Emily Singer has published an article at SFARI, Proposed guidelines won't miss autism cases, study says, which appears to suggest that persons who would meet DSM-IV PDD-NOS and Asperger's will "only" be reduced by approximately 10% under DSM5 criteria. The focus, as always, is on the HF end of the spectrum with no mention made of the intellectually disabled who will be excluded under the wording of mandatory criterion A of the DSM5. "We didn't see any evidence that there would be dramatically lower diagnosis of people with Asperger's or PDD-NOS," says Lord."
Catherine Lord has previously confessed that the real targets for exclusion from the DSM5's New Autism Spectrum Disorder are the intellectually disabled:
-"Catherine Lord, the director of the Institute for Brain Development at NewYork-Presbyterian Hospital, and a member of the committee overseeing the [DSM-5 autism] revisions, said that the goal was to ensure that autism was not used as a “fallback diagnosis” for children whose primary trait might be, for instance, an intellectual disability or aggression." [Bracketed terms added for context - HLD]
- Dr. Catherine Lord, as reported by NYT reporter, Amy Harmon, A Specialists’ Debate on Autism Has Many Worried Observers, New York Times, January 20, 2012
Persons with ID represented "the vast majority" of persons with autistic disorder according to CDC autism expert Dr. Yeargin-Allsopp. The DSM-IV addition of PDD-NOS and Aspergers reduced that figure to 41-44% according to recent CDC surveys. The DSM5 exclusion under Criteria A for social communication even where EVEN if all Critera A categories are otherwise exhibited will result in a further significant reduction in numbers of person with autism and ID. And that is the real aim of the DSM5 as Catherine Lord again confesses as reported in the Singer/SFARI article:
"Lord and her colleagues found that the DSM-5 is as sensitive as the DSM-IV, meaning it accurately identifies those who have autism. The DSM-5 criteria also have better specificity than those in the DSM-IV, meaning they can better distinguish between people who have autism and those who have other developmental disorders, the study found."
As set out above the real targets for exclusion from the autism spectrum under the DSM5 autism do-over are the intellectually disabled who are targeted by the addition of the "not accounted for by general developmental delay" disqualifying criterion in mandatory criterion A. Studies by J Matson have confirmed that substantial numbers, as many as 35.5%, of intellectually disabled who would meet DSM-IV autism criteria, will be excluded under the DSM5 criteria.
In the DSM5 the evolution of autism into Aspergers continues with the targeting for exclusion of the intellectually disabled. But no one cares. Not Dr. Lord, not Dr. Geraldine Dawson of Autism Speaks whose organisation has expressed concern over the possible impact of the DSM autism do-over on those at the HF end of the spectrum but not on the intellectually disabled. Not the New York Times and other major media who have worried over the possible HF exclusions. The exclusion of some HF is possible, the exclusion of many LF intellectually disabled is certain but apparently no one cares about the intellectually disabled and the impact this exclusion will have on them.
Were you able to read the "American Journal of Psychiatry" article. I have not read it thoroughly, but one of the charts seems to suggest that the sensitivity of DSM-V is higher for children with full spectrum IQs <=70 vs children with IQ's > 70.
ReplyDeleteI did not expect this, and perhaps I at this late hour have misinterpreted the chart.
...according to this my son did not need apply before he had three years of intensive aba but now he can apply....he is still himself though last time I looked. I do not get it.
ReplyDelete