Many in our community are understandably concerned that a planned revision of the medical definition of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) will restrict its diagnosis in ways that will prevent many persons from receiving vital medical and social services.
Before I catch you up on some of the details behind this revision, let me first say that although the proposed changes have a solid scientific rationale, we at Autism Speaks are likewise concerned about their effect on access to services. It is crucial that these changes don’t result in discrimination against people who are struggling with autism symptoms. As the APA moves forward in formalizing the new definition, we urge that this issue be kept at the forefront of the discussion. As the changes are implemented, scientists, families and providers will all need to carefully monitor its impact on those affected by all forms of ASD. The bottom line is this: We must ensure that all those who struggle with autism symptoms get the services they need.
Now let me provide some background.
The APA is currently completing work on the fifth edition of its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5), which will be published in 2013. The DSM is the standard reference that healthcare providers use to diagnose mental and behavioral conditions. As such, it influences availability of treatments as well as insurance coverage.
An expert panel appointed by the APA has proposed that the new version of the DSM change the current definition of ASD, in part because of shortcomings in how it is currently used for diagnosis. The new definition would do three things. First, it would eliminate the previously separate categories of Asperger syndrome and pervasive developmental disorder, not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS) from the diagnostic manual. Second, it would fold these disorders, together with “classic” autism, into the single category of ASD. Finally, it would change the criteria for diagnosing ASD.
Under the current definition, a person can qualify for an ASD diagnosis by exhibiting at least 6 of 12 behaviors that include deficits in social interaction, communication or repetitive behaviors. Under the proposed definition, the person would have to exhibit three deficits in social interaction and communication and at least two repetitive behaviors. The APA has also proposed that a new category be added to the DSM – Social Communication Disorder. This would allow for a diagnosis of disability in social communication without the presence of repetitive behavior.
Based on a recent study, some experts are suggesting that many individuals who currently meet the criteria for ASD, especially those who are more cognitively capable, would no longer meet criteria for ASD. If so, the new criteria would result in discrimination against people who are more cognitively capable. We are concerned about this and will do all we can to ensure that all people who are struggling with autism symptoms retain the services they deserve.
As these new criteria are rolled out over the coming year, Autism Speaks’ position is that it will be vitally important to collect meaningful information on how the change impacts access to services by those affected by autism symptoms. Further policy changes may be needed to ensure that all persons who struggle with autism symptoms get the services they need.
It is important to keep in mind that this revision in the medical definition of ASD is not just an academic exercise. These changes in diagnostic criteria will likely have important influences on the lives of those in our community who critically need services.
[Editor’s note: Please see the Autism Speaks policy statement on the DSM-5 revisions and a related FAQ here.]
Tune-in today to hear Autism Speaks’ leadership discuss the recently released analysis of the DSM-5, to be published in 2013, and hear about its potential implications for individuals to receive an autism diagnosis and appropriate services.
- Then, please join us for a live web chat at 3 pm Eastern with Autism Speaks Chief Science Officer Dr. Geraldine Dawson and Vice President of Family Services Lisa Goring – click on the tab on the Autism Speaks Facebook page to join in!
Watch Autism Speaks’ Dr. Andy Shih discuss the story on MSNBC “News Nation with Tamron Hall”
Today the American Psychiatric Association announced plans to change autism diagnostic categories in the newest version of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM). Notably, it has been proposed that the diagnoses of Asperger syndrome and Pervasive Developmental Disorder Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) be removed from the manual. A broad category of Autism Spectrum Disorder has been proposed instead.
These proposed changes are certain to be met with a wide range of reactions, and such reactions will depend on one’s perspective. From the scientific perspective, research conducted over the past decade has shown that there is no strong scientific rationale for distinguishing among autism, Asperger syndrome, and PDD-NOS. For example, research has shown that these subtypes are not linked to specific etiologies (causes) or specific treatment recommendations. Studies have shown that autism and Asperger syndrome can show up in the same familes and that specific autism risk genes don’t aggregate neatly within diagnostic categories. Treatment recommendations for Asperger syndrome versus high-functioning autism or for autism versus PDD-NOS are not different. So, from a scientific point of view, the changes in the DSM make sense. The new classification system recognizes that autism is a spectrum disorder that varies quantitatively in symptom severity and expression. The changes will allow us to look at the the landscape of autism broadly and focus on clusters of symptoms and seek etiological commonalities in disrupted signaling pathways that promise to tell us more than we have learned from considering each diagnostic category separately.
People in the community living with autism spectrum disorders may have a very different viewpoint, however. For some individuals who have been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome or other subtypes of the ASD spectrum, the change in the DSM will be very disruptive and distressing. Many individuals personally identify with the diagnostic label they have been given and grown up with. They may participate in support or advocacy groups that identify with a specific label, for example “Aspies”. Thus, although the scientific and professional communities may institute a change in the diagnostic criteria, many may choose to use the original labels despite the changes in the DSM. And there is nothing wrong with this. In fact, there is precedent for this. For example, “sensory integration disorder” and “nonverbal learning disability” are examples of labels that have been used by the clinical community, but are not specifically part of the DSM.
One potential positive impact of the proposed changes to the DSM is that they may help increase access to services to those individuals with Asperger syndrome and PDD-NOS who previously were denied access to autism-related services. From the perspective of a parent who is struggling with their young or adult child’s symptoms, it hardly matters what name is given to the collection of their symptoms. Increased access to services can help ease the burden of symptoms for those struggling to manage them.
We need to be respectful and compassionate about what a diagnostic change might mean for individuals with ASD and their families. We invite you use this space to share your thoughts about this change and what it means to your family. We will be listening and look forward to hearing your perspective.