Opinions on Diagnostic Merger? (DSM-V and Autism)

Post Reply New Topic

I like the way they're redefining autism, particularly in how they're handling the 'intellectual deficits' part of the autism diagnosis. When parents go in to get their children diagnosed, even if those children do have the intellectual deficits, parents will quickly realize that not every autistic is going to have cognition problems.

This will give an automatic awareness to parents who wouldn't have otherwise known about Asperger's Syndrome or Pervasive Development Disorder, even though their child has autism. It could be really useful in the wider Autie community, as I'm sure higher functioning individuals could really benefit from this diagnostic awareness.

Plus, defining our condition as autism could take away a lot of the 'chic' that seems to go with it. If people stop labeling themselves in the hopes of seeming 'intelligent' because they saw something on Daniel Tammet, it could take away a lot of the hostility people have towards our diagnosis.

I'm glad that they're doing this, but I'm not sure how everyone else feels. Negative or positive, I'm interested in what you have to say. So, let's hear it!

Where'd you get this news? Last I heard they were still doing simple severity levels without any mention of intellectual disability.

I'm afraid I don't understand what you're saying.



The inability to process and comprehend nonverbal cues and social signals is what defines Autism. That, and impaired Executive Function, both of which can't help but color perception, learning and reasoning. So, as I understand it, if you have no cognition problems, you don't by definition have Autism to begin with.




Chic? Wow, I wanna live in your neighborhood. I've been diagnosed for 2 years now and I have yet to discuss my Disability with another person (aside from my therapist) who has any clue what the hell Asperger Syndrome is. If I tell them it's a form of High Functioning Autism, there's at least that flash of recognition in their eyes that says 'Oh, Autism...at least I've heard of that" but it's still evident from their conversation they have no idea what any of it means.

I don't feel the least bit chic in any way, but I feel my SSI is at least somewhat safe as long as my DX is for Asperger Syndrome, because it's a recognized disorder unto itself. High Functioning Autism is a bit too vague for my tastes. Too easy for a bureaucrat with a rubber stamp to say to themselves "High Functioning? High Functioning people don't need assistance - DENIED."

Besides which, it's still entirely possible that when all the research is in, there may be several genetically distinct types of Autism. Lumping everything together without all the facts is just not scientific. Parents of LFAs already like to claim we don't actually have Autism since we can dress ourselves, and there are plenty of ignorant, petty, intolerant people out there who will be inclined to agree, that since our impairment is invisible, it can't be real, much less real Autism. I'd rather not pour gasoline on that fire by folding everyone into some imaginary 'spectrum'.

SSI as in the welfare program? I'm not intimate with your personal situation or if you have other comorbidities, but aren't most HFAs perfectly capable of completing tertiary education and having a meaningful career, whereas SSI is for people who are incapable of earning 800$/month or so (ie, there doesn't exist a occupation which you would be able to do)? At least from what I can read, you seem articulate and intelligent enough to get a job, just for the sake of example, working from home/telecommuting if you can't stand socializing at all, or a night shift where you don't have to interact with other people. You've mentioned numerous times how stupid other people are, so I imagine you must be more than capable for the job. There are tons of jobs which don't require recognizing nonverbal cues and whatnot.

I personally don't really mind since SSI is one of the few avenues through which physically/mentally disabled individuals can seek rehabilitation, and of course, essentials like food and lodging. However, just in terms of mere cost and energy, I don't imagine that you require the level of care as the people most consider "autistic" (LFAs)
e: mere disability in the traditional sense isn't grounds for qualifying for SSI, e.g., people missing arms and legs may not qualify (even if they might have trouble finding a job considering the accommodations they would require).

groupoidification, there are a fair number of highly intelligent people with autism, myself included, who are incapable of becoming gainfully employed. At my worst, I can't understand other people's speech. It sounds like complete gibberish to my ears. I can only sometimes communicate verbally. Sometimes I lose my words and can't communicate verbally at all. I get so overwhelmed by being out in the community that I have a tendency to lose myself and wander to places I don't mean to be. Groups of people make me so anxious I get panic attacks... they all move and talk and I can't interact with them. I very easily zone out and do nothing but stim, unable to convince my body to talk or move the way I want it to. So when I'm at work, I can sometimes be found standing and staring into space, stimming. That doesn't look good.

For all these reasons, it's extremely hard for me to hold down a job at all. At this point I'm working at the animal shelter 2-4 days a week, and it's taking every bit of energy and self control I have to be appropriate for that many hours a week. By the end of a 6-hour shift, I'm unable to speak at all and can't sort through sound enough to figure out that people are speaking to me. I ignore them. I want to continue to work part time, because I think that everyone should work to his or her own best ability, but I'm also trying to get on SSI so that I can survive.

For the record, even though I don't like functioning labels, I'm considered moderate on the autism spectrum by my doctors.

What I was implying is that they're going to change the Autism label so it doesn't include intellectual deficits automatically. It'll be listed under a severity label, which should make it clear to parents that people who have the condition aren't necessarily going to be intellectually crippled.

Redefining autism could help us when it comes to dealing with a lot of LFA parents. If autism is no longer defined by intellectual deficits in any form but through severity labels, any parents going through diagnostics will see that.

I think that, even today, the definition of autism already does not include intellectual deficits.

The definition of Asperger's does; it excludes any case that involves "clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction) and curiosity about the environment in childhood." So, people with classic autism do not necessarily have cognitive delay; but if they have cognitive delay, they cannot be diagnosed with Asperger's.

I think this is silly because what would you do with someone who is cognitively delayed but has language development on the same schedule with others with about the same kind of delays? You can't diagnose Asperger's even if he's got no language delay, verbal>performance, etc., even if he's a perfect textbook case other than the cognitive delays. I think that's just plain silly. If you're going to differentiate autism-with-early-speech from autism-with-late-speech, then that should be the only criterion you use. You don't make a different category of ADHD or depression or epilepsy for developmentally delayed people, do you? So why autism?

Another reason to dump the current definitions and start over...

http://www.wrongplanet.net/postt123747.html