Asperger's isn't autism?

Post Reply New Topic

You are aware that Aspeger's Syndrome was eventually defined because research was being done in what used to be called "Schizophrenic Autism?" That was the origin of the use of the term Autism. Asperger's research all began on kids that showed signs of Schizophrenic Autism, but were clearly not schizophrenic. That is why, at least in part, schizophrenia was usually ruled out before assigning a diagnosis of either Asperger's Syndrome OR Autism.

Therefore, by definition, Asperger's is NOT schizophrenia, and for the same reason, neither is Autism.

AS has for decades been, by definition, a form of Autism. Nobody "got rid of" Asperger's Syndrome. It's just not an "official" separate diagnosis in DSMV. It is included in the definitions of Autism now by virtue of the symptoms. That is the ONLY difference. Look, before DSMV came out everybody was screaming "The sky is falling!" but nothing terrible ever came of it. I haven't heard any horror stories about people suddenly losing out on anything.



And I agree, but all that argument does is prove my point. Aspie's are, in a way "closer to being NT," but they are still not NT, are they?



I don't draw any lines. I'm not a member of the APA. That's their job, and the lines are drawn by virtue of the criteria they've agreed upon.



Because they are defined very differently. Remember that a lot of DX's in existence today did not exist decades ago. Should they just leave the DSM as it was fifty years ago? In spite of the tons of evidence that it should be changed?



But it is obvious. From Asperger's own description of AS, at about the same time as Kanner's research, there was already talk of the similarities of both to each other. It was not very long before consensus was reached that AS IS a form of Autism. All they did when the DSM was rewritten for version V was combine the two into one diagnosis, with scales of severity. It changed virtually nothing! People who were diagnosed AS previously still call themselves AS and so do most of their doctors.

My entire point is that it's all gray areas. The people who are splitting hairs are those who can't seem to accept that. I don't get it. What on earth is the big deal? Call yourself whatever you want. It doesn't bother me, and it most likely won't bother your doctor either.

I don't think almost anybody who's discussing this matter on this thread, is bothered by whether Asperger's is autism or not. We're all just, kinda curious to find out and hear other people's opinions on the matter. Nothing wrong with that. Being curious about something has nothing to do with being bothered about it, etc.

It might not have lowered the number of people diagnosed. The Autism prevalence rate was 1 in 68 in 2012 and 1 in 59 in 2014 a year after the new manual came out.

Your noobieness is showing.

Just kidding man. Stick around a while you'll be surprised at how many actually are truly bothered by it.

I don't think being bothered is necessary. Maybe curious, concerned, etc. are more appropriate things to feel about it. If a large part of the community is really bothered then that's pretty sad.

Asperger's is considered a (usually) mild form of autism.

You can have classically autistic people who are "higher functioning" than a person with Asperger's.

I feel the difference between Asperger's and classic autism (both are under the autism spectrum) is one of emphasis.

In Asperger's, the verbal realm, in general, is a particular strength.

In classic autism, the visual-spatial (performance) realm , in general, is a particular strength.


Of course, under the DSM-V, Asperger's is no longer a diagnostic category. Though, under the ICD-10, it remains. It remains to be seen if Asperger's will be "gotten rid of" under the ICD-11. For now, it's not a diagnostic category under the ICD-11, though that can change. The ICD-11 will not be fully implemented until January, 2022 at the earliest.