New Definition of Autism May Exclude Many (NYTimes Article)

Post Reply New Topic

The good news is that the changes in the criteria are not retroactive....so if you been diagnosed with AS...that doesnt change, but for ppl without a diagnosis yet,, the changes will apply.

for the widening of the bipolar criteria...this academic journal article discusses that they want to eliminate just looking at mood cycles and just pay attention to various symptomology, such as social difficulties and trouble sleeping and things like that.

http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org/article ... urnalID=13

As for what I said about the autism critera
the proposed version
http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/P ... spx?rid=94

then in that same link ...click on the tab for DSM IV....which is current one and compare them

As a psychology major...I have studied the changes in the DSM and we discussed them in class as far as the widening of the bipolar diagnosis.
They are also proposing a new diagnosis for kids with alot of tantrums and/or meltdowns

http://www.child-psych.org/2010/02/chil ... horia.html

You know, in Italy an AS diagnosis is a rare thing so I'm officially an a**hole loner. I don't know if it's better or worse, but all my troubles are considered my fault. If I had a label, maybe people would complain me, but wouldn't trust me. In my culture autisics are considered mentally ill.

Here in the United States where I live, we do admire creativity and people doing their own thing, but at the same time many of our schools and workplaces are conformist. So I guess it's a mixed bag overall.

What I like about the idea of Asperger's and Autism being a spectrum, in fact being part of the same spectrum, is that it explains in a way which makes sense to me that some of my strengths and weaknesses are two sides of the same coin. Plus, it gives me a tribe at least potentially (esp. if one out of a hundred people are on the spectrum). Plus, it reminds me that it's about engagement, not conformity.

That's just not right. Four years ago, I was diagnosed as having Asperger's syndrome after learning I had an autistic "overlay", since birth, meaning I had some problems that are similar to Autism. If this law goes through, a lot of aspies will lose out on the specialized help they so desperately need.

Ok the article about bi-polar disorder does not say they are expanding the definition, it looks to me more like it says they are trying to better define the criteria and do more studies on the disorder to make the info in the DSM more accurate. So where you got they are expanding it so that anyone who's ever thrown a hissy fit will be considered bi-polar I'm not sure because that is not what it says at all.

the one about childhood bi-polar or whatever did not really seem to have much to do with any of this conversation other then that they are possibly putting a new disorder in the DSM that children who throw lots of tantrums might fit under....It's not necessarily a bad thing it's just in addition to the disorders already listed in the DSM.

Also what is wrong with the new proposed autism criteria in that second link? I saw nothing wrong with it.

How much overdiagnosis has been taking place under DSM-IV? I ask that honestly, because I have no basis to come to any conclusion.

Anecdotally, we can well imagine the parents dragging their youngster off to the psychologist, looking for the piece of paper that explains all of the behaviours that they dislike or cannot control. I have certainly been confronted by patients who are bound and determined that something is "wrong" with them, and insisting that I provide them with a finding that will justify their sentiment.

All of which serves to raise the question of whether we have become too formulaic in our practice of medicine. There are certainly objective disciplines in medicine. But even the most seemingly objective diagnoses (is this bone fractured or not?) still present a range of therapeutic options. How much more so, then, in the field of mental health.

Many of us who have diagnoses need little in the way of therapy. Some of us need it more at certain times of our lives, and less at others. Does that invalidate our diagnoses? Probably not. But it does signal that diagnosis is not the be-all and end-all of medical practice (and the practice of allied professions).

People shouldn't have to worry about being re-evaluated based on the new criteria after working hard to cope with the difficulties associated with AS. The evaluation should ideally look at your past and not just your present. I think it should be assumed that you will develop adaptations over time.

I saw something in an interview on a news program talking about the DSM V changes and someone suggested as some point that some people who've been diagnosed in the past may essentially no longer meet the criteria when older because they "out grow" it. That is silly to me.

I must say I have a hard time with the idea that someone who has developed elaborate adaptations to deal with deficits and function above the minimum threshold of clinically significant impairment is no longer diagnosable. If you have the deficits, you have them regardless of how hard you have worked to compensate for them.

You can see the point though. They want to diagnose people they can treat. Means self-diagnosis will become the way to find if you're autistic, and doctor diagnosis will be the way to find if you need treatment for it.

Yes, I follow the way you are thinking about the purposes and value in being diagnosed. You have diagnosis-specific treatment. You have diagnosis-specific accommodations. Then you have diagnosis-specific entitlements as I see it. Beyond that it is just self-knowledge.

What treatment do people get for HFA or AS? The comorbid stuff like a mood disorder is what normally gets treated with drugs and cognitive behavioural therapy right? A diagnosis just helps to guide the selection within those methods that will be most effective from what I know.

Interventions in early childhood such as social skills training and communication training are really the treatments specific to AS wouldn't you all say? Does someone who was diagnosed with AS or HFA in early childhood, but is now an adolescent or young adult get much of anything other than accommodations in school (and maybe work) that are specific to their diagnosis?

For some the diagnosis helps them qualify for financial entitlements such as Social Security Disability and other financial help when they are older I presume. But accommodations and financial assistance are not treatment. Those of you who have been diagnosed while something could be done about it, please let me know what sort of AS-specific treatment is done after you leave primary school.

By the way, health insurance doesn't pay for much related to HFA or AS does it? It might cover some of the cost of diagnosis I presume, but beyond that, you don't get much from health insurance even as a child do you?

Sorry for the litany of questions, but I have personally received not much of anything new other than a sense of relief and some self-knowledge since being diagnosed well into adulthood. All I have to go on is what I've read.