would i still be considered fitting the criteria ?

Post Reply New Topic

the old criteria for asperger's i fit but not the new

A. Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

(1) marked impairment in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction - Yes

(2) failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level - Yes

(3) a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g., by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people) - No

(4) lack of social or emotional reciprocity - Yes

B. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:

(1) encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus - Yes

(2) apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals - No

(3) stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements) - No

(4) persistent preoccupation with parts of objects - No

C. The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. - Yes

D. There is no clinically significant general delay in language (e.g., single words used by age 2 years, communicative phrases used by age 3 years). - Yes

E. There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than in social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood. - Yes

F. Criteria are not met for another specific Pervasive Developmental Disorder or Schizophrenia. - Yes


new criteria

1. Clinically significant, persistent deficits in social communication and interactions, as manifest by all of the following:

a. Marked deficits in nonverbal and verbal communication used for social interaction: yes
b. Lack of social reciprocity; sort of ( idont see it but by mom says i still act that way)
c. Failure to develop and maintain peer relationships appropriate to developmental level i had tbut his im improving

2. Restricted, repetitive patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least TWO of the following:
a. Stereotyped motor or verbal behaviors, or unusual sensory behaviors yes

b. Excessive adherence to routines and ritualized patterns of behavior yes

c. Restricted, fixated interests yes

3. Symptoms must be present in early childhood (but may not become fully manifest until social demands exceed limited capacities) Yes

No... and that's the problem with the new criteria. It is making some who previously couldn't get diagnosed be able to get diagnosed, and it makes others who were previously diagnosed not be able to meet the new criteria. This is going to cause a LOT of stink.

Give me an example of that. I don't believe that someone who wasn't able to fit the old criteria would fit the new criteria.

I think there is a new problem with the criteria. If that stays, tons of aspies will no longer be autistic because they won't meet the new one but meet the old one.

That's true. It leaves the very mild aspies out. It's much more restrictive now.

Subclinical ASDs will be noted in it (as far as what I've seen), but if you read the rationale of the DSM itself, anything that's not an impairing disorder is outside of its scope. There's no point in diagnosing someone with a disorder when they aren't hindered or impaired by it.

People tend to forget that even AS has severe social deficits that almost always lead to social isolation and failures.

How do you prove this?

Exactly. It shouldn't just be a label. I actually think people that have mild AS and not meeting the new criteria is a good thing.

I believe that is why relatives or other people are interviewed as part of an assessment (though it seems like that is not always done, or may be impossible to due to lack of living relatives). Not that that guarantees that relatives will remember, or tell the truth, of course. There really is no sure-fire way to prove it, except maybe being assessed at a young age (with no dx given), and then assessed again later, perhaps with videos of the prior assessment available. (Which seems like a somewhat unlikely, and excessively demanding scenario.)

Why? What about their struggles then and impairments?

I find it hard to believe that anyone who was previously diaganosed wouldn't meet this new criteria. This new criteria is much less /strict/, and includes anything from subclinical to nonverbal.

I also like how they included sensory.

The new criteria is more strict - it requires 3 in 3 social symptoms (instead of 2 in 4) and 2 in 3 steretype symptoms (instead of 1 in 4)

It depends what the impairments are. Look, I think if you are already diagnosed there's no need to get re-evaluated unless you needed some sort of special service from the government.

I disagree. I think the new criteria is less strict, and should fit practically everyone with autism that has clinical impairments.

I'll like to add:

Tony Attwood's modified DSM-IV-TR is the most strict; you have to meet all of them. Baron-Cohen's is close to this too. Gillberg's would be next. Then this new DSM. There's many in the medical profession who saw the DSM-IV-TR as too inclusive, as it could catch people who didn't actually have AS.

As for someone with "mild" AS who has a clinical level of impairment [and who meets the criteria], you'll still be included, of course. If you don't, but have "autistic features" that cause impairment, that can still be noted by a professional.

I think adding the symptoms must be present in early childhood is strict, same as adding in sensory issues. I'm in. Even though my sensory issues aren't that bad.