So mental health experts are messing with the definition of autism and the diagnostic criteria. My mind boggles with what that will mean to the future children being diagnosed, and the children already diagnosed today. How will we be able to accurately track the rise in autism rates and apply research on a potential environmental contributing factor if we throw this monkey wrench into the mix?! And down the road in a few years, the news reports will say that autism is on the decline and some government agency will take credit for it. Not because of changes made to our environment or perhaps improved treatment options…but because the diagnostic criteria has changed.
What will this mean to children already diagnosed and receiving services that no longer qualify based on the new criteria? Does it mean they no longer need services because on paper, they don’t have autism, just Aspergers. What would have happened if this new criteria was around when my son was diagnosed? His diagnosis was high-functioning autism. Would he have received a diagnosis of autism and qualified for the much-needed services he has received over the years? I credit biomedical intervention AND behavioral therapy for his huge gains since his diagnosis.
I’m sure there is some good news in all of this somewhere. Maybe for the insurance companies that would have to provide services in the states that have adopted insurance reform. I don’t know about this one. I’d love to hear from you and what your take on it is.
Filed under: Biomedical interventions, General autism info, Therapies | Tagged: Aspergers, autism, autism rates, behavior therapy, Biomedical interventions, diagnostic criteria of austim, DSM, health, high functioning autism | 4 Comments »