DSM-6 is in the works, where do we stand about it?

Post Reply New Topic

I had learnt that DSM-6 is in the works. Dsm-5 replaced the Asperger definition but it has been repudiated in many countries.
In Argentina, you can get that diagnosis still under CIE-10 and DSM-4.

Now, what i am concerned about is: is it beneficial that we still identify as "aspie"? Should the answer be "Yes" could we come together and ask APA to bring the Asperger diagnosis back?

Hans Asperger has been accused in a book of horrible things, yet, how can we find out if this is the truth or either if that could have been some sort of underhanded attemp to control us, maybe with full falsehoods, maybe mixing truths and falsehoods together?

Also, something that keeps me concerned since long ago.. if Dr Asperger lived up to 1980s and may he have been what he has been alleged to be, why didn't him appear on any color tv programme from Germany or Austria? Why we do not have color pics of him?
Europe had color tv since 1960s, color photography has been available from longer than that and was the norm in 1970s and 1980s..

I informally identify myself as being an Aspie.

When I got my Autism Assessment the conclusion was that I met the criteria associated with Autism Spectrum Disorder, Level 1 (Mild)—a DSM 5 assessment—but that I also satisfied the criteria previously associated with Asperger's Syndrome—a DSM 4 assessment.

I think Asperger's Syndrome is more precise even if it is not official.

Well, yes, bring Asperger's Syndrome back.

How are we supposed to use the term "spergsplain" when bereft of its founding origin, mmm? (I think spergsplaining is my most obvious trait, anyway.)

I think this politically-inspired cancelling of Hans Asperger is so stupid. Steven Spielberg (who is famously Jewish) showed in his film Schindler's List that Oskar Schindler actually saved Jews from the Nazis, even after joining the NSDAP, when he was often maligned as an enslaver of Jews. While Hans Asperger never joined that party, he also tried saving these children from them too. That's what his Wikipedia page says. I wonder what Spielberg would make of it?

Also, I think Aspies are the most employable of autists, generally very technically competent, just not people people. This merging into a spectrum just allows bad HR people to write off Aspies as - well - autistic, therefore hopeless, probably imagining it's all muteness, skywatching, and meltdowns a la Rainman.

I think an Aspie designation can highlight technical competence, but also that HR need to understand that what this really means is that an Aspie employee needs to be able to raise issues of and defend against office politics and bullying colleague nonsense. It lets prospective employees know in advance that the trade is for gaining a gifted employee in return for enforcing on other bad managers or colleagues what are actually standard employment conditions anyway.

With the DSM lacking that bracket, there's no foundation to this. Anyway, the DSM is not a list of incurable mental illnesses, nor should it be cataloguing conditions for treatment that demands cure or bust. A recognition of the condition and appropriate reasonable adjustments would suffice for Asperger's Syndrome, surely?