Reply to Article: Evolving Definition Of Autism Prompts Questions About Prevalence

Forum Index » Kids With Special Needs and Disabilities

Reply to "Article: Evolving Definition Of Autism Prompts Questions About Prevalence"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Ever since the DSM 5, I have been waiting to see how the changes would affect the numbers. Finally, here's a look at that.

https://www.disabilityscoop.com/2018/06/19/evolving-autism-prompts-questions/25205/

Now, for the first time, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is factoring the changing definition of autism into its regular tracking of autism prevalence.

Figures released in April show that 1 in 59 children have autism — an increase from reports two years ago that found 1 in 68 children were on the spectrum. However, the latest numbers, which rely on data collected on over 300,000 children who were 8 years old in 2014, are based on the older definition of autism.

In the same report, the CDC then evaluated the children under the newer[b] DSM-5 criteria, finding that 18 percent fewer [/b]would qualify for an autism diagnosis. Using the updated definition and also including children who had previously received a diagnosis of autism, 4 percent fewer children were found to have autism.

[/quote]

Pretty sure this is not a surprise to anyone who was paying attention when the change in definition happened.  The DSM V tightened the criteria and removed some of the umbrella terms (well, they combined them into one spectrum).  You now need to meet several criteria to be on the spectrum, where before you could meet one criteria to be on one area of the spectrum.

That being said, the kids with those issues STILL EXIST.  They did not disappear, and they still need help.  I don’t really think it matters one way or another to parents if they are “ASD” or not as long as they can get services...but if they cannot, and are struggling because of it, that’s a problem.[/quote]

Well said. Thanks. [/quote]

Actually, here's an article that spells out what's wrong with calling everything ASD.

https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/we-need-to-stop-moving-the-goalposts-for-autism/

From my perspective as an observer of “autism” for over 60 years, I do believe there is an actual increase in the number of cases of autistic disorder, but it is not an epidemic. And it has not been an increase of 31 percent in two years here in Wisconsin, for example, or a more than 150 percent increase in the U.S. in the past decade. That is simply not believable. [b]Instead much of that “epidemic” is a dilution of the rigor of the criteria for autism.[/b]

There are many reasons why the diagnosis of autism needs to be precise. Labeling some children as autistic when they have other learning disorders such as hyperlexia or language delay, for example, or “educational autism,” alarms families unnecessarily and can result in the wrong intervention or educational placement, which happens particularly with children who read early or speak late. Even “blindisms”—repetitive self-comforting behaviors such as rocking in children with visual impairments—can be mistaken for autism[b]. As elsewhere in medicine, the first step in treatment is to make the correct diagnosis.[/b][/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics