If I'm not Asperger's, then what's wrong with me?

Post Reply New Topic

I've been feeling agitated since I read an article in the Times about the proposed change to the definition of autism. To outsiders, I appear to be high-functioning because I have multiple advanced degrees, study several languages, and can function "normally" in many situations. At the same time, I can't drive or take public transportation, have no job, no friends, don't make eye contact, suffer from panic attacks, and a multitude of other things that mark me as being clearly abnormal. It seems that I'm good at going to school and nothing else. I'm not one to collect labels, but at least the Asperger's label gave me some kind of idea about how to proceed. At this point, I don't know if I will still be considered on the spectrum or not according to this new criteria, but if not, then what's my problem?

Social Communication Disorder?

At the same time, I can't drive or take public transportation, have no job, no friends, don't make eye contact, suffer from panic attacks, and a multitude of other things that mark me as being clearly abnormal.

Clearly, those things do affect your daily life in a significant way. The new DSM definition isn't an all or nothing proposition. It doesn't matter what random people see on the outside - what matters is how your brain works and if you are affected in your ability to live your daily life. The new DSM changes will not undiagnose you.

Do you fit the new criteria? I don't know what is so different about the new criteria that is causing people to proclaim that autism is being redefined. Autism is not being redefined. The new criteria are not that different from the old criteria. They are just written in somewhat different words. The behaviors that are being described are still the same, and the people behaving those behaviors are still the same too.

From what I've read, the whole redefinition is being pushed at least in part by some academics who feel that "too many" are being diagnosed and that it in turn "costs too much" (in fact I've read quotes from at least two academics in the U.S. that said precisely this). It's therefore hard for me not to see this within the ongoing deficit-mania that has taken hold in the U.S. - certain powerful and cynical groups have managed to convince everybody that the way to improve the economy is to slash programs indiscriminately in the middle of a recession, and what better way to slash spending on autism than to redefine it?

So while this might very well be a politically-tinged decision, there is no reason to let it affect your self-perception. And, as others have mentioned, it isn't even entirely clear that the new definition WILL exclude many people. And even if it does, it is just an arbitrary line drawn in the sand, and one quite possibly drawn with ulterior motives that have less to do with science or good public policy and more to do with the political landscape.

So don't let it affect they way you look at yourself or the path you follow from here on out. It sounds like you have made an important discovery as to why you are the way you are, and no re-definition can take that from you.

The criteria remains almost totally untouched, i don't see why you people think it is somehow more strict, it's just cleaner.