Your Thoughts on the DSM 5 Changes

Post Reply New Topic

People use words that best express what they mean. When I describe my disability, "autism" describes it better than "Asperger's" because I do not fit the Aspie stereotype (really, very few people do--even those who perfectly fit the Asperger's diagnosis). When I call myself autistic, it's harder for people to assume that I fit the autistic stereotype because I can speak; so simply calling it "autism spectrum disorder" forces people to see me as an individual rather than as a representative of my category. "Autistic" signals "this person has a real disability", while my semi-independent living and academic skills signal that I also have some useful skills. That gives people a much more accurate picture of my disability than "Asperger's" and its pile of assumptions.

Because ASD is such a broad category, I believe it will help with the NT tendency to stereotype autistics as being all the same, because people with an ASD diagnosis will be so obviously diverse that it is quite difficult for anyone who knows anything at all to keep them in a single category. With the AS/Autism labels, people found it way too easy to make assumptions based on your diagnosis. If you had Autism, you couldn't speak, couldn't do anything useful, and were severely disabled; if you had Asperger's, you were a nerdy, socially awkward, intelligent individual who needed very little help. Both groups suffered from those assumptions.

If you call it "autism spectrum disorder", you put the people who can't speak and seem very disabled in the same category with the people who can speak, live on their own, and have doctorates. That's a good thing. It means that people will stop assuming that the person who can't speak can't learn and doesn't have any talents, and will stop assuming that the person with the doctorate isn't really disabled and doesn't really need any help.

At least, that's what I hope will happen. I know very well it won't be perfect, because people are people and bias still exists, but I think it is a step in the right direction.

I think this is a great discussion. In the end, we'll have to wait on history to find out what will happen.

I don't mind being called autistic. I'm proud of that term. Maybe the term "HFA" will replace Asperger's? Or "ASD:1"?

Remember "manic depression"? Nobody calls it that anymore: it's "bipolar"; and bipolar is distinguished by I, II, III (or cyclothymia).

One reason I postponed getting my official diagnosis of ASD was all the furor about persons who would previously have had an Asperger's diagnosis being pushed into the no man's land of "social communication disorder". However, as soon as my library received its DSM-V manual, I went to Cataloging to get it. I was surprised to see that the critieria hadn't changed that much and that it explicitly provided for childhood history as reported by the patient to be considered. (Since I had grown out of most of my stims and lack of eye contact by adulthood, I needed that to be taken into account in receiving my diagnosis.) Once I told my psychiatrist who had been about my childhood behavior, showed him documentation of the link between Goldenhar Syndrome (a congenital craniofacial condition I have) and autism, and he had heard from an ASD specialist (herself an Aspie) that she had pegged me as an Aspie within minutes, he gave me my official diagnosis under DSM-V, so it didn't make a difference in terms of getting a diagnosis. (A lot of the adults on here who seem to be having trouble getting a diagnosis have the problem of pyschologists requiring supportive documentation of childhood history, such as medical records, school records, and family corroboration, but that stems from their lack of trust in patient self-report rather than any DSM changes or diagnostic requirement.) Like many on here, I don't really like being lumped with the classically autistic in the sense that it causes over-estimation of my level of impairment. I like that the term "Asperger's" signifies to the knowledgeable that I am an intelligent and verbal individual. However, at the same time, it is important to get people to recognize that we are all on the spectrum to get people to recognize that it is just as firmly a neurological disorder as classical autism, which is necessary if we are to make legal and social strides against discrimination. I also think that is a positive thing to bring all persons on the spectrum together in a common cause. I therefore use both terms when explaining my ASD to others and, in writing, I have adopted the practice of putting "autism spectrum disorder" followed by Asperger's in parentheses as my psychiatrist did in his diagnosis.

Among mental health professionals, I've found that most I have dealth with recently are still more comfortable with the dichotomy and terminology of DSM-IV, though they have DSM-V on the desk. I noticed that a psychologist that I have consulted with this Fall is still using DSM-IV. However, as his specialty is not autism spectrum disorders, I don't believe the preference has to do with the disappearance of Asperger's in his case.