No more Aspergers in the DSM V

Post Reply New Topic

So, in 2013, the DSM V will no longer include Aspergers as its own diagnosis.

This makes me sick! The language in it does not include excecutive function issues, sensory issues, and a variety of other issues that Aspies got through.

NY times article

Thoughts? We'll soon all be under the Autism spectrum.

_________________

Battle Angel Alita

I think it's a good thing. Asperger is a form of Autism.

We're already under the Autistic spectrum.

What is the DSM V?

Doesn't really bother me. On the one hand, AS has a bad rap (internet trolls, losers etc.) so I'll be glad to get rid of that label... on the other hand though, I won't call myself autistic. Somehow that seems an insult to the families who do have to deal with a relative suffering from traditional autism.

I know there's a group of people who have the same problems as me and that's enough; I don't intend to use the label in day to day interaction or to get benefits, so they could erase it completely or call it Too-Much-WoW syndrome for all I care.

asperger's is not a pleasant sounding word. haha

I think this will reduce confusion.

Yeah, I never like the word either. I will not be sad to see it go.

I just hope they clarify the diagnostic requirements, you know? I don't want anymore confusion on what I have, and I don't want to necessarily be called "autistic", because I don't want to be treated like I have full-on autism, you know?

I really hope they clarify how it manifests differently in females than in males, as well. I think my biggest fears are
1) that it will be harder to get a clear diagnosis
and
2) that people will be turned off by the fact that "normal looking people" are calling themselves autistic and that will increase stigma
and
3) that Aspies will be treated a bit like their stupid. Not saying that the fully autistic are, jsut saying that that is how the general NT's see them/us.

_________________

Battle Angel Alita

I heard that this would likely be happening when I was diagnosed with HFA a year and a half ago. The diagnosticians had already phased out the use of Asperger's Syndrome, using high-functioning autism instead.

I never liked the name "Asperger's" anyway, for the obvious reason that it sounds funny and is easily mocked. It's a shame so many people have gotten attached to it, with the fondly-given nickname "aspie" and such.

I don't think it's a good thing. It may be helpful on the medical/diagnostic side of things, if the change means clearer diagnostic criteria, but from the perspective of trying to explain ourselves to the world, it will only add confusion and further stigma for those who are on the milder end of the spectrum. Asperger's is seen by many as the "quirky and awkward genius syndrome," a perspective which I think does not have the same alarming connotations that the word "autistic" unfortunately carries. Even though we are not all geniuses, I think most of us do have clearer and more rational thinking, or artistic or other ability, as part of our strengths. I would like a word to describe myself that includes that perception. (Granted, we can continue to use the word Asperger's, but it becomes less authoritative if it's no longer an accepted medical term.)

I know someone who works with severely autistic adults, and it would feel presumptuous of me to borrow their label, so I agree with Lene that I would not feel comfortable calling myself autistic, even if it is in point of fact true.

I agree about the criteria being worse for not mentioning sensory, EF, and other non-social aspects. Seems like it will make it harder to differentiate from things like social phobia and such. It's a good argument that the social problems are secondary (in terms of the root difference) and are only deemed more important because that is what NT's most readily see from the outside. Like considering staggering to be the main thing with diabetes, when the root issue is blood sugar/insulin.

I always knew there was no such thing as american aspies, and now there will be a manual to prove it! *evil laughter*

Bit worried that people who need help won't get it. I mean less so even than now.

If that's not the case then, no problem.

They will be confused here where they use both manuals. One will say Asperger's the other will say nothing, or autism.

What good will it do to lump everyone up? It would make more sense to have more subgroups. Not less. DSM is NOT supposed to talk about origin, it is meant to group similar symptoms together. And now it groups together dissimilar symptoms, like language delay and good language.

It is not about renaming. The new autism is pretty much like the old diagnosis. Which means if you don't fit into classic autism now being aspie, you will have NO DIAGNOSIS later. Don't think you will be seen as autistic.

I think it's a good thing IF the public understands autism as a spectrum condition. I feel most people lump autistics in the same group, lumping HFAs with those who aren't even verbal.