Criticism of Broad Autism Phenotype

[Oz67]

I have some criticism of Broad Autism Phenotype.

Broad Autism Phenotype seems to blur the lines between a neurotypical that has persistent autistic traits and a person with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Tha argument can be made is if s person has a diagnosis or not.

There are also some people that have Unspecified Neurodevelopmental Disorder that have symptoms similar to Autism Spectrum Disorder, but they may not meet full diagnostic criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

It's just so confusing.

 

[Neonatal RRT]

I have some criticism of Broad Autism Phenotype.

Broad Autism Phenotype seems to blur the lines between a neurotypical that has persistent autistic traits and a person with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Tha argument can be made is if s person has a diagnosis or not.

There are also some people that have Unspecified Neurodevelopmental Disorder that have symptoms similar to Autism Spectrum Disorder, but they may not meet full diagnostic criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

It's just so confusing.

Agree. There should be some definitive criteria to meet.

This unfortunately gives credence to the minimizing statement that "everyone's on the spectrum". Statements like this are the gateway to denying that autism is even a diagnosis, that it's "just a label", or worse, "an excuse", and that we should "just try a little harder".

I'm generally a positive person, so don't get me started on a rant.

 

[Misty Avich]

What I find confusing is that there are some disabilities or conditions out there that also affect social skills but many autistic people seem to act like we're the only ones with social difficulties.

 

[Judge]

I have some criticism of Broad Autism Phenotype.

Broad Autism Phenotype seems to blur the lines between a neurotypical that has persistent autistic traits and a person with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Tha argument can be made is if s person has a diagnosis or not.

There are also some people that have Unspecified Neurodevelopmental Disorder that have symptoms similar to Autism Spectrum Disorder, but they may not meet full diagnostic criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

It's just so confusing.

Ironically I often wonder if it was the DSM-V's way of "professionally lamenting" that they aren't truly sure who and what we actually are. Without actually admitting it, of course.

I also wonder how many in the DSM-V were determined to simply sweep away the name and research of Dr.Hans Asperger from the equation altogether.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[Oz67]

Agree. There should be some definitive criteria to meet.

This unfortunately gives credence to the minimizing statement that "everyone's on the spectrum". Statements like this are the gateway to denying that autism is even a diagnosis, that it's "just a label", or worse, "an excuse", and that we should "just try a little harder".

I'm generally a positive person, so don't get me started on a rant.

That makes sense.

 

[Oz67]

Ironically I often wonder if it was the DSM-V's way of "professionally lamenting" that they aren't truly sure who and what we actually are. Without actually admitting it, of course.

I also wonder how many in the DSM-V were determined to simply sweep away the name and research of Dr.Hans Asperger from the equation altogether.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

That's interesting.

 

[Oz67]

What I find confusing is that there are some disabilities or conditions out there that also affect social skills but many autistic people seem to act like we're the only ones with social difficulties.

How many statistically from your point?

 

[Nitro]

Ironically I often wonder if it was the DSM-V's way of "professionally lamenting" that they aren't truly sure who and what we actually are. Without actually admitting it, of course.

I also wonder how many in the DSM-V were determined to simply sweep away the name and research of Dr.Hans Asperger from the equation altogether.

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Although a failure in some eyes, eliminating a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome was not an effort to remove any of Han's work.

I honestly read the entire DSM IV and skimmed III and 5

It is not a how to manual for psych evaluations, it is a fiscal guide on how to get individuals the support they need.

If a psych professional needs a written book to do their job, would you honestly want them doing YOUR eval?

There simply was not enough demarcation under Asperger's to meet all the deficits that were under that simple but ineffective umbrella.


On this very forum, we have Asperger's assessments which range from near genius level with social impairments to what is now considered level 2, individuals that struggle without some outside support system in place.
Honestly, there isn't quite enough demarcation under DSM 5 either, but for now the pros need to work with what they are offered simply to meet the fiscal demands of support.

With your former occupation in insurance underwriting, I would hope that you understand the importance of meeting fiscal needs of clients.

 

[Misty Avich]

I have BAP. Well, I was formally diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome but I read in various places that people diagnosed with that sometimes refer themselves as BAP or PDD-NOS. Usually those of us on the spectrum with average IQ and even average social skills prefer these labels, as 'autistic' sounds too serious for us.

 

[Nitro]

I have BAP. Well, I was formally diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome but I read in various places that people diagnosed with that sometimes refer themselves as BAP or PDD-NOS. Usually those of us on the spectrum with average IQ and even average social skills prefer these labels, as 'autistic' sounds too serious for us.

It doesn't matter what you call yourself because that in no way undermines who you are to be called autistic.


Give it any name you want, but in the end it is about highlighting deficits, not feelings.

 

[Nitro]

I have BAP. Well, I was formally diagnosed with Asperger's syndrome but I read in various places that people diagnosed with that sometimes refer themselves as BAP or PDD-NOS. Usually those of us on the spectrum with average IQ and even average social skills prefer these labels, as 'autistic' sounds too serious for us.

To add to this, I rarely share that I'm on the spectrum to begin with, so in the bigger picture, it only matters if you care to share it and are worried about what others think of you.

You might try to focus on positives instead of negatives that are not healthy towards your mental health.

 

[Rodafina]

The most accurate label for me is just a Rodafina - great struggles and great strengths all mixed up in a messy ball that I am unraveling a little more with each day that passes.

Generally, I like concise and clear order to things, but when it comes to a human brain that has lived for multiple decades, precise labels are likely going to be imperfect.

 

[Judge]

I still don't see the DSM-V truly meeting the needs of most of the autistic population either. That they provide a protocol of what they think we need, whether we get it or not. But then the entire equation isn't dependent only on the DSM-V either. Medical providers, federal and state bureaucrats and politicians all share some of the blame.

With your former occupation in insurance underwriting, I would hope that you understand the importance of meeting fiscal needs of clients.

Insurance underwriting in the most technical sense? Yes and No. "Apples and oranges" too.

Our job was to see that our independent agents made sure their clients (policyholders) paid their premiums in a timely manner and cooperated with underwriting and claims. Contrary to meeting their fiscal needs, it was the policyholder who had to meet my underwriting needs to determine their ability to pay their premiums. At the same time as the client was the agent's and not the company's I had no authorization at any time to deal with any policyholder, apart from state laws requiring a broker's license. And of course, to work in underwriting if an applicant had a broker's license, they had to surrender it to be an underwriter, to avoid any questions of conflicts of interest.

Morally, insurers don't have a legal or ethical equivalent to a Hippocratic Oath. They are regulated by state governments, but insurance is really about the ability of the pubic to meet the needs of insurers. Leaving only pricing and claims service to compete in the marketplace.

But even that was a sore point to me as a commercial underwriter. Because the price levels of so many of our products were simply outside the range of being really competitive
in Northern California. No matter how I could legally justify applying credits to accounts, more often than not it wasn't enough to get the account or keep it for long.

As for claims, I was an underwriter. Not an adjuster. I could make decisions that could impact a policholder based on what an adjuster told me, but it was an internal process not to be shared with the agent.

In essence, my official capacity to look after my agents was quite limited. And if they themselves had real financial problems, that was very bad news for them much more than for us.

 

[Nitro]

Like I said at the beginning, "Yes- and no."

My point was that your parent company had a set of rules in place to keep the business in check.
There was a business model set up to keep an eye on the money AKA profit margins.
The first rule of capitalism is to minimize losses while maximizing profits.
If insurance companies weren't profitable, they would cease to exist.

The DSM manuals are the guidelines used for directing needed support.
That is a necessary evil where there would need to be written guidelines instead of a willy-nilly approach with no guardrails, cameras or sissy sticks.
Lumping the diagnosis criteria all together makes sense from from the viewpoint of a billing department setting.
Makes it easier to find instead of dozens to sort thru to get them possibly wrong from a clerical standpoint.

Same goes for the psych pro who would otherwise have the same frustration over trying to gain support for a particular client because of a lack of demarcation to begin with.

In the end, the levels of "autism" are broken down to support needs instead of simply a name that could potentially cover two levels.

Removing Han's Asperger's name wasn't done to distance themselves from history, but to streamline the fiscal system in order to pay the support entities, which are also in it for a profit whether the money stays internal as a non-profit or is paid back out to the staff in a private entity.

 

[Misty Avich]

It's a bit contradicting that many autistics demand to lump everyone with possible ASD traits with just autism so that everyone on the spectrum can get support (or at least be treated like we're all low-functioning), yet in the next breath demand to call autism a difference rather than a disorder...forgetting that ASD actually stands for Autism Spectrum Disorders.

 

[Judge]

If insurance companies weren't profitable, they would cease to exist.

The thing is though, insurance companies don't make profits on underwriting. Only losses. Underwriters slow down the losses with risk management, but that's about it. Making it inherently awkward to think of how underwriting truly contributes to profits.

When I was an underwriter, the industry combined ratio was 110%. Meaning insurers collectively pay out $110 for every $100 they take in. Yet they continue to stay in business.

How do they stay in business? It's a false metric. The reality is that insurers are just clearing houses for cash, much like banks. Prudently investing every incoming dollar as fast as possible. When their actual profit usually exceeds losses. As long as the stock market remains lucrative, they will continue to exist. Especially as long as their investment profits outpace the cost of catastrophic losses, which continues to be evermore problematic.

Leaving corporate investors and actuaries to make the best salaries outside of executives.

 

[Shamar]

I have some criticism of Broad Autism Phenotype.

Broad Autism Phenotype seems to blur the lines between a neurotypical that has persistent autistic traits and a person with Autism Spectrum Disorder. Tha argument can be made is if s person has a diagnosis or not.

There are also some people that have Unspecified Neurodevelopmental Disorder that have symptoms similar to Autism Spectrum Disorder, but they may not meet full diagnostic criteria for Autism Spectrum Disorder.

It's just so confusing.

I suspect they are working toward making autism a personality type. This would explain autism in DSM-5. They seem to be headed toward an intelligence/cognitive/function definition of autism and eliminate ASD-1. My personal observation is that the "experts" don't have a clue about autism and would rather just be rid of us. Making us a personality type means they don't have to deal with us, and that would make them (but not us) perfectly happy.

 

[Oz67]

I suspect they are working toward making autism a personality type. This would explain autism in DSM-5. They seem to be headed toward an intelligence/cognitive/function definition of autism and eliminate ASD-1. My personal observation is that the "experts" don't have a clue about autism and would rather just be rid of us. Making us a personality type means they don't have to deal with us, and that would make them (but not us) perfectly happy.

That's an interesting observation.

 

[Oz67]

It's a bit contradicting that many autistics demand to lump everyone with possible ASD traits with just autism so that everyone on the spectrum can get support (or at least be treated like we're all low-functioning), yet in the next breath demand to call autism a difference rather than a disorder...forgetting that ASD actually stands for Autism Spectrum Disorders.

But there are different levels of support for Autism Spectrum Disorder, it's not exactly the same as you view it.

 

[vergil96]

I suspect they are working toward making autism a personality type.

This is what I observe with current ASD-1 as well. Originally autism and Asperger's differed only by IQ, not enjoying shopping malls and chaos and having some personality traits - where current definition seems to be going. Autism and Asperger's aren't two different things. Including them both in one diagnostic unit reflects that contemporary state of knowledge. But what gets included as ASD-1 is an entirely different issue and it doesn't serve the people who are diagnosed this way, because they would benefit more from different treatment and it doesn't serve the rest of the community - we get people coming who call someone autistic in the autistic community stupid for having autistic traits such as needing order, hating shopping malls and traffic or speech issues or being a loner or isolated. It shouldn't take place.