Does anyone feel like the current DSM needs urgent updating?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

again that’s not the freakin’ point. the point was to understand PP’s POV when faced with parents complaining about their extremely high functioning kid.

A kid that needs less help at school, but still assaults their parents and attempts to jump out of a fast-moving car, is having marked difficulties. Parents of these kids often find they cannot share their struggles with NT parents because they don’t get it; and now they should shut up on the SN board because other kids have it worse?

Did PP say you have to shut up on DCUM? PP told you how they feel, which you find unacceptable.

You don't think the poster who said "And yes it's annoying when you complain about your autism diagnosis" is telling some parents that they are not welcome to share? Because that's the implication I got.

boo hoo? if you don’t have the grace to understand where PP was coming from, I can’t give it to you.

You say mockingly 'boo hoo' and then say you can't give grace...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason for changing the dsm is not bc it’s annoying for parents of kids who are more profoundly impacted (even though that is a very valid and important conversation).
The reason to change the dsm is that the spectrum narrative is not helpful if the commonalities between individuals are vastly outweighed by the differences.
The purpose of diagnoses are to support research and create communities of people impacted in certain ways so that therapies and medications may be targeted to their issue. The increasing wideness of the spectrum makes this job much harder

That is not the purpose of the DSM. The DSM can be helpful for that but it is primarily for billing codes.

Also if you bump level 1 autism out of the autism category, you need another diagnosis for it because level 1 autism requires specific therapies too.

?? The DSM does not give billing codes. That’s the ICD.

The publisher of the DSM says exactly what PP said:

“ The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. DSM contains descriptions, symptoms and other criteria for diagnosing mental disorders. It provides a common language for clinicians to communicate about their patients and establishes consistent and reliable diagnoses that can be used in research on mental disorders. It also provides a common language for researchers to study the criteria for potential future revisions and to aid in the development of medications and other interventions.”

https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/frequently-asked-questions

The DSM absolutely has associated codes used for billing. Autism is 299.00. There are corresponding icd codes. I’ve had fights with insurance over which one they prefer…

no, the DSM cross-references ICD. ICD is used for billing. https://www.naswma.org/page/ICD10andDSM5

I think you are probably thinking about ICD9 v ICD10?

Ha! No I’m thinking the insurance company was just using another excuse to not pay us back by saying we had used icd codes and they needed DSM codes for billing instead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone can vent, but hopefully you understand why you shouldn’t cry loudly about your 6 week miscarriage to you friend who just had a 40-week stillbirth. Right? PP wasn’t saying you have no right to be sad or vent. She was explaining how she feels to be grouped with parents who have kids who are virtually NT.

Misery is not a contest to be won.

again that’s not the freakin’ point. the point was to understand PP’s POV when faced with parents complaining about their extremely high functioning kid.

O I'm the pp who is annoyed by parents with high functioning kids telling me their child is autistic.

I never said that they shouldn't say so, that was someone else. I personally find it annoying.

I liked the glasses to blind analogy. Imagine if in order to get any vision treatment, you had to qualify as blind.

Parents of children who really can't see would probably be really annoyed by people whose children have vision which is correctable by glasses complaining about being blind, and insisting there is no difference between a child who needs glasses and a child who will not be able to see no matter what.

[Anonymous]

Pp- I recognize that many people have never met a severely disabled child. It's possible that that's where they are coming from.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah, that ASD spectrum thing is BS. Always was.
Also, the ADHD+Dyslexia+high IQ is different from just one of the three.
Come to think of it, so is ADHD with a profoundly high IQ.

You know this is done by a committee right? Stupidest way ever to do it too. Really old white men mostly with a few younger (50s) ppl to round it out. I ran the Autism committee (as a staffer) for this last round when they did the spectrum and the disfunction among these ppl was intense. They should not have been allowed to name a child much less a group of disabilities.

Honestly I wish you’d talk to the New York Times or wapo.
The asd is a spectrum bs is the biggest hustle/ ruse in the history of time. It’s utter laziness and they only get away with it bc as a pp pointed out - ‘social deficits’ is so very subjective and basically covers anyone who isn’t George Clooney level of charming

I'd have to do so on background because I left the field awhile ago so can't claim "expert" on that any more. Upside, I am an expert in other areas of health policy so know how to talk on background.

You should do it on background and pitch the story overall bc the criteria they have given the medical community to determine this disorder is one of the biggest disservices to all impacted individuals in the history of ever and they deserve to be called out.
I feel like in ten years time ‘autism is a spectrum’ will be the new ‘all lives matter’

I think you may be almost alone in this feeling.

Many of us on this thread are not fans of the spectrum as it is currently categorized. That is the entire point of the conversation

[Anonymous]

Are people who need glasses blind?
No.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Are people who need glasses blind?
No.

Some people are considered legally blind without their glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason for changing the dsm is not bc it’s annoying for parents of kids who are more profoundly impacted (even though that is a very valid and important conversation).
The reason to change the dsm is that the spectrum narrative is not helpful if the commonalities between individuals are vastly outweighed by the differences.
The purpose of diagnoses are to support research and create communities of people impacted in certain ways so that therapies and medications may be targeted to their issue. The increasing wideness of the spectrum makes this job much harder

That is not the purpose of the DSM. The DSM can be helpful for that but it is primarily for billing codes.

Also if you bump level 1 autism out of the autism category, you need another diagnosis for it because level 1 autism requires specific therapies too.

?? The DSM does not give billing codes. That’s the ICD.

The publisher of the DSM says exactly what PP said:

“ The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. DSM contains descriptions, symptoms and other criteria for diagnosing mental disorders. It provides a common language for clinicians to communicate about their patients and establishes consistent and reliable diagnoses that can be used in research on mental disorders. It also provides a common language for researchers to study the criteria for potential future revisions and to aid in the development of medications and other interventions.”

https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/frequently-asked-questions

The DSM absolutely has associated codes used for billing. Autism is 299.00. There are corresponding icd codes. I’ve had fights with insurance over which one they prefer…

no, the DSM cross-references ICD. ICD is used for billing. https://www.naswma.org/page/ICD10andDSM5

I think you are probably thinking about ICD9 v ICD10?

Ha! No I’m thinking the insurance company was just using another excuse to not pay us back by saying we had used icd codes and they needed DSM codes for billing instead.

well that sounds about right!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Are people who need glasses blind?
No.

Some people are considered legally blind without their glasses.

Yes. Still not the same as being legally blind with glasses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Everyone can vent, but hopefully you understand why you shouldn’t cry loudly about your 6 week miscarriage to you friend who just had a 40-week stillbirth. Right? PP wasn’t saying you have no right to be sad or vent. She was explaining how she feels to be grouped with parents who have kids who are virtually NT.

Misery is not a contest to be won.

again that’s not the freakin’ point. the point was to understand PP’s POV when faced with parents complaining about their extremely high functioning kid.

O I'm the pp who is annoyed by parents with high functioning kids telling me their child is autistic.

I never said that they shouldn't say so, that was someone else. I personally find it annoying.

I liked the glasses to blind analogy. Imagine if in order to get any vision treatment, you had to qualify as blind.

Parents of children who really can't see would probably be really annoyed by people whose children have vision which is correctable by glasses complaining about being blind, and insisting there is no difference between a child who needs glasses and a child who will not be able to see no matter what.

I’d be really annoyed about that too. Like somebody whose mom is being irritating should be very cautious about complaining about their mom to somebody whose mom has just passed away. Or somebody raising a child with easily managed depression should not complain about it to somebody raising a child who has had to be hospitalized several times for depression. You’re 100% justified in being annoyed.

I just don’t see what that has to do with the DSM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:yeah, that ASD spectrum thing is BS. Always was.
Also, the ADHD+Dyslexia+high IQ is different from just one of the three.
Come to think of it, so is ADHD with a profoundly high IQ.

You know this is done by a committee right? Stupidest way ever to do it too. Really old white men mostly with a few younger (50s) ppl to round it out. I ran the Autism committee (as a staffer) for this last round when they did the spectrum and the disfunction among these ppl was intense. They should not have been allowed to name a child much less a group of disabilities.

Honestly I wish you’d talk to the New York Times or wapo.
The asd is a spectrum bs is the biggest hustle/ ruse in the history of time. It’s utter laziness and they only get away with it bc as a pp pointed out - ‘social deficits’ is so very subjective and basically covers anyone who isn’t George Clooney level of charming

I'd have to do so on background because I left the field awhile ago so can't claim "expert" on that any more. Upside, I am an expert in other areas of health policy so know how to talk on background.

You should do it on background and pitch the story overall bc the criteria they have given the medical community to determine this disorder is one of the biggest disservices to all impacted individuals in the history of ever and they deserve to be called out.
I feel like in ten years time ‘autism is a spectrum’ will be the new ‘all lives matter’

I think you may be almost alone in this feeling.

Many of us on this thread are not fans of the spectrum as it is currently categorized. That is the entire point of the conversation

NP. Sure but the analogy to All Lives Matter was highly inappropriate.

[Anonymous]

I understand that treatments for each level might be different, but based on my experiences with autistic people it really does seem like a spectrum. I know one kid who will close his eyes and rock back and forth as far as physically possible. He can hardly have a back and forth conversation, and laughs and talks to himself loudly at inappropriate times. He cannot come up with his own answers to assignments that require original sentences. Another autistic kid I know has back and forth conversations in some context, but not others (he can ask for clarification when receiving instructions, but in casual conversation either doesn't respond or responds with something completely off topic). He rocks back and forth in a less exaggerated manner with his eyes glazed over, and blurts out comments. Other kids just talk at me but can have reciprocal conversations with friends, just in a really off manner and don't ask follow-up questions, and they flap their hands at random moments.

Maybe these are just all level 1, but the first kid and the last kids I mentioned seem to have different levels of support needs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The reason for changing the dsm is not bc it’s annoying for parents of kids who are more profoundly impacted (even though that is a very valid and important conversation).
The reason to change the dsm is that the spectrum narrative is not helpful if the commonalities between individuals are vastly outweighed by the differences.
The purpose of diagnoses are to support research and create communities of people impacted in certain ways so that therapies and medications may be targeted to their issue. The increasing wideness of the spectrum makes this job much harder

That is not the purpose of the DSM. The DSM can be helpful for that but it is primarily for billing codes.

Also if you bump level 1 autism out of the autism category, you need another diagnosis for it because level 1 autism requires specific therapies too.

?? The DSM does not give billing codes. That’s the ICD.

The publisher of the DSM says exactly what PP said:

“ The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM) is the handbook used by health care professionals in the United States and much of the world as the authoritative guide to the diagnosis of mental disorders. DSM contains descriptions, symptoms and other criteria for diagnosing mental disorders. It provides a common language for clinicians to communicate about their patients and establishes consistent and reliable diagnoses that can be used in research on mental disorders. It also provides a common language for researchers to study the criteria for potential future revisions and to aid in the development of medications and other interventions.”

https://www.psychiatry.org/psychiatrists/practice/dsm/frequently-asked-questions

For the vast majority of mental issues, you can’t get insurance coverage unless you have a diagnosis from the DSM.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I understand that treatments for each level might be different, but based on my experiences with autistic people it really does seem like a spectrum. I know one kid who will close his eyes and rock back and forth as far as physically possible. He can hardly have a back and forth conversation, and laughs and talks to himself loudly at inappropriate times. He cannot come up with his own answers to assignments that require original sentences. Another autistic kid I know has back and forth conversations in some context, but not others (he can ask for clarification when receiving instructions, but in casual conversation either doesn't respond or responds with something completely off topic). He rocks back and forth in a less exaggerated manner with his eyes glazed over, and blurts out comments. Other kids just talk at me but can have reciprocal conversations with friends, just in a really off manner and don't ask follow-up questions, and they flap their hands at random moments.

Maybe these are just all level 1, but the first kid and the last kids I mentioned seem to have different levels of support needs.

Right but the behaviors you describe are not all that different. They all display perseveration and repetitive movements. I don’t think anyone is arguing about level of severity. I think what we’re saying is that ‘autism is a spectrum’ should not justify grouping people with virtually no symptoms in common together

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I understand that treatments for each level might be different, but based on my experiences with autistic people it really does seem like a spectrum. I know one kid who will close his eyes and rock back and forth as far as physically possible. He can hardly have a back and forth conversation, and laughs and talks to himself loudly at inappropriate times. He cannot come up with his own answers to assignments that require original sentences. Another autistic kid I know has back and forth conversations in some context, but not others (he can ask for clarification when receiving instructions, but in casual conversation either doesn't respond or responds with something completely off topic). He rocks back and forth in a less exaggerated manner with his eyes glazed over, and blurts out comments. Other kids just talk at me but can have reciprocal conversations with friends, just in a really off manner and don't ask follow-up questions, and they flap their hands at random moments.

Maybe these are just all level 1, but the first kid and the last kids I mentioned seem to have different levels of support needs.

Right but the behaviors you describe are not all that different. They all display perseveration and repetitive movements. I don’t think anyone is arguing about level of severity. I think what we’re saying is that ‘autism is a spectrum’ should not justify grouping people with virtually no symptoms in common together

But the difference in level 1, level 2, and level 3 is severity, and the way I am reading the comments in this thread, people seem to be suggesting level 1 should not be called autism. The last kids I mentioned are kids you’d say have “high functioning autism,” and people in the thread are saying that should be a separate category. Everybody diagnosed with autism, even level 1, has to have repetitive behaviors and communication deficits.