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?

The current DSM V is untenable and has been a complete disaster.

Everything it tried to prevent was given a shot of steroids.

The seriously disabled had their problems cruelly trivialized and had been forgotten about in the rebranding exercise

The pro autism neurodiversity advocates that supported the benevolent autism identity label, found their ambitions thwarted by being tethered to those with profound disabilities including intelligence so low its actually a major disability.

Something they were always ashamed and embarrassed to be linked with

So neither side advanced

If the pro vaccine lobby supported the DSM V to rebrand autism to make autism a less scary condition all it did was cause a massive increase in those diagnosed with the inevitable questions ( happening now) of why this was happening leading back to the safety of their product.

Going back to Asperger's A 2023 investigation concluded that there was no evidence Hans Asperger knew that Am Spiegelgrund was operating a child euthanasia programme when he referred patients there in 1941.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36239413/

Bringing back Asperger's would be a great start for the DSM VI

I think they should have kept Asperger's Syndrome in the DSM.

They should have kept it and also kept the criteria of aspergers and the other autisms more specific to avoid overdiagnosis. The UK, like the rest of europe, uses the ICD 11 (some other european countries still use 10.) That underwent the same unhelpful changes. Oddly enough, tbe paediatrician who diagnosed me used the Gillberg criteria. Which was an Aspergers specific one.
Hans Asperger protected a lot of kids by studying them and he was very fond of them. He was no more a nazi than anyone else employed in nazi Germany and Austria at the time, that part couldn't be helped.