Un-Diagnosing Asperger's
There has been a loud and increasing outcry about the
proposed redefinition of autism for DSM V. In that redefinition, autism, Asperger’s, and
PDD NOS will be combined to form one diagnostic label of ASD – autism spectrum
disorder.
In my earlier essays on this topic, I suggested that
people’s alarm was perhaps unjustified because I could not imagine health care
professionals taking away a diagnosis that was allowing a person to receive
useful treatment or therapy.
Yet that very worry seems to be the propagating rapidly
throughout cyberspace . . . Indeed, that is exactly what may happen, if what
these doctors believe comes to pass:
One psychiatrist (Volkmar) suggested up to 75% of the
Asperger population would not qualify for the ASD diagnosis.
Another doctor (Siegel) said she un-diagnoses 90% of the
Asperger kids who come to her today.
Conspicuously missing from both those statements is the
second part . . . if the psychiatric community proposes to un-diagnose this
large population of PDD NOS and Asperger’s, what do they propose to diagnose
them with instead? Something (I’m
waiting . . .) or nothing?
If the expectation is that these “former Asperger people”
will be diagnosed with something else that will qualify them for a sufficient
level of effective services, it’s high time we hear what that new diagnosis
might be. I have yet to hear of any
“replacement Asperger’s” for this population.
There is talk of Social Communication Disorder, but I am not aware of any broad array of services that might be associated with that diagnosis, if indeed it is an expected substitute.
There is talk of Social Communication Disorder, but I am not aware of any broad array of services that might be associated with that diagnosis, if indeed it is an expected substitute.
Most people are diagnosed with Asperger’s or PDD NOS as
kids. Once the diagnosis is given, those
kids receive social skills therapy and other help in fitting in. Everything I hear from the field tells me
the therapies are life changing for the people involved. When I hear complaints, they usually are that
the level of service is insufficient.
Conversely, I have never once heard of excessive treatment for
Asperger’s. Are we now proposing to take
those services away from today’s Asperger population and others like them in
the future? What would be the
justification for that?
I can imagine no reason except short term cost savings,
which benefits health insurers and school districts. While administrators of those organizations lobby from a different perspective, there is a widespread belief that these groups are already failing to deliver what's needed, in terms of support services. Is the DSM definition being perverted into a tool to save these people money when they are not doing their jobs adequately and effectively now?
I do understand that the surge in ASD diagnoses has placed a huge burden on the healthcare system and school budgets. If it's true that a large fraction of ASD kids are improperly diagnosed today, it would stand to reason that the services currently being delivered are not needed. If so, where is the outcry over waste? There isn't any, because it's universally accepted among recipients that the services ARE needed.
The concept that a large population, who has a disability
diagnosis today, might lose that diagnosis and access to the resultant services
as a result of DSM changes is both shocking and unprecedented.
When I originally heard about this proposal, my understanding was that the new diagnostic umbrella would cover all those with prior ASD diagnoses. Believing that to be true, I supported the redefinition for the various reasons I've already articulated. Now, I wonder if it's time to rethink that endorsement.
When I originally heard about this proposal, my understanding was that the new diagnostic umbrella would cover all those with prior ASD diagnoses. Believing that to be true, I supported the redefinition for the various reasons I've already articulated. Now, I wonder if it's time to rethink that endorsement.
It seems like the medical and therapeutic community is
sharply divided on this issue. Many still take the stand that I expected, which is that a kid with an ASD diagnosis today, who benefits from services as a result, should be a kid with an ASD diagnosis in DSM V land. For those
who believe we would be right to un-diagnose some large percentage of the ASD
population, what would you say to the people you propose to un-diagnose?
Comments
What upsets me is just because you have a less severe form of some thing doe snot mean you do not have it. It does not mean it shoul dnot be treated. If a person has high blood pressure it does not matter how high it is-- you still treat it as blood pressure.
My son was very behavioral. His therapies help him greatly-- so now doe she no longer need them? What do they think should happen instead?
The Asperger's diagnosis saved my son, I truly believe, because without it documented for his school records his school life would have been even more of a torture than it already was.
Maybe we can all share these questions enough, until they get n front of the DSM 5 task force and they feel compelled to listen.
The nefarious intent (budget cutting, reduce the 'heat by reducing the numbers) behind the changes seems so short-sighted it's laughable (to me).
If this is the Task Force's intent, we truly are in big trouble. All of us.
So by this logic, a large section of the population believe that Aspies do not need the services of psychiatrists or other professionals.
So I fear that changing the diagnosis system to something that may EXCLUDE too large of a population in NEED of services (and the need for valid DSM V status/diagnosis so that insurance companies will help cover the cost of said services) is a very disheartening thing; to be seen, perhaps, as a step backward.
Changing the general public's view on Aspergers is a MUST, and I would hope that a change in the DSM V status would help this view, not bolster more prejudice.
I have long noticed a not so subtle discourse in the Autism comunity a vibe that people with Aspergers aren't really a part of the comunity which is rather dishartenting. I think because people with Aspergers tend to "function" well on the surface people neglect the dramatic complications they have trying to navagate a world typically not made for them. Just ask the members of mine and my best friends support group for adults with Aspergers run by Aspies( our group is one of if not the only one like it in the US, or so we are told). But again ask them
I have long noticed a not so subtle discourse in the Autism comunity a vibe that people with Aspergers aren't really a part of the comunity which is rather dishartenting. I think because people with Aspergers tend to "function" well on the surface people neglect the dramatic complications they have trying to navagate a world typically not made for them. Just ask the members of mine and my best friends support group for adults with Aspergers run by Aspies( our group is one of if not the only one like it in the US, or so we are told). But again ask them
Excellent piece. I haven't heard a peep about Social Communication Disorder. I think it's temping for many neuro-typical folks to just think that Aspergians are just nerds, and "the nerds you will always have with you". I know that the supports w/in schools ARE expensive, but it is no longer an option for kids to drop out of high school. There have to be options to get Aspergian kids, and adults who need them, the services so that they can thrive in this over-specialized & credential-oriented world of ours.
When you get down to the nitty-gritty, every child has problems – it's be great if we could give every child the special attention that special needs children get with a diagnosis. What we're talking about here is money. The APA recognizes that the lifeboats only hold so many, and are using triage to winnow out those who can best stand on their own. AS kids have stood on their own for years (as we have made a big to-do with our famed alumni). However it's lonely standing on your own.
This is why I keep coming back to the reason why I got diagnosed, and that is depression. Depression rates among AS patients is phenomenally high. I was a depressed child, then a depressed teen, I finally eked out of it for a while as a youth, but then it sucked me back in. I now see how my life with AS has made almost everything so much more difficult.
Personally, I think it's a mistake to do away with the Asperger diagnosis – and I don't say that just because I now blog on AS (http://aspergal.blogspot.com/) but because I really see a difference between what is classically called Kanners Autism – High Functioning, and Aspergers. From what I can see, Aspergarians are more social - we're the ones trying to reach out but . . . just not quite getting it when around atypicals. Ughhhh, this is just so depressing!
What I've observed for about the last 10 years is No Child Left Behind pretending that all kids need is a little intervention and they'll be fine, they don't need special ed services. The poor regular ed teachers are expected to custom-teach an infinite number of students with no support. To me, it's shocking.
Then there's withdrawal of vocational training. All kids will now go to college -- never mind if they don't want to. I don't know who is going to come when the plumbing breaks and my car needs work. Oh, John, of course! Yes, I should have known...
But seriously, it's very disturbing.
When you have multiple generations showing up as new diagnoses, it may seem like an "epidemic", but really it is just the backlog of previously undiagnosed cases appearing in an artificially compressed time period. Over time, this would naturally level off, and yearly diagnostic totals decline. It seems that in an economic downturn, you cut services any way you can, but this seems transparently egregious in method. The stated aim is to "stem the epidemic", and no amount of verbiage they dedicate in backpedaling changes the fact that the method is a bureaucratic fix, not a medical one.
I was diagnosed in 2009 at the age of 37. Do I appear in the statistics at 2009, or 1973?
I'm glad that you have expressed alarm. Rightly so. The APA is rapidly making itself irrelevant, I believe. We have a long way to go before autism is truly seen as a neurological difference rather than a "mental disorder" (ugh!) but this flap will help.
You are absolutely correct that "services" is the key. Autistic people need and deserve help in education, employment, housing, and other areas of life. In return, their success will increase the diversity, health, and prosperity of the community as a whole. It is not just the right thing to do, it is the smart thing to do.
I'm not fussed so much about labels, although I have found Asperger's to be an extremely helpful one for me. The important thing is that people get the assistance they require.
And, just so you know, in one of the more significant announcements the DSM Committee has made, they changed the name from DSM-V to DSM-5!
This will bring the schools back to the 60s where only the average student and the wealthy will fare well, and any child who is abnormal will be labelled a troublemaker.
Service My Car
My initial support of the changes was based upon the same fallacy.
So, they take away the word "Aspergers" and diagnose the "worst afflicted" of us with Autism.
Then they invent a new word to describe the rest of us while withdrawing support.
Surely it would be simpler to leave the word and definition "as is" and simply reclassify the "worst afflicted" with with something which better reflects their needs?
Bureaucracy at its finest.
I "diagnose" him as Dyslexic, a visual thinker. Atypically, it's math and writing, or Dyscalculia and Dysgraphia that are his specific problems. I think part of the 20% of kids who are dyslexic and learn differently are given all kinds of labels. Look to Bipolar and ADHD to increase as Aspergians lose their label. Dyslexics get all kinds of labels from schools who are too rigid to teach them. In regards to dyslexia, schools get a D-.
but i perrsonally wouldn't mind at all if i lost my diagnosis. i've felt nothing but bitterness since getting diagnosed with AS at the age of 30, it's been a real struggle to come to terms with it. and if the psychiatric community is going to play loose with the words and defintions for awhile, i'm content to just walk away from the whole mess. i'll still struggle socially and have the same difficulties i've always had, but i was deeply unhappy when i got the diagnosis and i welcome a change like the one being discussed.
most adults getting diagnosed seemed relieved, happy (which is strange to me), so i understand that i'm in a small minority on this issue.
John,
Thank you for addressing this again. There really are some frightening implications to these proposed changes.
One thing I'd like to comment on - You posed and answered the question -
"If so, where is the outcry over waste? There isn't any, because it's universally accepted among recipients that the services ARE needed. "
I fear that characterization is misleading. While we don't find an outcry among the recipients of services, we DO face widespread public opposition to providing those services to them.
In my experience, the outcry over 'waste' (typically so-called by those with little to no understanding of ASD) is in school board meetings from town to town across the country. I hear the arguments CONSTANTLY about the 'disproportionate cost' of Special Education 'dragging down' our public school standards and 'taking resources' from typically developing peers.
It's dangerous rhetoric at best, catastrophic at worst, but unfortunately, it's very real, pervasive. and one more very salient reason that the DSM-V proposal is so feared by many in the community.
It's also why, in my view, we still have so much more work to do toward educating the public about autism and the longer term implications of doing nothing for those who desperately need (and benefit so greatly) from support.
Thank you again for adding your powerful voice to the conversation.
Jess
What about the kids who identifiy themselves as Aspie? My son is comfortable and proud of having Asperger Syndrome, it is something he assocciates with the very core of who he is. And what *poof*, it is gone?
We have worked so hard in getting him this far, I fear for his confidence and belief in himself.
And worry about the high numbers of kids who will once more be in limbo land.
My son would not qualify under DSM V and therefore the school could deny him services. Without an IEP that specifies accommodations, the teacher would bang her head against a wall. She wants to do right by my son. Without an IEP, she would have to force him to do things he won't do, and he'd suffer with lower grades and therefore lower self esteem--which could lead to depression. Do we really want that?
In 1958 at the age of six I was diagnosed as being Autistic, and now I have a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome. I'll be 60 in a couple of days. There were no services when I was 6 that I'm aware of. Instead my single mother worked overtime and on weekends to afford "Speech Therapy" which was recommended. That therapy ended up being singing lessons, drama lessons, and tap dancing lessons at a theatrical school in Los Angeles. It sort of worked and I've read several articles over the last several months that suggested some of these "tools" for children diagnosed with Asperger's today. What worked was an improvement in my ability to "speak", understand "normal" social interactions via the drama lessons, and an improvement in my "clumsiness" with the tap dancing lessons. What was missing was an awareness that I was "different" from the other kids and by my teachers. Instead I was viewed as a troublemaker, a freak, the last kid to be picked for a team sport, and the prime target for being bullied. If our children today aren't protected by a diagnosis that provides help, understanding by teachers, and some insulation from bullying, then we're taking an enormous step backwards. It seems to me that those in charge of "labels" could care less about the innocent children that they may impact and more about politics and "money". It's always about the money, isn't it...
The shrinks are kind enough to admit that "Autistic" comes in degrees, at least.
I correspond with some Milbloggers. An amazing number of them admit to having offspring, or other relatives, who are officially dx'd as Aspies.
One has an Aspergian nephew who is an EOD tech in the Navy, and yes they knew he was an Aspy when they picked him up. Laserlike autistic focus and fanatical attention to details are important when dealing with Other Peoples' Explosive Gizmos.
Keeping a cool head is good, too. I mind yer story about the magnesium and gasoline fire.
Why do you continue to hang out in Assachusetts? As the saying goes,
Massachusetts: Live Free, or Here.
Really, an awful lot of us in the rest of the country are thinking, not secession thoughts, but expulsion thoughts. Can we expel a State, such as Massachusetts, or New York, or California?
"clinicians show good agreement about who falls within versus outside the autism spectrum" This reads to me just like the same old story. You're either autistic or you are not. Which is why, I assume, there still are people who refuse to recognize Asperger's as something real. As if a diagnosis made your life "easier" and "normal" people somehow missed out on something.
I can remember two situations vividly where this came up. Both times, I was "told" that "not being normal" does not mean that there is something "wrong" with you. Which totally misses the point. It is not about whether you are normal or not. It's this black-and-white thinking that annoys me the most.
Usually, people are happy to label you, but not when it comes to money. It's perverse. So if not being labelled as anything (besides all the nasty names that people call you) can save money, that's fine. If, though, you can gain money through keeping some labels alive, that is perfectly ok.
It may seem a bit far-fetched, but I think this is mainly about power relations. The decision-makers can decide over people's heads to their own benefit and then they maybe see what happens. The sad truth is that when people become undiagnosed through this new definition, those who have decided over this issue will not see the damage that they have done. They're well off.
Who cares, as long as you can save money.
This is the absurdest thing I have ever heard. If you're left in a state like this, this is not very satisfying. It's like them telling you "Deal with it yourself".
How can you be either normal or autistic? No, what I actually mean is how can they leave the choice up to you?
That's the main problem here, isn't it? That people believe there is such a thing as "normal". It's just how people have come to perceive the world. The sane and the mad. The healthy and the ill.
Both have to keep to themselves. Because if they mix too much, many things would stop making sense.
The purpose of those services is to integrate people with Asperger's into the world. It's a way to bridge the differences. It may be a bit too idealistic to think about it in those terms, but that's what it really is about.
So it's ok to undiagnose... 90 per cent and leave them in their misery?
But then again, this world is not very fair.
AS is so far beyond a Social Communication Disorder. And who gets to decide the way I communicate is a disorder? It makes no sense to me.
I'm working to spread the word about females with Aspergers. I have a blog at Everyday Aspergers, and it amazes me how many females log in daily, to my blog, searching for answers and help. This is an interesting journey, to say the least.
My husband and I enjoyed your book. And that's a high compliment coming from my sci-fi-genre husband.
I have a Masters in Education and will use my skills and personal experience to help others as much as I can with this cause. Much support and love to you in your journey ~
So yeah, i am clueless on what to do now. I've been taking therapy for 2 weeks now, and it turns out that my therapist doesn't even know what social communication disorder is, so why i am there is beyond me.