2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

As a mother of an 18 yr old misdiagnosed as ADHD for the first 10 yrs but finally diagnosed by two separate professionals in two separate states as having Asperger's Syndrome, it was a relief to have some "name diagnosis" to begin a treatment plan that might acutally be beneficial for her.

I don't believe that this change will be beneficial for the individuals or the parents/caregivers.  In my opinion it is going to create a way for physicians, professionals and clinicians to "get off the hook" of doing a complete and thorough diagnosis process.  I also believe that it won't streamline or make services more available between insurers, school districts and other resources because there seems to be a gap between definition of Autism thereby school districts don't have the same criteria as the medical industry. If this change removes that gap, then there may be some benefit but if not, then it doesn't help.

I am the current Executive Director of InventSuccess who targets youth and young adults on the higher end of the Autistic Spectrum (generally IQ 79 and above) to provide educational, vocational and individualized training programs to help them become financially independent, self-sustaining adults and contributing members of their communities. 

With or without this change, we will still have the same problem we have currently with this target population, which is a graduated or non-gratuated individual who hasn't been given the proper  education, guidance and support to be independent after high school.

There is the additional problem that with this change there will come a cost of "higher priced services" because it could be construed as a more involved or complicated process to work with these individuals.

With Asperger's or High Functioning Autism, it seems to be perceived that those with this diagnosis will require a specific set of therapies that are less involved  than someone with classical Autism. Those with classical Autism and multiple other issues will need additional therapies to help them achieve a level of independence if it's in their ability.  That is still, in my opinion, a necessary target for these individuals.

Why can't we just move on to the problems at hand...educate these young people, train them in their passion or strengths and support them to be come independent adults!

posted 3 years, 3 months ago
view in context