DSM5 ASD "Essentially Everyone Gets In"

Post Reply New Topic

I don't care what your political beliefs are, if you are connected to autism in any way you should be jumping for joy about the affordable care act.

Right. It means that one cannot be denied insurance just for being diagnosed autistic (pre-existing condition). The ACA is not very good, but it's an improvement over what we had previously.

It's still a paltry excuse for healthcare compared to what Canada has.

Seriously, guys, get out of the feudal era already.

I was thinking about this lately.

Really diagnosis does no good for me now. It was supposed to help in school.

Why not label us Visual Spatial or Auditory or what ever else helps describe our learning prerequisite
That way they can come up with a curriculum to actually teach us instead of just pushing us into a room.

If we had Visual Spatial learning centers would the NT's have a disorder?
Could we push them in a room and make them watch a strobe light of images until they get passing grades?

hmm, not a bad idea.

I hope not, because if so she would also be referring to those individuals looking for someone to cut them some slack to negotiate that with their spouse. It was bad enough that she suggested that a person that could meet the diagnosis for Asperger's without a medical diagnosis would need to negotiate it with their spouse if they were looking for someone to cut them some slack, instead of amplifying the need for them to have availability and access to a diagnosis for potential needed therapies and/or support. She sounded more like "Michael Savage" to me in that comment, than a DSM5 working group member, if one is familiar with Michael Savage's infamous quote about people with Asperger's being spoiled brats and not having any real medical disorder or need of therapy and/or supports.

She has to know that research doesn't support her similar statement about "whether they have aspergers or not" those looking for someone to cut them some slack need to negotiate with their spouse". It appears to me that she has grown weary of criticisms over the DSM5 from some people that she may personally question their self-diagnosis and or diagnosis. From the article it bears noting that in fuller context she followed Michael Carley, who has made more than one "Aspie elitist" public comment. That's just my opinion, one would have to ask her for greater clarification. The looking for slack needing to negotiate it with one's spouse is indefensible, as far as I can see, coming from one of the lead professionals from the DSM5 working group.

That's something I would expect from Michael Savage, but he got called out on his statement addressed at children. And that's probably part of the reason why; Savage's comment was addressed at children, instead of the "invisible" adults on the spectrum that are usually only recognized if one finds their way into an online autism community, blog, or facebook site. It also goes to show that he is likely not aware the adults exist either, as he too probably would have took a shot at the adults, if he was aware they exist. That may yet be to come, if he reads New York Magazine, as that magazine provided greater public purview of a type of notorious awareness of adults on the spectrum.

The following sentence in the text "If someone needs someone to cut them slack, whether they have Asperger’s or not, that’s something they need to negotiate with their spouse.” indicates that she thinks otherwise. Colloquially Asperger's refers to high functioning or mild autism. This is how most people see it anyway. In their minds there are no such things as HFA or PDD-NOS, only low to moderate functioning autism and Asperger's as a mild form of it. The context defines how the term should be interpreted. Assumption is made that the former group is already given slack, as they are most likely diagnosed.

Y'all are reading far more emotion and offensiveness into this than I am. I don't know if that means you're wrong or I'm wrong, so I'm going to leave this alone.

Not just denied but parents having to decide between feeding the kids or insuring them. You probably know more about this than I do but I believe part of the ACA forces insures to cover mental health also.

Did the US reach the feudal era? That's almost worthy of a celebration.

So this sentence that you are discussing - context?

I know half of my immediate response to it, but it needs context.

The first post in the thread is the full context.

I mean the "Most people who use Asperger’s would not have met the DSM-IV criteria, so they’re using the term already as a colloquial term. And that’s fine. I don’t think anyone wants to take that away, it just isn’t a medical diagnosis. If someone needs someone to cut them slack, whether they have Asperger’s or not, that’s something they need to negotiate with their spouse.”

quote.

She has to be referring to the [extremely] vocal self-diagnosed crowd, the ones who make an "identity" out of the label. She also alludes to the all too common facet of self-diagnosing your partner, crowd.

I don't think it's appropriate for her to talk about these things, rather, she should just stick to tangible facts and avoid any non-clinical question. She's a professional after all.

It's a product of the whole, "geek syndrome" thingy, IMO, which is also purveyed by those with the disorder (*cough*, Temple). What the author said is really just a backlash at that (IMO again).

Here's the link again, to the page that has that quote. It's towards the end.

http://nymag.com/news/features/autism-spectrum-2012-11/index6.html

Here's a quote from Susan Swedo, another person in the workgroup:

GRASP had a meeting with the workgroup to recommend against the DSM-5 and keep AS, but the workgroup didn't follow the recommendations.

Big, big backlash, especially with that coming from two members of the group.

The "small but vocal group" seriously must have annoyed them enough so as to speak about it (especially proclaiming that said group don't have it anyway).