|
opinions are useful for underpinning case studies and assessing quality of life. Also, I thought there was research showing correlating in utero factors?
|
#
¿
Jun 28, 2014 22:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 05:51 |
|
|
no one is saying that. In the last thread I did ask a poster to clarify their position because it read a bit like advocating genocide; as in abortions being socially or medically considered a cure for autism and genetic disorders. The poster clarified that that was not their position, that they were simply stating a position about reproductive rights and hoped for a cure.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 00:06
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:The current DSM is problematic in a lot of ways, and although the recent revision has improved and narrowed the criteria for autism spectrum disorder, it's still likely to cause massive overdiagnosis. It's a big separate can of worms, but the diagnostic procedure for psychiatric conditions is difficult at the best of times. Autism is especially problematic because a)we don't have a clear etiology for the disorder, b) our dataset likely actually contains multiple conditions with similar symptom sets, and c)the behavioral criteria for these conditions, even within a population, aren't particularly well-structured(although, again, they've improved). Two examining authorities can easily use the same criterion set to come to differing conclusions about an autism diagnosis. Your critiques are valid. However, restricting the criteria further due to the limitations you state might decrease over-diagnosis but lead to under-diagnosis, a potentially worse problem. I'm in no way saying you are in favor of doing this, I just know its a hotly debated topic between the advocates and dissenters of the DSM. This is especially true with regard to autism and ADHD. What makes it worse is, psychologists cannot just say "more evidence is needed before we can make accurate judgments" as the need for guidelines is pressing.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 29, 2014 04:14
|
|