DSM-V - Diagnosed But Would Now Not Be

I'm assuming with the DSM-V criteria, there are people out there who have been diagnosed but would now not be?

The reason I say this is that one of the criteria is that it must limit you on a daily basis; that means that all those on Youtube and on the forums who say they had no idea they were autistic would surely now not be diagnosed?

Where I'm going with this is I suspect I'm autistic but that the extent won't be enough for a diagnosis. So, is it therefore possible nowadays to be autistic but receive a formal diagnosis that you're not?

I'd have thought that you either are, or are not autistic, but of course it's a spectrum and it seems, (possibly because of increased awareness and pressure on the NHS) that the medical experts you see will know you are autistic but send you home with a diagnosis that you're not if it's mild.

Seems a shame but that's how it's shaping up to me.

Parents
  • Hi, i don’t know if this adds to the discussion. I’m just starting the journey to diagnosis. I didn’t understand what autism was before a health practitioner raised it with me. I don’t know if I am autistic yet but I have faced a lot of daily struggles that I didn’t have an explanation for, at the time I didn’t know they were symptoms of autism. Perhaps that’s just my nativity though.

  • Alot of people are being diagnosed later, due in part to more understanding of autism. Where previously people would have been diagnosed with other mental health problems. 

    As for looking into autism for you, have you taken any of the online tests such as the eq or aq? This might give you an indication of whether you are on the spectrum. 

  • You mention MH this was raised in treatment for cPTSD, therapist suggested the trauma could have been caused by autism. I took the Aq test 45/50, was shocked by that. I haven’t tried the Eq yet.

Reply Children