Semantics once more - ASD vs ASC

Post Reply New Topic

I think the Autism diagnosis should just be eliminated, and replaced with several diagnoses that describe its individual characteristics, such as lack of executive function, hypersensitivity, speech impairment, etc. Instead of being classified as a syndrome, each symptom could be classified as its own individual disorder. These "disorders" would more often than not be co-morbid with one another, but still be considered separate conditions. The syndrome itself would cease to exist, so it'd be for the best if the forum disbanded to avoid perpetuating "false" ideas and help to kill off any stereotypes that began before the changes to the diagnostic criteria. There is no such thing as a syndrome, some conditions are just often co-morbid with other conditions.

I don't like the fact that everything in the DSM is labelled a disorder.

So I prefer ASC. As I see it as a condition, but still disabling.

[Moved from Autism Politics, Activism, and Media Representation to General Autism Discussion]
Good necro!

I don't think 'disorder' can be a value-neutral term.

It carries the inherent implication that NTs are 'ordered'. It brings to mind a coordinated machine versus a tangled wreck. My brain is not a tangled wreck. I'm a Mac, not a broken PC.

Disorder = pathology. If you consider the functionality of a 'coordinated machine' vs a 'tangled wreck' its not hard to relate that to the general focus on 'functionality' in clinical mental health. In the case of ASD, there is even a nifty severity scale which classifies you from 'fender bender' to 'tangled wreck' however this is not going to include 'coordinated machine'. Identifying and managing pathology, supporting or improving functionality, would seem to be the entire focus of clinical psychiatry/psychology. When researchers are looking at 'ASD' their focus is on identification, management/treatment, and outcomes of disease. Someone who simply just has traits of the autism spectrum, who has never been functionally impaired and has always managed to adapt and cope and perform on their own at levels expected of the general population('coordinated machine') is probably going to have more of an etiological significance to them than anything else. Since you're not going to get a clinical dx without impairment, and there's little need to see a clinical psych in the absence of impairment(or distress related to impairment), it makes sense that the labels used, as well as all of the diagnostic criteria in the DSM, reflect pathology ('broken pc').

Thought Id throw this semi-related rant in here-> Ive encountered many people now who seem to get offended by the words 'disease' and 'disorder' and even the very concept of being 'functionally impaired' but they seem to be ignoring what exactly the words mean, the contexts they are being used in, and their entire purpose for seeing clinical health professionals to begin with. They can't seem to relate all of the years of therapy, special programs in school, medicines for secondary disorders like anxiety and depression, and overall economic/time inputs by families/spouses, communities(school programs), and government(foodstamps, housing, disability) to the management of their impairments. They don't seem to recognize how their greatly increased need for support, and the stress this puts on everyone around them, relates to pathology or clinical health. I'm not sure if its denial, or some sort of misguided political agenda.

I don't really see the point to using 'condition' over 'disorder' given the historical and overwhelming usage of 'disorder' by clinicians and researchers in psychiatry. Seems pretty arbitrary to me. Change a word because some people don't understand what it means? Ive never even seen someone use 'disorder' as a slur. I can't conceptualize how 'disorder' could be seen as inherently offensive. 'Disorder' is *not* a neutral thing, and it is definitely not a positive thing. Im not sure what it matters, as it seems like one of those private things between you, your doctors, your family, and anonymous forums on the internet, like cancer, Alzheimer's, or anal warts. The only 'implications' I see are being made by autists themselves. Seems like some sort of disingenuous PC kneejerk to me.

A reasonable use I see for condition and disorder would be when distinguishing between those with unimpaired functionality vs those who are impaired.

The problem is, these are also terms being presented to the public. Most people who hear of a "disorder" are going to attach innappropriate negative connotations to those with such a diagnosis.