With the Americans Reclassifying Asperger's......

Post Reply New Topic

Are there any other countries planning something similar?

Or is it just the U.S.?

First off, it's not the Americans who are attempting to abolish the standard taxonomy for AS; it is the American Psychiatric Association's doing. I'm an American and don't approve of the APA's actions at all.

Having said this, the reason the APA has so much influence is that they produce the DSM. My understanding is that the DSM is influential because it is used by insurance companies in the US, and by governments in countries where socialized medicine is the standard.

There is reason to take heart though. I have read that the APA is meeting with a lot of resistance over the new DSM V. Consequently, I wouldn't be surprised if the DSM V were rendered more acceptable.

There are currently two widely established systems for classifying mental disorders—Chapter V of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-10) produced by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-IV) produced by the American Psychiatric Association (APA). Both list categories of disorders thought to be distinct types, and have deliberately converged their codes in recent revisions so that the manuals are often broadly comparable, although significant differences remain. Other classification schemes may be in use more locally, for example the Chinese Classification of Mental Disorders.

Some 25 countries use ICD-10 for reimbursement and resource allocation in their health system. ICD has been translated into 42 languages.

From ICD-10
F84.5 Asperger's syndrome
A disorder of uncertain nosological validity, characterized by the same kind of qualitative abnormalities of reciprocal social interaction that typify autism, together with a restricted, stereotyped, repetitive repertoire of interests and activities.

It would seem that only DSM-V is eliminating the Asperger's term. Internationally, the term remains.

It should be noted that there is a bill in the U.S. Senate to prevent the implementation of ICD-10 in the U.S.

http://www.icd10watch.com/blog/effort-s ... -us-senate

I really don't get why this is a big deal at all. It makes no sense to separate out AS from autism, there's piles of research showing there's no clear dividing line.

For someone who actually reads psychiatric literature, I see very little to complain about in the DSM-V, and quite a lot to be happy about. Including many of the things other people are freaking out about.

Seriously, if you're going to criticize the DSM, you should make sure you actually know what you're talking about. Psychology is a specialized field. There is a large body of research behind each and every one of the DSM's changes, as you can tell if you read their rationale for the changes.

We have all known for a long time that the Dsm should not be taken absolutely literally. No practitioner worth their salt does not read between the lines.

The coming ICD-11 is a mess regarding Asperger's. I wouldn't want that. It doesn't even list the repetitive behaviors, which are just as important as the lack of social reciprocity.

If you're unhappy with the DSM-V, you could technically request Gillberg's Criteria for AS; it's close to Hans' paper for the most part, and experts do use it (Attwood does, for example).

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/10/icd-dsm.aspx

...but if you read this:

As I understand it, they are saying that a diagnosis should incorporate a cross-disciplinary process. Yes, the psychiatric/psychological evaluation plays a part, but so should (as science becomes more able) include genetic, medical and any other relevant area. That way the person can be treated more individually.

As always there is a huge gap between what we know would be best practice and where we are right now.

Until we have a more reliable method of diagnosing ASCs - a blood test, a DNA screening... - then we have to make do with the clinical psychology methods. They may not be perfect but they are moving away from the subjective, qualitative approach into a more objective approach based on the findings of research over the last couple of decades.

It is even less likely that a medical screening test will differentiate between AS and autism - we already know that the same clusters of genes are involved in both presentations, we just haven't pinpointed the common factors for all people on the spectrum yet.

The DSM has taken one step but it is not the final one, NIMH is moving forward into finding the next step - let's hope it isn't another 20 years till it gets there.