AS is defined by NTs, but what is your definition?

Post Reply New Topic

People mention many things on WP.net that are not in or differ from the diagnostic criteria. Here is the diagnostic criteria for Aspergers which is debatable. Do you think anything should be taken away, added, or rewritten? In another post people were debating over anxiety which is not in the criteria for example.

1. Severe impairment in reciprocal social interaction at least two of the following:


a) inability to interact with peers

b) lack of desire to interact with peers

c) lack of appreciation of social cues

d) socially and emotionally inappropriate behavior





2. All-absorbing narrow interest at least one of the following:


a) exclusion of other activities

b) repetitive adherence

c) more rote than meaning



3. Imposition of routines and interests at least one of the following:


a) on self, in aspects of life

b) on others



4. Speech and language problems at least three of the following:


a) delayed development

b) superficially perfect expressive language

c) formal, pedantic language

d) odd prosody, peculiar voice characteristics

e) impairment of comprehension including misinterpretations of literal/implied meanings




5. Non-verbal communication problems at least one of the following:

a) limited use of gestures

b) clumsy/gauche body language

c) limited facial expression

d) inappropriate expression

e) peculiar, stiff gaze

6. Motor clumsiness: poor performance on neurodevelopment examination

I don't think of it like that so much these days. I think of individual challenges to be dealt with. I think the general ideas in the first definition make sence.

I don't think it's an inability but no knowing how to at first, which eventually turns into an awkwardness around peers for being different, which leads to anxiety or avoidance.
It's not that I'm physically not able to interact just that from experience I realise I'm no good and prefer little or no interaction.

I wouldn't change the rest though. It doesn't all apply to me but it may for some others.

b) lack of desire to interact with peers

This is what it may look like on the outside, but inside the person may have desire to interact they just don't or don't so well due to difficulties.

That falls under the inability clause. The manual doesn't care about the reasons for the inability.
Keep in mind that these are just the easiest symptoms to be commonly observed out of hundreds that may be possible. There is huge room for professional interpretation in an evaluation.

Nicely said, Gary. What is most frustrating about definitions is they provide labels, for NTs and for us, but dammit, don't provide answers.

I feel like saying "Hello? Yeah, I know I have this problem. Thanks for telling me what I already know, numbnuts. So what the f**k am I supposed to do about this? Wow, what a radical idea - actually addressing the problem, not just providing pigeonholes!! !!"

Ahem...sorry for the rant, but Gary you put it so much better than I could. Much thanks and praise, dear lad.

That is Gillberg's criteria, however the DSM-IV-TR differs from this in some ways. And from what I have read, most professionals in the United States go by the DSM-IV-TR. Do you also propose the same for the DSM-IV-TR, or just Gillberg's criteria. By Gillberg's criteria I don't have "at least three of the following" from section 4 but by the DSM-IV-TR criteria, I can fulfill more than the required amount of criteria.

In any case, the criteria for AS should be the same as for autism.

With the exception of - if you want to keep AS - that there's no cognitive delay and no speech delay.
Whether the criterion about normal curiosity about the environment, age appropriate adaptive behaviour and self-help skills should also be kept or not is something I don't care about.

But really, I think that there's no reason that the criteria of AS should differ beyond that from the criteria of classical autism.