What forms of Autism were re-defined as ASD-1?

[Greatshield17]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the re-definition itself, of Aspergers and other forms of Autism as “ASD-1,” is actually worse, than the confusion it causes. Even if one is opposed to Autism Acceptance, this re-definition is wrong because by viewing us purely from what’s wrong with us, the treatment itself will be undermined as we’re not being viewed as how we actually function.

I’m wondering, what exactly were the other forms of Autism that were re-defined and what is known about them?

 

[Joshua the Writer]

As far as I know, PDD-NOS and Asperger's were redefined into ASD-1. I think this is good because it removed the awful functioning label aspect of it, and ASAN actually guided this decision.

 

[Greatshield17]

As far as I know, PDD-NOS and Asperger's were redefined into ASD-1. I think this is good because it removed the awful functioning label aspect of it, and ASAN actually guided this decision.

The ASD levels 1, 2, 3 etc. are purely functioning labels; the re-definition is based on function, and frankly, undesirable we are.

 

[Joshua the Writer]

The ASD levels 1, 2, 3 etc. are purely functioning labels; the re-definition is based on function, and frankly, undesirable we are.

At least it's not the binary high/low functioning.

 

[Gerontius]

Controversy-- delicious.

I think it's good to lump Asperger's and autism together. It saves focus on the symptoms and then allows research to keep an eye on the overall causes of it. Also, it helps with remembering autism=neurodivergent instead of giving people yet more labeling to fight over.

Not a scientist though, but since so many disorders & what-not are linked to autism that are also linked to Asperger's it is helpful to see them as the same. Autism presents differently in men & women--it also presents differently in individuals. The way I see it--which, like much of what else I think, may be wrong indeed--seeing it all as autism forces the observer to acknowledge the differences of the individuals, rather than creating more categories.

But that is simply a guess.

 

[Greatshield17]

Controversy-- delicious.

I think it's good to lump Asperger's and autism together. It saves focus on the symptoms and then allows research to keep an eye on the overall causes of it. Also, it helps with remembering autism=neurodivergent instead of giving people yet more labeling to fight over.

Not a scientist though, but since so many disorders & what-not are linked to autism that are also linked to Asperger's it is helpful to see them as the same. Autism presents differently in men & women--it also presents differently in individuals. The way I see it--which, like much of what else I think, may be wrong indeed--seeing it all as autism forces the observer to acknowledge the differences of the individuals, rather than creating more categories.

But that is simply a guess.

I’m all for Aspergers and the like being recognized as a form of Autism, and I’m opening to viewing Autism on an individual level; the problem is, is that the re-definition was made to re-define Autism as all-bad and deny anything good about it. Just recently there was an article out there that said something along the lines that Autistic women “had less Autism” as they got older; the narrative has become even more dominated by our enemies than before, this re-definition was a huge victory for them.

 

[Crossbreed]

Actually, PDD-NOS (DSM-4) can occur at any severity level.
My ASD3 daughter, originally, had a dx of PDD-NOS.
PDD-NOS means that it is very similar to autism, but it doesn't tick all of the boxes.

I think severity/functioning level is a better distinction than IQ.

 

[Shamar]

The more I think about it, the more I realize that the re-definition itself, of Aspergers and other forms of Autism as “ASD-1,” is actually worse, than the confusion it causes. Even if one is opposed to Autism Acceptance, this re-definition is wrong because by viewing us purely from what’s wrong with us, the treatment itself will be undermined as we’re not being viewed as how we actually function.

I’m wondering, what exactly were the other forms of Autism that were re-defined and what is known about them?

Autism exists as a spectrum, I think we can all pretty much agree on that. The problem is that spectrum is, and always has been, seen as one of function. I see multiple spectra, and dimensions, laid across that fundamental spectrum of function. Two people at the same point on the function spectrum will be entirely different, yet considered and treated the same. Hence our saying "If you meet one person with autism, you've met one person with autism."

This tendency to measure us in one dimension does none of us benefit, and probably harms all of us. I was told by one counselor that because I was so cognitively high functioning and technically skilled, I did not need treatment or benefits. This was one of the things used by SSA to deny me benefits. Yet, I was unable to find long term work other tam menial labor or burger flipping. As the garbageman on Dilbert said, "High intelligence does not have as much practical application as you might expect."

The medical, psychiatric, and psychological professions need to recognize all of our dimensionality. For example, Asperger's has a set of well defined characteristics within the whole of autism, and needs to be kept as a separate grouping. The stated goal of the new DSM standards was to simplify things. Unfortunately, it appears they have simplified things to the point of uselessness.

I appear to have gotten into a bit of a rant here, but I believe these things need to be said, and repeated, until the people charged with helping us pay attention.

 

[Shamar]

Actually, PDD-NOS (DSM-4) can occur at any severity level.
My ASD3 daughter, originally, had a dx of PDD-NOS.
PDD-NOS means that it is very similar to autism, but it doesn't tick all of the boxes.

I think severity/functioning level is a better distinction than IQ.

I beg to differ a bit. I am very high functioning (I'm embarrassed to say just how high my score came in), yet socially I am nearly non functional. So, am I ASD-1 or ASD-3? Or strike an average and call it ASD-2? Is it possible to be at both ends of a spectrum simultaneously? Which group would you put me in given the three choices? Hence my rant a few minutes ago.

 

[Isadoorian]

Contrary to popular belief, Autism is NOT a Spectrum; It's just not that simple.

Here's an excellent article about it, which I'll always refer people to

“Autism is a Spectrum” Doesn’t Mean What You Think

 

[Gerontius]

Contrary to popular belief, Autism is NOT a Spectrum; It's just not that simple.

Here's an excellent article about it, which I'll always refer people to

“Autism is a Spectrum” Doesn’t Mean What You Think

Oh that's a neat article.

That's actually why I am OK with putting all of it under the banner of "autism" instead of tiny little differences. I was told I was high-functioning when I was diagnosed. Well, out in the world functioning, be hanged if that's so--I realize that I am incapable of living alone, at least in an urban area. Yet I live alone & scrape by. Most of the time things are OK but I admit I am unhinged & am trying to regain stability and equipoise in life.

 

[Isadoorian]

Oh that's a neat article.

That's actually why I am OK with putting all of it under the banner of "autism" instead of tiny little differences. I was told I was high-functioning when I was diagnosed. Well, out in the world functioning, be hanged if that's so--I realize that I am incapable of living alone, at least in an urban area. Yet I live alone & scrape by. Most of the time things are OK but I admit I am unhinged & am trying to regain stability and equipoise in life.

Exactly! There's just Autism. That's it.

There's no such thing as "High Functioning" or "Low Functioning", they're just labels used by the ableists and eugenicists (such as Autism $peaks) to forgo help to those that need it.
Same with "mild" and "severe"; there's no such thing.

 

[Greatshield17]

Autism exists as a spectrum, I think we cal all pretty much agree on that. The problem is that spectrum is, and always has been, seen as one of function. I see multiple spectra, and dimensions, laid across that fundamental spectrum of function. Two people at the same point on the function spectrum will be entirely different, yet considered and treated the same. Hence our saying "If you meet one person with autism, you've met one person with autism."

This tendency to measure us in one dimension does none of us benefit, an probably harms all of us. I was told by one counselor that because I was so cognitively high functioning and technically skilled, I did not need treatment of benefits. This was one of the things used by SSA to deny me benefits. Yet, I was unable to find long term work other tam menial labor or burger flipping. As the garbageman on Dilbert said, "High intelligence does not have as much practical application as you might expect."

The medical, psychiatric, and psychological professions need to recognize all of our dimensionality. For example, Asperger's has a set of well defined characteristics within the whole of autism, and needs to be kept as a separate grouping. The stated goal of the new DSM standards was to simplify things. Unfortunately, it appears they have simplified things to the point of uselessness.

I appear to have gotten into a bit of a rant here, but I believe these things need to be said, and repeated, until the people charges with helping us pay attention.

Well-said, you unpacked a lot on this issue.

It seems that an obsession with efficiency is a real problem in our society.

 

[Gerontius]

Exactly! There's just Autism. That's it.

There's no such thing as "High Functioning" or "Low Functioning", they're just labels used by the ableists and eugenicists (such as Autism $peaks) to forgo help to those that need it.
Same with "mild" and "severe"; there's no such thing.

I'd be tempted to say that there are degrees of severity based on affect, but that one is either autistic or not. Same as you can heat a piece of wax or a piece of iron to 300 and get very different results.

 

[MyLifeAsAnAspie]

The word "spectrum" is intended to not denote functioning level, but rather the "colors" of autism. The DSM-4 resulted in the use of Asperger's/Autism as two functioning levels to a large extent, ignoring that actually criteria which didn't intend that. I think of Asperger's as a sub-type of ASD, which is USUALLY high functioning, but is only one sub-type of high functioning ASD people.

The other explanation for use the Asperger's in the DSM-4 is to provide an alternative to the "autism" word. To encourage broader diagnosis, it was useful to have an alternative word to avoid scarring parents with the big, bad "autism" word. I was disappointed in Elon Musk calling himself Asperger's instead of ASD, even though he fits the Asperger's type so well. I suppose he thought he wouldn't be able to use "ASD" without confusing people.

 

[Crossbreed]

I am very high functioning (I'm embarrassed to say just how high my score came in), yet socially I am nearly non functional.

Dyssociety [social klutziness] is a defining trait across the whole spectrum.

So, am I ASD-1 or ASD-3? Or strike an average and call it ASD-2? Is it possible to be at both ends of a spectrum simultaneously? Which group would you put me in given the three choices?

"Severity" is based on how well one can handle their self-care responsibilities (apart from above). It is cumulative.
If you can handle most of them on your own, ASD1.
Some of them, ASD2.
Nearly none, ASD3.

I'd be tempted to say that there are degrees of severity based on affect, but that one is either autistic or not.

There is only one autism. One's severity is based on the effect of one's total co-morbid load.
ASD2 = ASD1 + a severe co-morbid load.
ASD3 = ASD1 + a more severe co-morbid load.

Those co-morbids saw an unprecedented upswing starting in 1979, and are believed to be largely preventable, if their cause could be correctly identified. (Without them, one would still be ASD1.)

2014-CA DDS Autism Cases By Birth Year
Occurrence of ASD2/3 by Birth Year (California, 2014)

 

[Greatshield17]

Contrary to popular belief, Autism is NOT a Spectrum; It's just not that simple.

Here's an excellent article about it, which I'll always refer people to

“Autism is a Spectrum” Doesn’t Mean What You Think

What do you and others consider to be the unifying traits that make up Autism? Not just the symptoms and debilitating factors, but also the positive and noteworthy factors and the like?

I seem to mostly lean with @Crossbreed on a lot these topics, though I don’t think it’s just being “dyssocial” that defines, or is the key trait of Autism. (More specifically I have my own, philosophical speculation about Autism that’s based off of my Faith’s philosophy which I discuss here: [URL="https://www.autismforums.com/threads/catholic-philosophy-and-autism-your-thoughts.35429/"]Catholic Philosophy and Autism: your thoughts[/URL])

 

[Crossbreed]

"Lack of social instinct" is the defining trait according to Dr. Lorna Wing, who established the spectrum.
A diminished "theory of mind" is the leading contender for why that is so.
It is also why we tend to think "outside of the box,"
since said box is largely a social construct.

 

[Greatshield17]

"Lack of social instinct" is the defining trait according to Dr. Lorna Wing, who established the spectrum.
A diminished "theory of mind" is the leading contender for why that is so.
It is also why we tend to think "outside of the box,"
since said box is largely a social construct.

Well yeah, that seems to be the main thing associated with Autism, but there’s clearly more going on; like sensory issues, that seems to be quite common among Autistic people, and I think we should consider stuff like that as well, especially considering (as I pointed out in the thread a linked) all human communication is ultimately bodily (that is, uses the 5 senses, predominantly sight & hearing) in nature.

 

[Aspychata]

Finally- how well woman mask also means where do they assign us? On how well we mask, how high our IQ? Our ability to or not work unsupervised? To live alone? It should be rated on a series of questions of how we function in society.

I took a crappy job for the longest time because l couldn't deal with office politics. But l now have some ability to do fine in a work-related situation within certain confines.