Page 1 of 10 [ 154 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 ... 10  Next

Sefirato
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 160
Location: Japanese Pacific States

10 Feb 2010, 10:48 am

The new DSM-V is much better, much more streamlined to diagnose people properly, those that should belong onto the autistic spectrum. It's interesting to see that CDD is included under the ASD category. I know this isn't final, but what we're seeing here, I want to say I like it very much.

With that being said, I have looked over the criteria for the qualification of receiving an ASD diagnosis, and I qualify on ALL of them, which is not a surprise at all since I've been diagnosed a few months ago. I've learned quite a lot about myself, my childhood years, and such that I have come to realize that I am more HFA than AS from all the different behaviors I have manifested over the years, and still manifest even to this day. However, one can't really go around saying that without being properly diagnosed by a professional regarding the differences between HFA and AS, can they? Then again, these two are similar, and will still be placed under the same roof of the Autistic Disorder in DSM-V. so semantics need not apply in this one.

For some of you feeling concerned that you may not qualify under the DSM-V - I want to say I'm sorry you feel that way, and I hope that whenever DSM-V comes out, that you can seek out another evaluation (if you haven't been officially diagnosed yet) to assess your issues properly by a professional so that you can definitely know where you are, whether you are on the spectrum or not. If you are not, remember that you will always be welcome here, regardless of what happens in that evaluation if you opted to seek it out, and regardless of the officiality of DSM-V in a few years.



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

10 Feb 2010, 11:08 am

Arroyo wrote:
For me, it seems they are describing a pathological form of ASD.

Yes, what else would you expect to be described in a book about and entirely devoted to disorders?

Danielismyname wrote:
However, "c." is going to undiagnose a lot of folk out there. If you're married or have a friend..., you're out.

That is not how that particular criteria item is applied in DSM-IV, so I doubt that it will be applied as you describe just because the edition number has changed.

To me, if interpreted sensibly, the problem with the criteria for adults, is not that the symptoms are missing in adults, but that they are much more difficult to observe, particularly in a clinical context. It would be much more plausible to observe lack of social reciprocity in a non-formal social setting for instance than in a clinical context.



zeichner
Supporting Member
Supporting Member

User avatar

Joined: 10 Sep 2008
Age: 65
Gender: Male
Posts: 689
Location: Red Wing, MN

10 Feb 2010, 11:09 am

I think it's great that the APA is actively seeking comments & suggestions regarding these proposed changes. Everyone has the chance to voice their opinion.


_________________
"I am likely to miss the main event, if I stop to cry & complain again.
So I will keep a deliberate pace - Let the damn breeze dry my face."
- Fiona Apple - "Better Version of Me"


Last edited by zeichner on 10 Feb 2010, 2:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

10 Feb 2010, 11:10 am

pandd,

I meant for people who have normal and appropriate social relations.



Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

10 Feb 2010, 11:16 am

I think the new criteria are fine the way they are, but ONLY if they add a sub-clinical variant.

Why's it needed? Okay, consider these points.
1. Diagnosis is only useful when it leads to treatment. Therefore, things that don't need treatment, don't need diagnosis.
2. When a psychiatrist/psychologist treats a patient for one thing, he needs to know if the patient is atypical in one respect or another--even if that trait is not disabling. For example, he'd need to know that a patient was very introverted so he would know not to see social withdrawal as a depressive symptom; or he'd need to know that the patient came from an emotionally expressive culture so that he'd know not to assume the same strength of emotion as he'd assume from someone from a culture with more stoic emotional expression.

So those two things would seem to contradict each other. You don't need to diagnose something if it doesn't need to be treated; but you do need to make a note of it because the professional needs to know about it.

The solution is to add the sub-clinical variant. This would mean that all the people currently diagnosed, barely, with Asperger's, but not disabled by it, would be put in that sub-clinical category. That serves the purpose of a diagnosis admirably, because if people who are just-barely-diagnosable now need treatment, they tend to need it for things like depression, anxiety disorders, and social phobias--not for autism.

If they use this correctly, it would mean that the sub-clinical type would be put into your record, so that when you did need treatment, they would know that your social skills aren't too good, you tend to have obsessive interests, and you aren't very good with either language or conversation--but that your problem isn't that you need to be "normal"; it's that you have some other issue going on that's keeping you from living your life.


_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com

Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com


Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

10 Feb 2010, 11:21 am

They seem to be adding sub-clinical variants (there was two), well, if the severity tier in the last update is adhered to.



Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

10 Feb 2010, 11:22 am

I really hope so. It would be a travesty if people with these strong autistic traits were completely dissociated from the spectrum; even traits that aren't disabling have a large effect on your life, and need to play into any psychological treatment you might receive. If they don't recognize that autism fades into the typical, they will shortchange a lot of the borderline cases.


_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com

Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com


ursaminor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Nov 2009
Age: 158
Gender: Male
Posts: 936
Location: Leiden, Netherlands

10 Feb 2010, 1:00 pm

Will the number of symptoms (either individually from 1,2 or 3 or total amount of ~) be important? Or will it be that one symptom from 1, 2 and satisfying 3 will be enough?



Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

10 Feb 2010, 1:29 pm

It says all of 1 (the social and communication cluster), 2 of 2 (the repetitive behaviour cluster), in addition to 3 (the age of onset).

No doubt each cluster will be explained in its various manifestations, from severe to least severe (this can be seen as Wing's three levels of social severity, which were mentioned in the DSM-IV, but not in the point by point criteria), and then on to sub-clinical where people don't meet the criteria [but have one or two here and there that are affecting them and warrant a label].



MONKEY
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,896
Location: Stoke, England (sometimes :P)

10 Feb 2010, 2:01 pm

What about those of us who weren't diagnosed using the DSM criteria, does this change apply to us? I've asked this question loads of times on these threads but no one's answered it yet.

Also I don't really want it to change, it was fine as it is.


_________________
What film do atheists watch on Christmas?
Coincidence on 34th street.


matrixluver
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 19 Oct 2008
Age: 49
Gender: Female
Posts: 163

10 Feb 2010, 2:09 pm

if you weren't diagnosed with the DSM criteria- you weren't diagnosed....



ASdogGeek
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jul 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Female
Posts: 769

10 Feb 2010, 2:14 pm

MONKEY wrote:
What about those of us who weren't diagnosed using the DSM criteria, does this change apply to us? I've asked this question loads of times on these threads but no one's answered it yet.

Also I don't really want it to change, it was fine as it is.


have you been officail diagnosed? if so what was used to diagnose you if not the DSM? You might have to get rediagnosed



Cascadians
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 4 Mar 2007
Age: 64
Gender: Female
Posts: 197
Location: Oregon City, Oregon

10 Feb 2010, 2:15 pm

I'm an officially diagnosed Aspie, and what strikes me is that I don't consider myself impaired within myself. It is only the REACTION of NTs that leads to impairment. I write well and am articulate. You'd think communication would be A-OK. But NTs do not understand me or choose to interact.

So it is the behavior of others that leads to lack of peer relationships. It is my social regulation meter that is out of kilter with the norm out there. NTs sense a "difference" and stay away.

Ppl cannot relate to what I say. It seems I live in a different world, truly a different planet. My perceptions do not jive with theirs, but seem completely right to me.

I'm almost 50, and yes I can look other ppl in the eye, and speak, but it has no effect; it is as if I'm a wraith. What I say does not resonate as real to other ppl. But it is factual, 100% true, completely in accordance to reality.

Fortunately I take extreme relish in my special interests and am happy. But wraiths cannot function independently in this world. I'm disabled, but not because of me.

So I think the new criteria doesn't tell the whole story.



pandd
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Jul 2006
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,430

10 Feb 2010, 2:17 pm

There are other criteria, such as ICD-10, Gilberg and Gilberg to mention two.



InaWoodenHouse
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2010
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 39
Location: Washington, DC

10 Feb 2010, 2:21 pm

Well what do you know, NLD hasn't been included anywhere in the DSM. Again. ARGH!

But if all ASDs are now considered "Autistic Disorder" in the DSM, is the whole thing irrelevant? Would I simply be diagnosed with autism, not NLD, if I were retested, according to the DSM? :?

I don't get it :P


_________________
NLD blog: http://onefootonthespectrum.wordpress.com || Current topic: NLD and the first semester of college


MONKEY
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Jan 2009
Age: 31
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,896
Location: Stoke, England (sometimes :P)

10 Feb 2010, 2:27 pm

ASdogGeek wrote:
MONKEY wrote:
What about those of us who weren't diagnosed using the DSM criteria, does this change apply to us? I've asked this question loads of times on these threads but no one's answered it yet.

Also I don't really want it to change, it was fine as it is.


have you been officail diagnosed? if so what was used to diagnose you if not the DSM? You might have to get rediagnosed


Yes I'm official. I used the DISCO (The Diagnostic Interview for Social and Communication Disorders) which is not as well known as the DSM and the gillberg, I think DISCO is only in Britain I'm not sure.


_________________
What film do atheists watch on Christmas?
Coincidence on 34th street.


Last edited by MONKEY on 10 Feb 2010, 2:30 pm, edited 1 time in total.