Should Asperger be reclassified

Post Reply New Topic

The problem with the DSM IV was that they made Aspergers a separate diagnosis. Professionals understood that Aspergers is part of the autism spectrum. The people diagnosed with Aspergers were expected to understand this “hidden meaning”, not a strength of people with this diagnosis. Some Aspies did understand and others did not and became ableist towards “autistics”.

Obviously, they grasped the fact that autism and Asperger are connected: otherwise whats the point of being ablist towards autism as opposed to, say, Down's?

I don't know about other aspies, but in my case whats behind something that might "look like" ablism is when I am upset at someone who attributes to me symptoms I don't have. And in this context it might be towards other aspies too, not just towards autistics. For example, one girl asked me whether I am capable of love if Sheldon wasn't. So I was screaming at her that I am not Sheldon and don't want to be lumped together with him. Now, notice how Sheldon has Asperger rather than autism -- yet it didn't stop me from being ablist towards him.

So my issue is I want to be taken as an individual. If people are "telling" me that I have such and such "bad" trait simply because the members of a certain group I belong to has that trait -- and I know for a fact I, personally, don't have it -- then I can do one of the two things:

a) Argue that the group as a whole doesn't have that trait, and the idea that they have it is a misconception

b) Agree that the group has that trait -- and argue that I am "better" than those other members of the group in that I don't have it, since I am an exception

So doing a isn't ablist, but doing b is. Whether I do a or b really depends on how much I know about a particular group. If I don't have enough knowledge to do a, I might lean towards b. So in case of people with Asperger its pretty hard to do a since I don't know that many people that have it, thats why I might do b. But that doesn't make me ablist, that just my way of defending myself.

How so?

So... are you trying to suggest that Asperger's is sort of the halfway point between being NT and being fully autistic? The idea isn't bad, but that does not provide any support to your argument that Asperger's is not part of the autism spectrum, because to counter that argument all you'd have to do is define the traits of the autism spectrum, and put those with stronger traits in the autism boat, and those with weaker ones in the Asperger's boat.

Besides, I've heard rumours that even people diagnosed as "severely autistic" may care about other people and try to form relationships -- it's just that they're clueless regarding how to do so. The only advantages the Aspergians may enjoy is they have some innate understanding of the unwritten social rules or they can learn them when they're taught, as opposed to being totally clueless. Read personal stories written by those with autism and those with Asperger's, and they share pretty much the exact same difficulties, only to either a greater or lesser extent.

In case of severe autistics, aren't there issues like profound mental retardation, being unable to take care of oneself, not understanding any words at all, etc. etc etc? With those things, being or not being clueless fades to the background

Now I realize that in case of high functioning ones yes it is about them being clueless -- and they are still autistics as opposed to having Asperger. So I guess the low functioning end is a different topic. But I can't help but bring it up, since you did in fact mention severe autistics.

Occasionally on this site and elsewhere you do get Aspie supremacist sentiments that say don’t put me in the same category as those autistic people. I am not talking about those who fear negative consequences from others putting them in the same category as autistics but because they do see themselves as superior. I suspect at least some of the time those saying they fear others associating them with autistics do not themselves want to be associated with “inferior” autistics.

Aspies tend to take things literally. If DSM IV had explicitly said Aspergers is a type of Autism instead of making it a completely separate diagnosis thus leaving the association implicit this type of ableism would be less of a problem.

From the ICD 11:

http://www.researchautism.net/condition ... m-disorder)/Diagnosis

It seems to me however brilliant you think you are , compared to people with ASD level 3, you won't get the diagnosis unless you're seen to be impaired in some way or other.

Hmmmm…

Just Wiki it.

Looks like I have "schizoid personality disorder" confused with "schizotypal personality disorder". And have to withdraw that opinion. Change it to "I don't know".

Have a buddy who is diagnosed with one or other of those two things. Can never remember which.But I know that he is nothing like me (as aspie).

But now that I have read the Wiki descriptions of both I realize that my buddy MUST be schizotypal, and not schizoid.
When he is off of his meds he fits the description of schizotypal like a glove.

And I hafta admit that "schizoid" does kinda superficially sound like aspergers.

And what would you call the many people on the autism spectrum who fit neither Type 1 nor Type 2?

Examples:

Type 3: Very high verbal AND non-verbal IQ, with no difficulty visualizing, but has low processing speed. Capable of intense focus, including in-depth reading/study, for long periods of time, but finds casual conversation difficult. Deals with sensory overload by running or yelling about it. Comes across as rigid, but fully accepts that different people have different needs, abilities, and goals.

I'm sure there are many other "types" that could be described in terms like these as well.

Yeah I'm non of these three exactly. I'm closest to the third, but don't like fiction and have difficulty visualizing


But then I think the diagnosis is fine as it is. Compared to the alternatives.

Asperger's used to be described as "childhood onset schiziod"

My view:

There should be something like "social processing disorder", just like there is dyslexia and prosopagnosia. I believe it to be the core (or at least one of the cores) of Asperger's Syndrome and it is also typically present in all other forms of autism.
One can develop a schizoid personality with or without this trait on neurological level.

So, in my view, Asperger's and schizoid overlap a lot but they exist on different levels - Asperger's on neurological, schizoid on social-behavioral.

In the USA, the DSM V now has Social Communication Disorder as a diagnosis.

I have a sneaking suspicion that it just describes people with very mild autism, though.

Maybe.

In is supposed to used to describe people having social communication issues associated with autism but do not have repetitive behaviors.
Social (Pragmatic) Communication Disorder - American Psychiatric Association

No.

That is autism, and not aspergers.

What is now called "level three autism" or "low functioning autism" was originally described as "childhood onset schizophrenia". Aspergers was not considered part of autism back then, nor was aspergers even recognized as a thing by the medical communities anywhere outside of the German speaking world back then. Children with aspergers would not have been diagnosed as even being autistic then because aspies are not severe enough to look like the classic Kanner type autistics (the only folks recognized as autistic back then). An aspergian kid would just get the same talk therapy as neurotic NT kids got then.

Once again you just confused different words that start on Schiz.

Severe autism used to be "childhood onset schizoPHRENIA"

Asperger used to be "childhood onset schizoID"

Notice different endings?

The fact that Asperger in particular was called "childhood Schizoid" you can even see in ICD 10. At the end of ICD 10 description of Asperger it says "Includes: Schizoid disorder of childhood"

However, despite calling it "Schizoid disorder of childhood" the ICD 10 still grouped Asperger together with autism as opposed to Schizoid. So that made me think why not grouped it with Schizoid since they even knew to give it similar names?