Do you ever question your kid's ASD diagnosis?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep..it is a very broad spectrum. Sometimes I think they put all the other non-specific neurodivergents under the umbrella

+1

+2.

It seems like some psychologists are placing kids who have one or two of the many characteristics associated with ASD under the ASD umbrella. It feels like any kid who isn't socially adept has ASD. Likewise kids who don't have mainstream likes and preferences. Has the DSM (and diagnosing professionals) gotten to the point where anyone who is not within one standard deviation of the mean with respect to social skills is on the spectrum? I really, truly believe that there are many people who have ASD, that it makes their lives really hard, and they need support. My concern about over diagnosis is that it signals to a kid that they have a condition that requires treatment. Can a kid march to the beat of their own drummer (or be a "nerd") without being placed on the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there's any grey area anymore. The DSM standard seems to be vanilla and other flavors are a condition. This is overly simplistic, I admit. But in the rush to provide support to kids (insurance coverage and IEPs), have we really narrowed what it means to be neurotypical, and are we less accepting of those who aren't mainstream?

These are good points but I think that most parents don’t seek out a diagnosis unless they perceive their kid as struggling in some way. I never would have if my kid wasn’t having massive behavioral issues. OTOH maybe parents are jumping the gun. It certainly is easy enough to get fixated on your kid not being perfect and there are plenty of private practice psychologists willing to diagnose.

Struggle is part of the human experience. No one is great at everything. That is being a human. When parents can't identify any waeknesses or non positive traits in their kids outside of ASD related things - you know they got a diagnosis just because their child wasn't perfect and they wanted a perfect child - not an actual human.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

Incorrect. It takes expertise to diagnose autism. The notion that it must be obvious to everyone is ridiculous and unsupported by research, not is it a criteria in the DSM.

There are many, many kids whose autism is not obvious but who clearly meet the criteria in the DSM. This is not "TikTok autism" - it's a diagnosis made by a medical professional.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep..it is a very broad spectrum. Sometimes I think they put all the other non-specific neurodivergents under the umbrella

+1

+2.

It seems like some psychologists are placing kids who have one or two of the many characteristics associated with ASD under the ASD umbrella. It feels like any kid who isn't socially adept has ASD. Likewise kids who don't have mainstream likes and preferences. Has the DSM (and diagnosing professionals) gotten to the point where anyone who is not within one standard deviation of the mean with respect to social skills is on the spectrum? I really, truly believe that there are many people who have ASD, that it makes their lives really hard, and they need support. My concern about over diagnosis is that it signals to a kid that they have a condition that requires treatment. Can a kid march to the beat of their own drummer (or be a "nerd") without being placed on the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there's any grey area anymore. The DSM standard seems to be vanilla and other flavors are a condition. This is overly simplistic, I admit. But in the rush to provide support to kids (insurance coverage and IEPs), have we really narrowed what it means to be neurotypical, and are we less accepting of those who aren't mainstream?

These are good points but I think that most parents don’t seek out a diagnosis unless they perceive their kid as struggling in some way. I never would have if my kid wasn’t having massive behavioral issues. OTOH maybe parents are jumping the gun. It certainly is easy enough to get fixated on your kid not being perfect and there are plenty of private practice psychologists willing to diagnose.

Struggle is part of the human experience. No one is great at everything. That is being a human. When parents can't identify any waeknesses or non positive traits in their kids outside of ASD related things - you know they got a diagnosis just because their child wasn't perfect and they wanted a perfect child - not an actual human.

Who are you even talking about here? Which parents are seeking out an ASD diagnosis "because their child wasn't perfect"? We sought it out because multiple therapists separately suspected autism. But I am sure there are school staff that interact with DC that think like you do and act all high and mighty and snarky about it so they can feel superior to medical professionals.

[Anonymous]

I thought my DD possibly had autism, as did her therapist, so I had her evaluated right before her 14th bday. She is very rigid, is sensitive to changes in routine, has niche interests, still has meltdowns, has a hard time making and maintaining friends. The neuropsych report found that while she met the threshold for restricted and repetitive behaviors, she did not meet the criteria for qualitative impairments in social interaction; it said those issues were rooted in anxiety. I used to think the spectrum was too broad, but if my dd isn't even on it, maybe the dsm knows what it's talking about - assuming providers apply those standards.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

Incorrect. It takes expertise to diagnose autism. The notion that it must be obvious to everyone is ridiculous and unsupported by research, not is it a criteria in the DSM.

There are many, many kids whose autism is not obvious but who clearly meet the criteria in the DSM. This is not "TikTok autism" - it's a diagnosis made by a medical professional.

It should be obvious. It is not a hidden condition. There may be cases especially with young children where it is less obvious (ie language delay, trauma, ID) but for older kids it should be clear if you know what you are looking for. And yes, family members should know that this person socializes differently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

Incorrect. It takes expertise to diagnose autism. The notion that it must be obvious to everyone is ridiculous and unsupported by research, not is it a criteria in the DSM.

There are many, many kids whose autism is not obvious but who clearly meet the criteria in the DSM. This is not "TikTok autism" - it's a diagnosis made by a medical professional.

It should be obvious. It is not a hidden condition. There may be cases especially with young children where it is less obvious (ie language delay, trauma, ID) but for older kids it should be clear if you know what you are looking for. And yes, family members should know that this person socializes differently.

Sounds like you are making up your own vague criteria to justify your snark towards families of kids with ASD. Gross.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep..it is a very broad spectrum. Sometimes I think they put all the other non-specific neurodivergents under the umbrella

+1

+2.

It seems like some psychologists are placing kids who have one or two of the many characteristics associated with ASD under the ASD umbrella. It feels like any kid who isn't socially adept has ASD. Likewise kids who don't have mainstream likes and preferences. Has the DSM (and diagnosing professionals) gotten to the point where anyone who is not within one standard deviation of the mean with respect to social skills is on the spectrum? I really, truly believe that there are many people who have ASD, that it makes their lives really hard, and they need support. My concern about over diagnosis is that it signals to a kid that they have a condition that requires treatment. Can a kid march to the beat of their own drummer (or be a "nerd") without being placed on the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there's any grey area anymore. The DSM standard seems to be vanilla and other flavors are a condition. This is overly simplistic, I admit. But in the rush to provide support to kids (insurance coverage and IEPs), have we really narrowed what it means to be neurotypical, and are we less accepting of those who aren't mainstream?

Can you elaborate on this? Are you an educator who questions ASD diagnoses in kids at your school and think the parents are "gaming the system" (to what end??)?

I'm a parent of a kid with an IEP and SAT accommodations. There's no agenda. It's just a question.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep..it is a very broad spectrum. Sometimes I think they put all the other non-specific neurodivergents under the umbrella

+1

+2.

It seems like some psychologists are placing kids who have one or two of the many characteristics associated with ASD under the ASD umbrella. It feels like any kid who isn't socially adept has ASD. Likewise kids who don't have mainstream likes and preferences. Has the DSM (and diagnosing professionals) gotten to the point where anyone who is not within one standard deviation of the mean with respect to social skills is on the spectrum? I really, truly believe that there are many people who have ASD, that it makes their lives really hard, and they need support. My concern about over diagnosis is that it signals to a kid that they have a condition that requires treatment. Can a kid march to the beat of their own drummer (or be a "nerd") without being placed on the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there's any grey area anymore. The DSM standard seems to be vanilla and other flavors are a condition. This is overly simplistic, I admit. But in the rush to provide support to kids (insurance coverage and IEPs), have we really narrowed what it means to be neurotypical, and are we less accepting of those who aren't mainstream?

Can you elaborate on this? Are you an educator who questions ASD diagnoses in kids at your school and think the parents are "gaming the system" (to what end??)?

I'm a parent of a kid with an IEP and SAT accommodations. There's no agenda. It's just a question.

The phrase I bolded is not a question. It is an opinion you are sharing but it is unclear what that opinion is based on. Is it based on your kid? Other people's kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

What makes you think what was done in the past was better? Who, specifically, is suffering more in the current model and in what specific ways does the current model harm them? What are your observations based off of? Many autistic people report their diagnoses they received later in life were literally lifesaving. Are you questioning those diagnoses of people you have never personally me

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yep..it is a very broad spectrum. Sometimes I think they put all the other non-specific neurodivergents under the umbrella

+1

+2.

It seems like some psychologists are placing kids who have one or two of the many characteristics associated with ASD under the ASD umbrella. It feels like any kid who isn't socially adept has ASD. Likewise kids who don't have mainstream likes and preferences. Has the DSM (and diagnosing professionals) gotten to the point where anyone who is not within one standard deviation of the mean with respect to social skills is on the spectrum? I really, truly believe that there are many people who have ASD, that it makes their lives really hard, and they need support. My concern about over diagnosis is that it signals to a kid that they have a condition that requires treatment. Can a kid march to the beat of their own drummer (or be a "nerd") without being placed on the spectrum? It doesn't seem like there's any grey area anymore. The DSM standard seems to be vanilla and other flavors are a condition. This is overly simplistic, I admit. But in the rush to provide support to kids (insurance coverage and IEPs), have we really narrowed what it means to be neurotypical, and are we less accepting of those who aren't mainstream?

Why does that matter? Seriously, why are you so hostile? If you disagree, then do so, and explain why.



Can you elaborate on this? Are you an educator who questions ASD diagnoses in kids at your school and think the parents are "gaming the system" (to what end??)?

I'm a parent of a kid with an IEP and SAT accommodations. There's no agenda. It's just a question.

The phrase I bolded is not a question. It is an opinion you are sharing but it is unclear what that opinion is based on. Is it based on your kid? Other people's kids?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

What makes you think what was done in the past was better? Who, specifically, is suffering more in the current model and in what specific ways does the current model harm them? What are your observations based off of? Many autistic people report their diagnoses they received later in life were literally lifesaving. Are you questioning those diagnoses of people you have never personally me

I didn't say it was better in the past. I'm wondering about the current DSM and how it is applied.

I think everyone should be diagnosed accurately. If a kid had a diabetes diagnosis, and it turned out that the kid didn't need treatment (because the standard was so low) or was misdiagnosed (because the clinician applied the standard too broadly), the parent would presumably want to know that.

I'm not talking about anyone in particular. I'm not asserting that autism diagnoses are fake.

You assume that the DSM is accurate and all diagnoses are correct, and that I am contending that ASD diagnoses are fake. I'm questioning whether too many people are swept in. I fully concede that the DSM correctly diagnoses many people and that the diagnoses have helped them, both in finding support and understanding who they are.

You seem really defensive. Like, because you are your kid was diagnosed with ASD, everyone with an ASD diagnosis must have ASD. I'm not advocating for taking people's diagnoses and accommodations away. Sheesh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

The ASD diagnosis is subjective based off observations, others observations and a checklist. Other things, especially very young can look like ASD and its not.

There are people who may get it for an IEP/504 but I would think that's rare and they'd do ADHD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

What makes you think what was done in the past was better? Who, specifically, is suffering more in the current model and in what specific ways does the current model harm them? What are your observations based off of? Many autistic people report their diagnoses they received later in life were literally lifesaving. Are you questioning those diagnoses of people you have never personally me

I didn't say it was better in the past. I'm wondering about the current DSM and how it is applied.

I think everyone should be diagnosed accurately. If a kid had a diabetes diagnosis, and it turned out that the kid didn't need treatment (because the standard was so low) or was misdiagnosed (because the clinician applied the standard too broadly), the parent would presumably want to know that.

I'm not talking about anyone in particular. I'm not asserting that autism diagnoses are fake.

You assume that the DSM is accurate and all diagnoses are correct, and that I am contending that ASD diagnoses are fake. I'm questioning whether too many people are swept in. I fully concede that the DSM correctly diagnoses many people and that the diagnoses have helped them, both in finding support and understanding who they are.

You seem really defensive. Like, because you are your kid was diagnosed with ASD, everyone with an ASD diagnosis must have ASD. I'm not advocating for taking people's diagnoses and accommodations away. Sheesh.

Bad comparison as with diabetiess there are blood tests - both through a lab, and at home or a device that can tell you exactly what the numbers were. With ASD, there is no blood test or genetic test (maybe in the future though).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Read the DSM criteria - it requires pretty significant funcational impairments across settings.

If someone in your family has ASD, you know it and it doesn't take long before anyone who interacts with them can tell something is different about them too.

TikTok autism (that so many seem to have now) is a whole different ballpark and isn't a clinical diagnosis.

Kids and adults have weaknesses, imperfections, vulnerabilities, unique characteristics, etc. That is part of being human. Those should not be psychopathologized. A diagnosis means you have substantial clinical symptoms that cause functional impairment across settings and that you require support / intervention to function.

This is a 12:00 private poster.

My point is that the DSM (and clinicians) might be viewing variations from the mean as impairments when, in the past, they were viewed as personality characteristics and quirks. In other words, the impairment bar is set really low. In the alternative, clinicians are being generous in defining impairment to get insurance coverage for kids who might need support but don't have ASD.

And you are totally correct about that. The concept of “hidden” autism or autism that can be so effectively masked that it is totally undetectable in some settings has unfortunately also taken root including among some clinicians. The better clinicians understand that “hidden” autism is much more likely something else.