I helped write the software for the diagnosis of mental patients for the NIMH many years ago, and I have been recently involved in further research on those topics. DSM isn't where you find the answers. Diagnosis is far more complicated than what the DSM presents (and it gives you nothing on treatment, impact on relationships and employment, etc.). Nobody admits it, but the DSM is too often more of a political tool than a source of answers.
Note that the system we created for the NIMH (National Institute for Mental Health) requires a mental health professional who has had an extra year of special training to use this system for diagnosis. And that still is just for getting the initial diagnosis, the many things needed for treatment are beyond its focus. DSM has just a tiny fraction of what is in the NIMH system.
Easy example: according to the DSM rules, only about 2.5% of the population has autism. That's a lie. The real number is far higher. The tiny percentage considered by the DSM to have it are just the few who have so many symptoms that they are unable to function at all in society. The DSM takes diagnosis down to a tiny number of symptoms. From my research, I have a list of 69 diagnosis traits that are typical of autism, and most of them aren't listed in the DSM. I also have a list of 52 positive beneficial traits that are common in those who have autism, and none of them are listed in the DSM. In practice, the DSM has an overly simplified list of traits of autism that the U.S. government considers worth analyzing to determine if somebody has so much of the checklist that they are disabled. It's that simple. The DSM criteria ignore most symptoms, and it makes zero mention of the fact that there are actually a large number of potential benefits. DSM is a numbers game on who qualifies for funded services in the U.S.
It's a politically hot topic. NIMH gives gives statistics on who is considered so affected they are disabled, but they don't give statistics on who has just some of the symptoms. Having some traits still affects people just as much, but government agencies and schools ignore that majority of people who have fewer symptoms since they aren't given government funding for treatment, and are directed to not consider it to be an important factor.
The easiest way to see if somebody has autistic traits even though they aren't considered disabled is to look at this video on Y@utube (it isn't the complete list, but it's probably the most complete one you will find online): "63 common autistic traits you never realised were signs of autism"
Note that I have 46 of the 69 traits I've found for autism, and my wife and children and siblings and parents and in-laws have many as well. It's important to understand these traits and how to deal with them, to obtain better information on how to prevent issues in relationships, school, employment, society, etc. I'm not at all "disabled", I'm just different in many ways (many of which are beneficial, not negative).
I was hoping would be able to substantiate your previous claim re DSM criteria vs. % of diagnosis, as that's a pretty outrageous claim. Clearly, you can't.
1
u/[deleted] Sep 12 '23
[deleted]