There are rumours circulating that ICD-11 will more closely align itself with the American DSM-5 and exclude the term Asperger Syndrome by incorporating into Autism Spectrum Disorder. I have had a look at the draft of ICD-11 and found the following:
6A02 Autism spectrum disorder
6A02.0 Autism spectrum disorder without disorder of intellectual development and with mild or no impairment of functional language
Description: All definitional requirements for autism spectrum disorder are met, intellectual functioning and adaptive behaviour are found to be at least within the average range (approximately greater than the 2.3rd percentile), and there is only mild or no impairment in the individual's capacity to use functional language (spoken or signed) for instrumental purposes, such as to express personal needs and desires.
All index terms:
Autism spectrum disorder without disorder of intellectual development and with mild or no impairment of functional language
Autism spectrum disorder without disorder of intellectual development and without impairment of functional language
It appears that the official term for the condition is "Autism spectrum disorder without disorder of intellectual development and with mild or no impairment of functional language" that's a mouthful but a generally good technical description whilst Asperger syndrome is included as an alternative / unofficial / popular / colloquial term.
The question now is whether the recent paper by Herwig Czech will impose pressure on the WHO to completely eliminate Asperger syndrome from the final publication of ICD-11.
If they're going to include colloquialisms, and consider Asperger's to be one, I don't see how they can avoid including it.
Emotion and pressure from Jewish and holocaust survivor communities.
Simon Baron-Cohen (who is also Jewish in origin) wants Asperger Syndrome eliminated as a medical term.
IMO the term is now too entrenched to be eliminated or deemed an unacceptable or offensive word.
I also do not see any connections between DSM-5 and the findings of Herwig Czech when it comes to a future decision whether to rename or eliminate AS or not. They are separate and independent events.
In my county the nhs do not use the term aspergers. My very recent diagnosis is simply autistic spectrum disorder and the clinicians noted state that if we are researching my condition we should be searching for info on aspergers as that would be useful for me!
Huh! So we on the autistic spectrum are having a decision made for us using emotional parameters - because obviously we cannot be trusted to decide for ourselves on such matters, having no emotion and all that.
Regardless of what's decided now, I was diagnosed with Asperger's and and that's what I'll continue to use.
Endymion said:Huh! So we on the autistic spectrum are having a decision made for us using emotional parameters - because obviously we cannot be trusted to decide for ourselves on such matters, having no emotion and all that
The holocaust community is very aggressive and has friends in the media and in high places. This way they can almost always get what they want. Defenders of Hans Asperger could end up becoming another David Irving.
Endymion said:Regardless of what's decided now, I was diagnosed with Asperger's and and that's what I'll continue to use.
Meanwhile, 'is it time to give up on a single diagnostic label for autism?':https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/is-it-time-to-give-up-on-a-single-diagnostic-label-for-autism/
Arran said:IMO the term is now too entrenched to be eliminated or deemed an unacceptable or offensive word.
I agree. I was diagnosed 3 years ago under the general criteria for an 'Adult Asperger Assessment (AAA)'. I've always thought of myself as someone with Asperger's Syndrome - or an 'Aspie' - and I'm going to continue to think that way, in spite of what historical revision reveals. It doesn't mean that I defend the affiliations or actions of Hans Asperger. It doesn't make me anti-Semitic by association - though I'm sure there are plenty who will argue that way. In the same way that plenty argue that to be anti-Zionist or anti-Israel is anti-Semitic. It's a bit like saying being anti-Catholic is anti-Irish.
Some revisionist histories of Churchill suggest that he was a white supremacist. I don't see anyone taking down his statues or discontinuing the references to 'Churchillian' determination and fortitude, though.
I totally agree. I think that the equivalence is ridiculous to say the least. I think the issue is about Asperger's connection with "euthanasia". I voiced my concerns with it all in the Asperger thread. The way Czech has tried to smear Uta Frith is ridiculous, he seems like an attention seeking hack with his tactics concerning valuable members of the Autistic research community. I worry about the effects that this will have on past and future research.
I'd say as someone who is of Jewish heritage, I don't feel it is anti-Semitic either. It could be called homophobic, anti-Roma gypsy, anti-Black or even more paradoxically anti-neurodiverse to make an equivalence. I think that the Jewish connotation is more of something that lies close to Arran's alignment. I doubt there are many that will question your use of the term. I think Flieger style watches should still be called Flieger watches. I don't see anyone queing up to stop the use of that term.
On the subject of Churchill though he was a eugenicist who advocated sterilization of the "mentally deficient" and got neurodiverse people put in labour camps by getting a bill passed in parliament.
Stepping over and around the hot piles of your other opinions, I totally agree that the term should be left alone regardless of who finds it offensive. I use it and I'm of Jewish heritage (I don't consider myself Jewish but I have maternal lineage from my grandmother, I think that that would qualify me though! Right Arran!).
I was saying in the Hans Asperger thread that Czech's attack on Frith was disgusting. The problem I have with Czech's paper is the effect it could have is on past and future research. If the term gets changed that's bad but if it does I will still use it, it's more alarming if it effects research.
I think that the issue is more about his use of so called "euthanasia" but I think that you seem to have a bit of an agenda. Autistic children were murdered, so in general people connected with Autism might find it in bad taste. Especially considering the emphasis on todays academic community to be totally politically correct. There's where my concern lies, it might effect further research built on the past that cannot be changed.
Arran said:Defenders of Hans Asperger could end up becoming another David Irving.
I highly doubt it. Why David Irving specifically? I don't think Uta Frith is a holocaust denying, Hitler defending, openly racist, Nazi propagandist with links to Facist groups. Funny that one. He seems to share some of your views on the media and the holocaust.