4 ms·

> Asperger's wasn't "abandoned," it was folded into the broader spectrum of autism ... This is a common misconception. Asperger's wasn't folded into the parent

by lutusp 12y ago

> Asperger's wasn't "abandoned," it was folded into the broader spectrum of autism ... This is a common misconception. Asperger's wasn't folded into the parent category, instead those who were diagnosed with Asperger's, and the symptom constellation it represented, were folded into the parent category. Asperger's was abandoned. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/health/03asperger.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/health/03asperger.html?pag... Quote: "Some experts worry that the loss of the label [emphasis added] will inhibit mildly affected people from being assessed for autism. “The general public has either a neutral or fairly positive view of the term Asperger’s syndrome,” said Tony Attwood, a psychologist based in Australia who wrote “The Complete Guide to Asperger’s Syndrome” (Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2006). But if people are told they should be evaluated for autism, he went on, “they will say: ‘No, no, no. I can talk. I have a friend. What a ridiculous suggestion!’ So we will miss the opportunity to assess people.”" It's clear from the above that we're talking about a label, not a diagnosis. The label has been abandoned, and those seeking a diagnosis du jour with have to settle for Autism, universally regarded as undesirable. The thinking was that, if people with an Asperger's diagnosis knew they would be recategorized as autistic, this would reduce the diagnosis rate to something more consistent with reality, and the immediate motivation for the change was to halt an epidemic of nonsense diagnoses. > The same is true for thousands of others, and we're kind of tired of you psychology deniers telling us that we don't exist. You mean, along with all responsible psychiatrists and psychologists, all of whom now realize their mistake in allowing this diagnosis to come into existence? Your protest is on a par with someone who feels that his religious beliefs have been disparaged or discriminated against. I say this because Asperger Syndrome does not exist. The mental health profession now agrees and, by removing Asperger's from the DSM, has taken steps to signal clinicians to avoid use of the label. As to "psychology deniers", you may not be aware that the present chairman of the NIMH has recently ruled that the DSM may no longer be used as the basis for scientific research proposals, for the simple reason that it has no scientific content: http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h http://www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-rats-of-n-i-m-h http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2013/transforming-diagnosis.shtml http://www.nimh.nih.gov/about/director/2013/transforming-dia... The first step was the elimination of Asperger's from the DSM. The second step is the elimination of the DSM from serious conversation among scientists. So, tell me, which part of this recitation of real events is causing you the most personal anguish? In closing, I want to say something that you ought to find reassuring -- you're not a diagnosis, you're a human being. The Asperger's story proves that diagnoses don't have rights and can be abandoned without warning. But human beings have inalienable rights, and cannot be abandoned. Start thinking of yourself as a human being -- see how it works out for you.

judk 12y ago
The way that you interpret all of your sources exactly backwards is showing Scientologistically scary attitude to the topic.
- lutusp 12y ago
  > The way that you interpret all of your sources exactly backwards ... Prove it. Pretend to be a scientist. I said Asperger's has been abandoned, that's an objective, easily verified fact. I said the DSM will no longer be accepted as the basis for scientific research proposals, that's an objective, easily verified fact. Even you can masquerade as a scientist. I'm sure of it. I know this because psychologists do it every day. It's not as though my views on psychology are in any way original -- Richard Feynman had the same view of this field, and expressed it to anyone who would listen: http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm "I think the educational and psychological studies I mentioned are examples of what I would like to call cargo cult science. In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they've arranged to imitate things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas — he's the controller — and they wait for the airplanes to land. They're doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn't work. No airplanes land. So I call these things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they're missing something essential, because the planes don't land."
  - PhasmaFelis 12y ago
    That's a very glib and stirring bit, and for all I know it may have been considerably more accurate in Feynman's heyday, when people still took Freud's weird hangups seriously. And of course psychology still has a long way to go, as any psychologist in the world will tell you. The only problem is, with modern psychology--not invariably, but more often than not--the planes do land.
deleted 12y ago

by lutusp 12y ago

judk 12y ago

The way that you interpret all of your sources exactly backwards is showing Scientologistically scary attitude to the topic.

lutusp 12y ago
> The way that you interpret all of your sources exactly backwards ... Prove it. Pretend to be a scientist. I said Asperger's has been abandoned, that's an objective, easily verified fact. I said the DSM will no longer be accepted as the basis for scientific research proposals, that's an objective, easily verified fact. Even you can masquerade as a scientist. I'm sure of it. I know this because psychologists do it every day. It's not as though my views on psychology are in any way original -- Richard Feynman had the same view of this field, and expressed it to anyone who would listen: http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm http://www.lhup.edu/~DSIMANEK/cargocul.htm "I think the educational and psychological studies I mentioned are examples of what I would like to call cargo cult science. In the South Seas there is a cargo cult of people. During the war they saw airplanes land with lots of good materials, and they want the same thing to happen now. So they've arranged to imitate things like runways, to put fires along the sides of the runways, to make a wooden hut for a man to sit in, with two wooden pieces on his head like headphones and bars of bamboo sticking out like antennas — he's the controller — and they wait for the airplanes to land. They're doing everything right. The form is perfect. It looks exactly the way it looked before. But it doesn't work. No airplanes land. So I call these things cargo cult science, because they follow all the apparent precepts and forms of scientific investigation, but they're missing something essential, because the planes don't land."
- PhasmaFelis 12y ago
  That's a very glib and stirring bit, and for all I know it may have been considerably more accurate in Feynman's heyday, when people still took Freud's weird hangups seriously. And of course psychology still has a long way to go, as any psychologist in the world will tell you. The only problem is, with modern psychology--not invariably, but more often than not--the planes do land.

deleted 12y ago