Will Criteria D Actually Be Required in Diagnosing the New Autism Spectrum Disorder Level 1?

In order for the New Autism Spectrum Disorder to be diagnosed pursuant to the DSM-5, Criteria A, B, C, and D must all be met.  That is what the DSM-5 says according to the dsm5.org web site.  But will Criteria D, Symptoms together limit and impair everyday functioning actually be present in practice?  Or will psychiatrists and psychologists diagnose Level 1 Autism Spectrum Disorder without any real limit or impairment in everyday functioning?

I had previously asked if any of the well known, apparently very high functioning persons with autism or Asperger's Disorder would lose their diagnoses under the new criteria.  The other side of the coin, of course, is the possibility that Criteria D will not be required in practice.  

I have met persons with Aspergers who clearly have limitations in everyday functioning and I am not suggesting that anyone with Aspergers could not really meet a limited and impaired everyday functioning test.  There are, however, some very successful persons with a high functioning autism or Aspergers disorder who do not have any obvious limit or impairment including some who can function in high level government, legal and media settings. Presumably everyday functioning is an everyday, common sense, criterion. But how some of these people were diagnosed with an ASD even under the current DSM-IV criteria is beyond my understanding as a layperson. Given the careers that some have built as spokespersons for the autism community, will public pressure  be exerted for professionals to go easy on Criteria D in diagnosing the New Autism Spectrum Disorder?

Will Critieria D actually be required in practice in diagnosing the New Autism Spectrum Disorder under the DSM-5?  I guess the answer will be found in future prevalence studies and debates. 

Severity Levels in the DSM-5's New Autism Spectrum Disorder: Requiring Support, Substantial Support and Very Substantial Support

The DSM-5 will merge the disorders now commonly referred to  as Autism Spectrum Disorders into one diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder and will divide that spectrum by severity levels.  The severity levels are Level 1 - Requiring Support, Level 2 - Requiring Substantial Support, and Level 3 - Requiring Very Substantial Support.  Intellectual Disability, as expected,  is not mentioned in this classification scheme even though it is obvious that Intellectual Disability will be common amongst persons with Level 3 Autism Spectrum Disorder and non-existent in the Level 1 ASD where most persons currently diagnosed with Aspergers will be reclassified.

I believe that the failure to acknowledge fully the relationship between Intellectual Disability and Autism Disorders is a form of Intellectual Dishonesty. As long as we continue to ignore the ID Pink Elephant in the Autism Spectrum we will never conduct the research necessary to fully understand autism disorders.  The Intellectual Dishonesty of omitting express reference to Intellectual Disability aside though, the division of the New Autism Spectrum Disorder into severity levels based on the levels of support required to function should at least help remove some of the romantic veneer with which autism disorders have been coated by various Neurodiversity and purported autism self advocates over the last two decades.  There is no reason to take joy in discovering that you, or your child, have an impaired functioning level requiring support, substantial support or very substantial support.  It is hard to glorify autism disorders in those terms.  

Despite my misgivings about  the New Autism Spectrum Disorder, I have to acknowledge that  the New ASD may at least be a  start toward a more realistic approach to public discussion of autism disorders. It is hard to tell at this time though whether it will be a substantial start or a very substantial start towards a reality based approach to autism disorders.