Overdiagnosis of Asperger's/Autism? Your Thoughts

Post Reply New Topic

OK, to be more specific then, what I should say is that AS is not the same as HFA (which is not in itself a diagnostic label) because in AS there has to be a lack of speech delay.



This means that although not in all cases of HFA would there have been a speech delay, it is entirely possible that there could be. They could not meet the criteria for Asperger's if they had a speech delay/regression.

So, they are not the same. Unless AS has the criteria for A. above removed then it can't be considered the same.

The DSM and the IDC each have their own criteria which don't necessarily exactly match. The IDC is the internationally used criteria, whilst the DSM is an American criteria.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/10/icd-dsm.aspx

It would be more accurate to place the entire category of AS inside "HFA" (assuming one finds value in functioning labels), which would then be that AS is always HFA but HFA is not always AS. The idea that they are really two separate things is fairly debatable and hard to empirically support at this time.

I agree, autism is a spectrum after all and AS is perhaps just the mildest end of that spectrum. I wish they'd all agree on criteria and use one universal source. In the UK, there is not yet even a standard assessment pathway, there is much difference depending on where you live. If the criteria were clarified and universal that would help everyone to start off on the same foot at least.

^ Yup. I always felt that "aspergers" is just a cloak anyway for people who don't want to say they are autistic (rightly so due to most public reaction)

Which brings me to be irritated by our own profile diagnosis settings here on WP. It's all "aspergers" when autism is autism... a spectrum disorder. That thing needs to be fixed with more appropriate choices/settings. Autism isn't even an option. Irritating. *steps down from off-topic soap box*

The problem is that we have no physical test for ASD, so even the most objective diagnostician cannot always be one hundred per cent accurate in all cases. In many ways, over-diagnosis is better than under diagnosis, but it becomes a problem if it deflects attention away from those who experience AS as a debilitating disability, and if AS is relativized to such an extent that the condition becomes meaningless and open to misunderstanding - I see no firm evidence that this is the case, but it is a concern.

I do wonder when I hear cases of successful career people, married with kids, who jump on the 'aspie' bandwagon. They may well have problems of their own, but AS is a serious social disability that by its nature puts obstacles in the way of normal functioning. The problem is that AS does blend into the 'normal' spectrum at its furthest end, and some very successful people may well be borderline AS. They might not even need a diagnosis, but having one can make them feel better about themselves because they still might have low self-esteem and other issues. However, they might be more prone to breakdowns and depression due to the added stresses they face, and they might need a diagnosis in order to get support when this happens. To what extent they have AS in an absolute way cannot be fully verified because of the vagueness of the concept. It is indeed possible that they were more severely impaired when they were younger but have overcome many of their difficulties - in this case, they are an inspiration.

Another way in which AS could be 'over-diagnosed' is when people with mild learning disabilities are included. There is a thin line between Aspergers and learning disabilities combined with a mild social impairment.

I'm not sure I understand this. I have a friend who got married, had 3 children, had some serious issues, got divorced and then was finally diagnosed with Aspergers. I have at least another friend on the spectrum who is married with a child.

I did used to know someone who claimed he has Aspergers because he's good at Maths. I know people on the spectrum who are good at Maths, people who are average and people who are not so good at Maths. I know at least one person who isn't on the spectrum who is good at Maths. Where does that myth come from that we're all good at Maths anyway?

Coming from someone with language delays (plus other cognitive ones), they aren't anymore hindering than the social and repetitive behaviors found in AS. In fact, apart from the early difficulties in schooling that such make, they didn't seem to be much of a problem otherwise (unlike the social and repetitive behaviors of AS, which don't seem to get better; if they have gotten better in my case, i.e., changing from aloof/passive to active but odd, it doesn't seem to be any easier now than back then).

That's just me though.

This might be a controversial opinion, but I was diagnosed in 1995 - one year after Asperger's was entered into the DSM, and a lot of people didn't know much about it then. I didn't meet someone else with the same DX until late high school, and even then it was still just the one. I know that as it becomes more known, naturally more people will come out of the proverbial woodwork who fit the criteria. BUT. Before I got my DX, some people speculated that I had ADHD or Tourette's, which were the "this is a 'problem child' and we don't know why" catch-all diagnoses at the time - I'm sure a lot of the people given those DX's really did have the disorders, but I bet a lot didn't as well. I'm afraid that AS may be becoming the new catch-all, and if a kid has difficulty fitting in or behavior problems, that's the easiest go-to even if it doesn't truly fit, which is troublesome because it takes credibility away from those of us who really do have it. Then it's the whole, "I have Asperger's" "Yeah, so does everyone" bit that's starting to go around.