Should those with severe autism have their own diagnosis. Thread 2

[Cubic]

The first thread was full of debate of this emotive topic. Most posters engaged in good faith. Many of us want to have this discussion and that includes posters for and against.

It's worth saying that some posters may have autism so please bare that in mind as some posts could be mis interpretated or written in a way where it appears abrupt and that isn't the intention.

There was a notable derailment in the last thread and it is suggested that if/when this happens it is ignored.

The poll at writing was 91% in favor of a seperate diagnosis after over 1000 votes.

It’s usually a co-existence of autism and LD that means the term profound is used.

Where the debate differs is if it’s acceptable to refer to those people as profoundly autistic or if profoundly disabled is more accurate, as the LD isn’t autism in itself. Really, that’s just semantics IMO.

Personally, I would be happy for that co-existence to mean someone was labelled as profound, in whatever format “acceptable,” if it meant that the level of need was recognised and catered for effectively.

Thanks for answering. That makes sense.

While categorisation is rarely perfect, it's at least more informative than lumping everyone together with no distinction. There could be basic levels used to provide a general overview, alongside more detailed medical reports for schools or others who require more depth. It works for other conditions. Having agreed upon terms to quickly give people a general idea of what to expect would be helpful, as the label can currently mean almost anything. At present, if someone says they or their child is autistic, it provides very little useful information because the diagnosis encompasses everyone from some of the most successful, high functioning people in the world to some of the most severely disabled who need 24 hour care, and everything in between. As I said on the other thread, we already classify many other conditions like cerebral palsy, learning disabilities, and hearing or visual impairments by levels of severity. Why is autism so different that people seem to object so much to the idea? Even if we don't distinguish between different levels of severity of autism, there'll still be a line drawn between people who have many traits of autism but not quite enough to get a diagnosis, and those who are very similar but have just enough traits to be diagnosed, and that will be imperfect too.

That’s horrendous for the YP and their family.

It is a hard decision. And one where there isn’t a right answer. Neither is perfect. Both have risks. Both can be traumatic for DC and all involved. It also isn’t always one or the other even for the same individual - both can be necessary depending on the intervention/investigation.

You absolutely should not feel a fraud. If he's autistic he's autistic. Just like NT people they are all individuals with individual needs.
My son now holds down a job, lives independently and travels abroad ( when he's got the money!). At 5 he started in special education still in nappies and liable to spend the morning looking for things to sweep off surfaces or, if liquid, pour on the floor. HFA or not?

This paper is currently not behind a paywall.

I found quite interesting and it cover a lot of what we discussed on this and the previous thread inc genetics, pregnancy and the removal of Aspergers, inc profound etc. It's worth a read for anyone with an interest.

https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/the-british-journal-of-psychiatry/article/from-autism-to-the-plural-autisms-evidence-from-differing-aetiologies-developmental-trajectories-and-symptom-intensity-combinations/4D9B0B35DCF03FDBA4E001F7DC9B02D6?fbclid=Iwb21leARZnlVjbGNrBFmeMGV4dG4DYWVtAjExAHNydGMGYXBwX2lkDDM1MDY4NTUzMTcyOAABHrQ8U9MKmQ7Dh71gORoZrQu9FlZmWmBzNgiKMGlkdIVYGXwYPU89sEkG9Z-S_aem_D4xydtt2NLzC9vOlJwT7UA&utm_id=97758_v0_s00_e0_tv2_a1demo0eb4c038