Jump to content

Talk:Asperger syndrome

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Rilmallion (talk | contribs) at 18:25, 22 January 2024 (Factual inaccuracy in article?: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Former featured articleAsperger syndrome is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on April 17, 2004.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
April 10, 2004Featured article candidatePromoted
September 5, 2005Featured article reviewKept
August 1, 2006Featured article reviewKept
September 24, 2007Featured article reviewKept
April 25, 2020Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Past tense

I think this edit is correct, because, as it says on the page, with valid sources: "however, with the publication of DSM-5 in 2013 the syndrome was removed, and the symptoms are now included within autism spectrum disorder along with classic autism and pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified (PDD-NOS). It was similarly merged into autism spectrum disorder in the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-11) as of 2021." Laurier (xe or they) (talk) 11:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think the question is whether AS no longer being considered a diagnosis in and of itself means that it effectively no longer exists. I'm not a mental health professional, so I'm leery of making assumptions regarding this. This is an inexact analogy, but what comes to mind is that on Wikipedia we refer to TV shows in the present tense even after they've been canceled, because they do still exist (for instance, on DVD), even if they're no longer being produced. DonIago (talk) 13:40, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
First of all, AS is still a diagnosis in countries that follow ICD and are yet to transition to ICD-11, which will take a couple of years since it came into effect in 2022. Further, AS does not cease to exist just because it is no longer given as a diagnosis. People diagnosed with AS keep that diagnosis and the concept of AS does exist independently of ICD-10 and DSM-IV.
It is true that "AS was a diagnosis in the DSM-IV and ICD-10" but it has existed as a concept before that (arguably, according to Wing, since the 1940s) and will continue to exist as an idea.--TempusTacet (talk) 15:30, 22 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure people would react the same if we were talking about a physical disease. If I had a diagnosis of a chronic physical illness in one country, and later found out they used old medical information, and according to the latest scientific theories, it was something else altogether, with a different cause and different treatment etc., I'd want to know that, and would't want to 'keep' the old diagnosis. I think Wikipedia would reflect this new information and change the page to the past tense, AND mention it was still a current diagnosis in countries that use the older system. Laurier (xe or they) (talk) 12:44, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It seems to me that if AS is still considered a diagnosis in some countries but not others then the most appropriate way to represent that is to retain the present tense while giving due weight to the point that in other countries it is no longer considered a diagnosis. As AS isn't no longer considered a diagnosis universally, to me it would be inappropriate to put it in the past tense as though it's ceased to exist.
To continue with my earlier analogy, just because a TV show may no longer be availble in any form in certain markets wouldn't mean that we would say it no longer existed; we'd just say it wasn't available in those markets. DonIago (talk) 14:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Laurier: It's not about what people call their diagnosis but about how the healthcare system treats it. Many/most people once diagnosed with AS will call themselves autistic and might reject the term AS but they'll still have an AS diagnosis in their records that will usually not be updated/renewed, although the DSM-V explicitly specifies that an established DSM-IV AS diagnosis can be updated to an ASD diagnosis without additional diagnostics. Note that the US is also still working with ICD-10, the 2023 ICD-10-CM still contains AS (code F84.5).
Echoing what @DonIago said, the article should (and does) reflect the fact that the diagnosis will disappear and that the term has been discredited, not just for medical/scientific reasons, with a majority of people diagnosed with AS, clinicians, and researchers embracing the ASD/autism label.
Note that there are still voices calling for a re-introduction of a diagnostic category similar to AS for a purportedly "mild" part of the autism spectrum, although no convincing definition and criteria have emerged.--TempusTacet (talk) 10:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
What about my analogy with a physical disease? If I was treated for X, but in countries that use the latest scientific medical evidence that it's actually Y, I'd wanted to be treated for Y. I'd want to know the country in which I received diagnosis X used a system that is formally outdated. I'd want that to be very clear on Wikipedia as well. So in the first few lines, I should read that X WAS (...), and in some/many countries, this diagnosis is still current. Laurier (xe or they) (talk) 13:50, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have an example of an article that supports this? Even the ones you linked to in your first post in this thread use present tense. DonIago (talk) 23:33, 14 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
No, I don't. It is my personal POV, and as such not enough as a convincing argument; if many editors would support my ideas we could change the page accordingly, but it is now clear that not many editors agree, so I'll just let it be. :-) Laurier (xe or they) (talk) 14:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Factual inaccuracy in article?

"...formerly described a neurodevelopmental condition"? It still does describe a neurodevelopmental condition, in that people that were diagnosed with it before the criteria merged it with autism spectrum disorder are not, at least in the UK, having their original diagnosis changed.aspaa (talk) 04:11, 04 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it is only the usage of DSM-V that has changed it, ICD-10 still has it (F84.5), so its not "removed" except for in one manual Rilmallion (talk) 18:25, 22 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 11 December 2023

Asperger’s syndrome being called a disability is offensive and incorrect. I would like to reclass it as a diversity. Aspergers123 (talk) 17:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Where is it called a disability? I briefly checked the page and I don't see that. DonIago (talk) 17:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: likely WP:CENSOR violation Shadow311 (talk) 18:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Introduce myself and request for editing this article

Hello, I am a master student enrolled at Uskudar University in Istanbul, Turkey. As part of my course, "Brain, Neuroscience, and Biotechnology Edit-a-thon," I've been assigned with editing an article on "Asperger syndrome". I successfully completed the Wikipedia training modules to improve my editing skills. Your support in this work would be greatly appreciated. Thank you in advance. Best regards, Fadel111 (talk) 09:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC).[reply]