Will the dsm5 contain or worsen the "epidemic of autism

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/dsm ... mic-autism

Thoughts anyone?

Yes I think I like it. I do not understand the DSM myself but people around me do. I think the article was very thoughtful and I am surprised it was all very well talked about.

what isnt over diagnosed today,there point is what.if autistic disorder wont be over dx then some other catagory would

I think allot of people also sought to be diagnosed believing they had it based on internet conversations. Who knows what % of all people. If people are really disabled and have had substantial differences since birth with problems with transitions, communication development and so on that persist into adulthood preventing experiencing normalcy those individuals should definitely be diagnosed. Individuals that go on to get their PHD's, Masters and or can simply work full time with no help and with no substantial early developmental impairment and who seem to have mild overall similarities I don't believe they need to be diagnosed with some disorder label. That's my personal opinion. Sometimes doctors and so on can over-diagnosed to assure people that may need intervention get it as in childhood that the best time for treatments and missing that could alter an outcome profoundly.

Yeah I think to qualify for a diagnosis, the symptoms need to significantly interfere with your life functioning and it cant be because of other reasons. I do think many undiagnosed aspies on here are not actually aspie. They are awkward NTs who are probably self-conscious of their social abilities. There seems to be an awfully large number of "mild" aspies on here which not all of them are really aspie Id suspect.

I dont know how many mis-diagnosis are there because of this. But with diagnosis, theres a lot of subjectivity based on the doctor. The symptoms need to be clinically significant. There are plenty of people out there with mild non-clinically signicant aspie like symptoms. Who decides if their clinically significant is the doctor.

I have asked you before to stop attacking or undermining people based upon their accomplishments.

You have no idea to what I had to deal with in my infancy, childhood, adolecense, or adulthood.

You have no idea what deficits I have or how impaired I am.

Yet you presume to 'diagnose' me, asserting that I can't possibly be disabled or 'need to be diagnosed with some disorder label'.

This is outrageous and unjust behavior. You do so many of us a disservice. Please stop it now.

Last edited by AlanTuring on 08 Sep 2011, 4:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.

So only people who have severe life difficulties should be able to receive treatment. How about other people who need treatment? Also what about all of those people that actually do have what is called autism and it doesn't seriously affect their lives? These are double standards. Just because a person can keep their problems in check doesn't mean they don't have a problem.

I have asked more than once that people with a diagnosis stop belittling and trying to exclude people who do not have a diagnosis.

There are many reasons for not seeking a diagnosis. I have explained some of these reasons at length.

Your opinions on what being undiagnosed means, and whether someone who is undiagnosed belongs here or should be listened to, are uninformed and truly not helpful.

My doctor doesn't think I need to seek a diagnosis, and neither do I. Please keep your opinions on this subject to yourself.

In another thread I presented an informal statistical study that a woman did on surveys of three different tests for autism presented on this site that compared those self diagnosed to officially diagnosed for autism scores. The self diagnosed people with Aspergers actually scored higher on the three average tests for autism than the officially diagnosed people with Autism.

While those results are not scientifically determined by strict standards, it is the only objective evidence that is available on this particular topic of contention here on this site, and that evidence seems to suggest that there is no objective reason to doubt the diagnosed as opposed to non-diagnosed individuals that state they have Aspergers here on this site.

I don't think it is fair to question any specific person's self-diagnosis, but I would protect the right of Ai-Ling, to suggest a general opinion on the subject, that limited evidence seems to refute, particularly in reference to the Topic of discussion here.

Regarding the specific topic, PDD NOS current diagnosis does not require all the Repetitive Stereo typed behaviors and interests component required in the DSMV.

I presented some research in another thread that suggested that the majority of individuals with PDD NOS, in a specific group study did not have the required criteria in the DSMV for Repetitive Stereotyped Behaviors and Interests; 64 out of 66 subjects studied, in fact. The research suggested these individuals may be placed in the new Social Communication Disorder when the DSMV comes out.

If that is the case countries like the US that use the DSMV for diagnosis would likely see a significant reduction in the overall numbers of Autism. PDD NOS is currently the majority of cases of Autism diagnosed, per Wiki, so it stands to reason there might be a significant impact here. All that it is tentative at this point; the DSMV is yet to be finalized.

The new criteria for current cases of Autism disorder and Aspergers disorder are expected to fit well, with individuals consistently meeting the new diagnoses. I don't see many if any people in those two categories losing their current diagnosis; that is the current opinion stated on the DSMV website.

As far as new cases of Autism, similiar evaluation techniques that are used now will probably be used in the future, Other than the PDD NOS, situation, I personally don't think there will be a significant impact to those new diagnoses that would have received one under the current diagnoses, as far as whether or not one is diagnosed, or not.

The idea that people without disabilities be diagnosed with a label is ill constructive. Please stop taking everything I say personally. There are potential reasons why some are misdiagnosed and I offered theory. The whole Asperger's means to be a nerd is just another social and cultural symptom of potential misdiagnoses. I don't see how that is threatening your sense of identity to a label in your life. You stated you are not diagnosed. To me and under the law in certain settings until someone is diagnosed they are not confirmed as having a form of autism nor are their self-advocacy appropriate in comparison to individuals diagnosed when not by seeking it but by needing it obviously in life whom are more disabled then the otherwise very high functioning who can go without diagnosis without much trouble to them in their needs. Additionally those more severally disabled not only have just as much say on matters but their concerns and reality of autism differs from that of those whom have been included and can reasonably achieve inclusion independently.

I said it's my opinion and everyone can have an opinion.

For starters he did have difficulties. He told you so. You can only be ignoring them if you don't see that he had problems. Same with me. Furthermore any attempt to say that one can only be autistic because they have severe disabilities is just a case of 'No True Scotsman'. No true person like you cannot have disabilities.


Why shouldn't he? You are talking about people like him. Ergo it is actually his person. Ergo you made it personal. The problem is that you cannot simply accept that he has his own problems and just because he isn't exactly like you. that means people like him are to be excluded. That is not only self-centred but unhelpful. And no 'amount of autism' should blind you to that.


That has absolutely no evidence to it whatsoever! He has problems. You are ignoring them to benefit your goal of making people focus on your wish for a cure. You are expending the lives and happiness of thousands of people in your bid to cut everything down neatly for your benefit.


There are tonnes of reasons why not to get a diagnosis, but that has nothing to do with him not actually being like you. Officialdom does not decide a man's identity. It only recognises it under the law.

1. The law does not decide reality. That sort of authoritarianism is abominable.
2. I already said above: Lack of diagnosis does not mean not autistic. Sometimes it might. But to presume it does is rubbish.


Ironic that you're talking about inclusion when you're trying to exclude us because we are just nerds.


We aren't saying you don't have an opinion. We're just have criticism. Are you against criticism? I would presume not.

Gedrene - Thank you for your reply to ci.

It said everything that I wanted to say.

So are you.

Mr.G does and so does the other guy just about everything he requests me not to do. The one thing I do is respect the law and peoples choices to treatment advancements. To them that is horrible. It's just become the same old discussion and I am damned bored of it. In the offline reality these folks have little chance at preventing research and offer few if at all any solutions to improve peoples lives that are disabled and whom have autism. I find it much better and more productive to compete with one another creating solutions and having plans and going for it. That's what will change things and no bickering on internet forums about words and mal-interpreting intents.

Are all your arguments based on accusing the other side of making accusations that it actually does? Do all your arguments degenerate in to this unproven and therefore ultimately obscurantist?

Is there some sort of invisible audience around here or is talking about people you are arguing with for long periods of time in the third person somehow not patronising where you come from?


Well for someone who is damned bored of it he keeps responding again and again. This isn't the first time you have said you were bored or tired, or complaining that it was getting old.

Unlike you we happen to be patient enough to point out all the logical flaws in your arguments no matter how droll, how rambling and how samey your posts become. I am sure you can make the same accusations about our posts. Well go ahead! I don't believe it's my fault that I have to tell you thirty times (and for anyone else watching, this is an accurate statement. Seriously.) that you have no reason to claim that talking about 'abortion politics' somehow makes ASAN wrong.



1)Just a few posts ago you were accusing AlanTuring and myself of a treasure trove of things without evidence.
2)You are the who is 'doing what you request us not to do'

You see that first point? They are evidence. Unlike in many of your posts we use that to prove that what we are saying is right. It isn't opinion based on one's feelings, it isn't evidence that I can't find. It's actual evidence that anyone reading this post can look up and see just by craning their head up and flicking a mousewheel once (if you have a crud comp screen like mine). I can even quote it when I want, and I will when I edit this post later.

This is also a distraction from the argument at hand, which is whether you are willing to discard freedom of speech in order to further your personal wish for a cure.

Mr. G I don't think you get the point. When people argue they do that to each other. In posts I want to be constructive so I talk about reasoning and rationality to figure it out. Some posters then do so with me and things conclude much faster and typically those are the pro-cure folks and anti-cure pride tends to be emotional and not factual. When it questions what you believe in instead of offering logic and explanation it resorts to something much different and it's getting boring. ASAN for instance no one has proven it is not all one sided in it's central platform as a self-advocacy network. It is a complete waste of time to continue to deflect what is obviously a very one sided organization in focus and opinion which is merely as an organization a response to Autism Speaks for much of the part aside from some educational advocacy I agree with a moderate portion of the time when the founder is not putting himself in the place of others and trying to make decisions for them. Their self-advocacy is stuck in response to the Autism Speaks PR modality for instance. There is to me no reason to believe in an absolute way what people say online when 1. they are not diagnosed where applicable, 2. they are where applicable not about reasoning but emotional assertions and accusations and 3. commonly unwilling to have a public credibility by being verified and credible.

I just don't think these conversation get much of anywhere and help no one.