There is a basic problem in the field of autism. Nobody can agree on what Autism Spectrum Disorder’s (ASD’s) are. The traditional camp of psychology has the DSM-IV in their corner but the neurological and genetic camps have strong scientific evidence in their corner. This disagreement on the basics of ASD’s is most damaging in the area of policy reform. Without a unified push the community of ASD’s will remain ineffective in policy reform.
(Lee Baker, 2007) looked at the public’s perception of ASD’s by analysing Canadian media. The author found that autism is an “emerging issue with fiercely competing definitions” and beliefs in treatment (Lee Baker, 2007). Baker believes that without a strong agreement on the definition of ASD’s the development of policies with continue to be slow and gradual until the public feels that ASD’s are urgent. This urgency will not begin as long as stakeholders continue to argue over ASD’s definition.
The diversity of symptoms and the variability in severity through the autism population has intrigued Ralph-Axel Müller to propose a new definition of ASD’s. The strong but variable evidence throughout many disciplines has induced Müller to propose that autism is a "distributed disorder" of various etiologies. Genetic, neuroanatomical, neurofunctional and behavioural sciences are included in Müller’s definition of autism. A coming together of definitions may have the best potential for scientific understanding and for policy formation. If all those involved agreed that many of the evidence-based theories are part of a holistic definition of autism there would be a unified front. This redefinition could fuse together those involved in ASD issues to spearhead policy changes.
Between 2003 and 2006 the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology of the Canadian government conducted a study on mental health and illness. At this time the committee heard from many different stakeholders that ASD’s should no longer be considered a mental illness but a neurological disorder. Due to the convincing presentations provided by the various stakeholders the Canadian government decided not to include ASD’s in the mental health report titled “Out of the shadows at last” and that the issue of autism required further investigation. It was decided that there was not enough evidence-based knowledge to base policy reform on. The National Autism Strategy was then formulated in December 2006 to develop evidence-based standards for diagnosis and treatment, create Innovative funding methods for care, Fund research and create a National surveillance program. For those affected by ASD’s in Canada the government’s realization that the definition of autism is largely unknown is monumental. This realization has begun a new era of hope for individuals and families affected by ASD’s.
---------------------------------------------
References
Lee Baker, D. (2007). Defining autism in Canada: Unfolding the public aspects of neurological disability. The Social Science Journal , In Press, Corrected Proof. Retrieved November 26, 2007, from ScienceDirect.
Müller, R. (2007). The study of autism as a distributed disorder. Mental Retardation And Developmental Disabilities Research Reviews , 13 (1), 85-95. Retrieved December 1, 2007 from, MEDLINE.
The Standing Senate Commitee on Social Affairs, S. a. (March 2007). Pay now or pay later: Autism families in crisis. The final Report on: The enquiry on the funding for the treament of autism. Retrieved August 2007, from The Parliament of Canada: http://www.parl.gc.ca/39/1/parlbus/commbus/senate/com-e/soci-e/rep-e/repfinmar07-e.htm