Redefining autism and how it might affect your child.

Post Reply New Topic

I came across this article on Yahoo News, which I thought might be of interest to you parents.

http://news.yahoo.com/advocates-redefin ... 00544.html

To sum it up, at least half of those individuals with AS or PDD-NOS will not meet the new criteria, and the schools do not have to provide your child services without a formal diagnosis.

They will simply be able to deem your child disruptive and pass them off to the county, who's solution to the problem of unruly children is youth detention facilities and group homes.

Thanks for the article. I hadn't really considered that angle when reading about the proposed changes. I guess I should jump into it, because my child would probably be one of those who gets dropped out - even though the schools have consistently shared that they are glad he gets services, that they can tell services have been needed and that he has benefited a lot.

I have no problem with the conditions in the DSM being reconsidered, for example in the 1970s the DSM was altered to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder. I suspect that this was done becuase political preasure was exerted on the psychiatric industry to become more scientific. As no real evidence existed to support the idea that homosexuality was a diseased state I think it was right to remove the entry in the DSM.

But while political forces may require those responsible for the DSM to reconsider the contents of the book, I think it is deeply wrong for those political forces to dictate to the authors of the new DSM the outcome of their reconsideration. It reminds me of what Sergei Jargin wrote about soviet science when he was considering the link between chernobyl and thyroid cancer. He wrote in the journal dose response, 2011, 9, pages 471 to 476. (http://dose-response.metapress.com)

"Research themes were often assigned to the scientists, while “expected results” were discussed at Scientific Councils (uchenyi soviet)sometimes being, in fact, prescribed in advance. Desired research results could be “recommended” by a superior, which was favored by the authoritative management style, ingrained also in science and medicine."

While Jargin might or might not be right about chernboyl and cancer, his thoughts on soviet medical science do help us to look at the rewriting of the DSM. I suspect that political preasure is being exerted to change the DSM for social reasons to reduce the rate at which autism is being diagnosed. Such a change in the DSM is deeply wrong.

I think that for too long that psychiatry has been dominated by the ideas of Freud and some of his followers. Freud took a top down view which ignores the mechanisms inside the brain, while Pavlov and Skinner did some good work but the likes of Wilhelm Reich did a lot of harm.

I hold the view that brain biochemistry and the way your brain is wired up is the reason why one person has autism while another person has a psychotic condition. If we take the more scientific bottom up method which is favoured by the brain scientists then I would say that sufficent evidence exists to suggest that aspergers syndrome is real and is related to autism. Also classic autism as documented by Kanner looks different to what Asperger documented.

_________________
Health is a state of physical, mental and social wellbeing and not merely the absence of disease or infirmity I am not a jigsaw, I am a free man !

Diagnosed under the DSM5 rules with autism spectrum disorder, under DSM4 psychologist said would have been AS (299.80) but I suspect that I am somewhere between 299.80 and 299.00 (Autism) under DSM4.

So what happens to eveyrone diagnosed ASpergers? You dont have it anymore? You gont get services for it anyomre? Your condition doesnt get recognized anymore?

What happens to my son? I believe he will fit into the category called "Autism 1" but what tests will they come up with to substantiate these results? Will they need all new testing now?

It seems like people were just recently upset over Aspergers being classified as high-functioning autism (which I do agree with and saw as a step towards greater understanding) and now this which seems like a big step backward and a lot of denial.

I've read a couple of these articles now and its a bit maddening that none of them are very specific about what the proposed changes are. I finally found this link in a NY Times article. It is incredibly difficult to read the document but I found if I really pushed the magnification on my web bowser up I could make it out. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/01/20/health/20autism.html?ref=research#annotation/a42700
On its face it does seem like the changes will reduce the number of people meeting the criteria because it requires that all three of the social communication/interaction criteria must be met. What I see as an improvement however, is reference to differences in response to sensory input. The current criteria don't seem to address this aspect directly. It is scary but I am interested in what comes out in the end.

Thanks for that link, Bombaloo. I was just reading it over and realized there's still lots of room for interpretation: DS, who's still on the "high-functioning" end of the spectrum could still qualify...or not, depending on how the clinician looks at things. They didn't do a lot to make the deficits specific.

I wrote an email directly to the APA at [email protected]. It's their catchall mailbox, so it may well be shouting into a windstorm, but I figured it would do more good than talking about this change elsewhere.

momsparky, let us know if you get anymore info from the APA. I also thought those proposed criteria left a lot of room for interpretation. We're probably in the same boat as you, DS may or may not fit into these new criteria. Meeting the current criteria hasn't exactly been a ticket to ride for us anyway so I will still be fighting for services either way it seems.

GRASP just posted that emails can also go to [email protected] as well as the address upthread, or you can call them directly at 703.907.7300.

Some of you said you couldn't find what the changes were... The new criteria (and the old as well) are available at

DSM V Autism Spectrum Disorder

Here is John Elder Robison's take on the subject, and I tend to agree with him: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/my- ... ect-people

The one thing that worries me is requiring 3 types of deficits in social communication. With the exception of last year, DS has successfully maintained friendships and is interested in friends - it doesn't mean he doesn't need the communication supports, though. I suppose a clinician would point out that he can't keep friends without the supports, but that might not be the case. I could see where a person might not meet all 3 criteria and still need support.

I do like that the severity levels will be defined; for kids on level 1, it helps show that even a relatively small difference can be disabling.