Why is GRASP upset about the new DSM?

[pup]

Can anyone explain to me why GRASP is asking for a letter writing campaign to protest the newest version of the DSM?

Perhaps I wasn't looking at the correct version but I couldn't see what was wrong with the idea of autism being defined as a spectrum rather than a narrow list of bullet points.

I'm confused.

[pup]

Um okay, maybe they are saying the opposite... that they plan to narrow the diagnostic criteria. As I said, I'm confused about what is being proposed for the DSM.

I tried to delete this topic but it says it won't let me. Sorry

[BruceCM]

I dunno, I can't find the actual planned changes but there's a lot of fuss about them!

[aliengirl]

The fuss (and I'm not saying I agree with it) is that some people with diagnoses of Asperger Syndrome and PDD-NOS are worried that any services or support they are currently receiving will cease as their diagnosis will no longer be considered valid by the providers of said services.

To be honest, I think a more sensible way of looking at it is that we'll just all be classified "autistic" rather than having our diagnoses removed, but bearing in mind we are in a recession, it could be the case that cash -strapped services decide to restrict their services to only support those with a diagnosis of 'pure' autism, so to speak.

There is also the ongoing idea perpetuated by the media and by organisations like Autism Squeaks that there is an "epidemic" and that autism cases are increasing. I would argue (as would many others) that it is just a case of better understanding of the condition leading to more people being diagnosed who would previously have been misdiagnosed or left with no support, but sadly not everyone sees it this way.

So some are saying that the new diagnostic criteria will be narrower so as to reduce the number of people being diagnosed, and most likely this could result in those of us diagnosed as aspie or HFA being overlooked.

I couldn't find a working link to it, but a couple of researchers tweeted that one of the lead psychiatrists involved in writing the new DSM said that people who call themselves "aspie" probably aren't actually autistic! I think that if this is what s/he actually said, it is highly ignorant and probably based on the ridiculous assumption that if you have an opinion about how you are treated by society, you're not allowed to be autistic...the belief that true autistics can only be passive beings in a perpetual child-like state which is highly offensive and not actually true of ANYONE on the spectrum, even those with more substantial support needs.

[BruceCM]

If grasp wants me to do anything about it, they'd need to supply the information - all I got from their email was a load of unsubstantiated claims! If it's one (or a few, out of all those that speak on the matter) saying something daft, that's no reason to get in such a panic. Obviously, with the ongoing economic situation, services won't get as much funding as we'd like but that seems likely to affect all users of them about equally, not just us.

[pup]

I don't see why they can't just consider us all under the umbrella of "autistic" and see it as a varied spectrum. Autistics aren't carbon copies of each other. I thought they said a longgg time ago (a year?) that it was what they were going to say in the new book.

[BruceCM]

Yeah, there was quite a fuss about it in a forum I was in back then, too! If your or my logic were applied, though, there'd be no diagnoses, just the human spectrum!

[pup]

I did think about that when I was typing the post

[BruceCM]

Then you know as well as I do what a lot of the fuss is about- Aspie elitism!

[pup]