult to discern what is going on.

I do know that the medical community is not very good at communicating with the general public. They may know and understand among themselves what all this means but they forget the average person on the street does not know. Because I work in research and am familiar with medical lingo I am called upon all the time to translate doctorese to my non-medical friends.

It seems to me that the medical community and those that put together the DSM have a responsibility to explain to the rest of us what they are doing and why; not just announce a change but make sure people understand what that change means. I know in my field if new regulations are proposed there is usually a period of time where the regulatory agency seeks input from the people who are most affected by the regulations. They then take this into account. I don't see this happening with the DSM.
 
Spinning compass they actually do do that with the DSM in fact they have put off putting out hte DSM V for several years pushing it back year as they discussed and talked to clinicans and such. Its a big deal to change things and they do talk to people about it but a lot of people don't pay it any heed and don't learn about it. Honestly the DSM was created to help clinicans to help people. Like with anything of course some politics are invovled that is the nature of humans but it was orignally and continues to be of help to those of us in the field. I do have education in this matter and I do understand the implications of what is happening but at the same time I think it is actually a good thing. It will help get people the right diagnosis and make the shift to a more spectrum based DSM for all disorders not just Autism. Autism was just the jumping board./SIZE]
 
I agree that diagnosis and treatment are different subjects, but I believe that once a diagnosis is made, it seems that a gut reaction made by society is to see how the condition can be treated. It also seems to raise another issue: What is a "disorder" and what is "normal"? Does "normal" even exist?
 
Jacki Cucinotta said:
I agree that diagnosis and treatment are different subjects, but I believe that once a diagnosis is made, it seems that a gut reaction made by society is to see how the condition can be treated. It also seems to raise another issue: What is a "disorder" and what is "normal"? Does "normal" even exist?
Click to expand...


It also seems to raise another issue: What is a "disorder" and what is "normal"? Does "normal" even exist?

When I learned about Asperger's and veleived my son to have it and myself and mabey my sonsDad I told my son's Dad about it. He said well expain to me what it is", I told him a little of wha I knew about it. He said , "So that's just the way I am... what's wrong with that?" , "it's a brain disorder", I told him, "Why is it a disorder. How do they know it's not normal?", he asked..."probalby becouse only such and such number of people have it" I said, "O, so if the numbers were the other way around it wouldln't be a disorder?" he said,,, "I guess" I said.....
Now I investigate more and learn that Asperger's has only had an officially agreed upon definition in the US for the past 19 years. I mean when I was a kid Asperger's was hardley know about (I am 44). I have to wonder if Asperger's would have been left in the 'book' meaning the DSM for like 100 years to cover an ientire lifespan of generations who many people would really have it?? Mabey it's not unnormal. I really wonder/





Today I talked to someone from the autism resors center for Indiana becouse I was wanting to aske her where I could take my son for a diagnosis. She was looking to some p;laces for me and She said the Riley autism center in Indy is not doing any diagnoseing right now. I had to wonder if they are putting of diagnosing untill after the change. Anyway we got onto the subject of the change as I was wanting him diagnosed before then. She told me that she had recentley talked to a phycologise, phychiatrist/ what ever who specializes in autism who she beleives knows what she is talking about. This Dr. told her that those who carry a diagnosis made prior to the change will be allowed to have the diagnosis for 2 years. They will need to be re diagnosed to keep a diagnosis after that. ................... just passing on what I was told in case this applies to anyone who wants to know.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
answeraspergers said:
http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress

i cant say much better than what this guy says really.

plus the wiki is also a bit scathing

DSM-5 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I look to neuroscience not the resulting book of a compromised panel and its closed door processes. Its estimated that 40% of people who were aspies under 4 wont be HFA under 5 - me included!
Click to expand...

If less people qualify as autistic now, I think you should look at how much impact autism has for those people in real life. How much added value is having an autism label for someone who has a succesful carreer, is married, has kids and things like that and can cope with life in general.

It's people that have issues in these areas that need diagnosis and services most.
 
I'm glad to see that at lease one other person on here besides me seems to realize that the diagnosis is not the same in 4 and 5. 5 is stricter.

"I look to neuroscience not the resulting book of a compromised panel and its closed door processes. Its estimated that 40% of people who were aspies under 4 wont be High Functioning Autism under 5 - me included! "

Aman!

It's people that have issues in these areas that need diagnosis and services most.[/QUOTE]

That's true King and I really hope these people get what they need becouse my son is only 13 and already has a hard time. I am concerned about him makeing it in this worl as an adult.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I just want to say that I know what I am talking about. I understand the implications and I do have the education and background to make a stance on this. I think it has become an issue of identity for people and not really seeing it in true light. I am also alittle upset right now because I have gotten the feel from this thread that my edcuational background doesn't mean anything even though I am also a diagnosed aspie.
 
Arashi222 said:
I just want to say that I know what I am talking about. I understand the implications and I do have the education and background to make a stance on this. I think it has become an issue of identity for people and not really seeing it in true light. I am also alittle upset right now because I have gotten the feel from this thread that my edcuational background doesn't mean anything even though I am also a diagnosed aspie.
Click to expand...

It's not that we don't consider you a reputable source. It's that lots of reputable sources seem to be saying different things.
 
What Smith says is true Arashi. here is an article from a Dr. and autism researcher of over 30 years opposeing the DSM autism heads...

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm5-in-distress/201211/will-the-dsm-5-reduce-rates-autism

It's not about disrespecting your education. I certainly respect your position. It's just that there is so much out there from every level...I think if anyone really wants to know all they can do is look into the facts for themselves. I mean I would guess it to be harder for someone in your position becouse mabey authorities which you know and trust and respect have presented this to you in a certain way.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Top Bottom