http://dyslexiahelp.umich.edu/sites/default/files/IDA_DSM-5%20Changes.pdf

How long has the DSMV been out? Because the neuropsych wouldn't diagnose DD with a learning disability because she wasn't below average and that was 1.5 years ago. Our state allows for it though, and I guess schools can qualify a student or deny them depending on their mood and how much money they feel like spending on a student.

DSM-V codes have been out for awhile. My DS diagnosis is over a year old. My understanding is that if there is a spread in subtests or reading or writing of 2 or more standard deviations is when the SLD would apply. DS was on grade level in decoding, a bit behind in fluency, but 2 grades behind in comprehension. I am guessing it is possible for students to be behind in a certain aspect in reading or writing but appear on grade level for an averaging type reading test.

October 23, 2015 Dear Colleague letter might be helpful.

DS has a diagnosis of specific learning disorder, with impairment of written expression
-Spelling accuracy
-Grammar and punctuation accuracy
-Clarity or organization of written expression
DSM-5 diagnostic code 315.2

The neuropsych subtests used were WIAT-III Spelling, Sentence Building, Sentence combining and Essay Composition.

Does DS qualify for a laptop at district expense? I'm just dabbling into a laptop (specifically a MacBook) at district expense now.

The DSM-V is awful for LD, and just plain horrid for 2E. I keep getting told that it requires below-grade achievement - but while that is stated in the criterion, the more detailed explanation is not quite so absolute:

"One essential feature of specific learning disorder is persistent difficulties learning keystone academic skills (Criterion A), with onset during the years of formal schooling (i.e., the developmental period). A second key feature is that the individual’s performance of the affected academic skills is well below average for age (Criterion B). One robust clinical indicator of difficulties learning academic skills is low academic achievement for age or average achievement that is sustainable only be extraordinarily high levels of effort or support. A third core feature is that the learning difficulties are readily apparent in the early school years in most individuals (Criterion C). However, in others, the learning difficulties may not manifest fully until later school years, by which time learning demands have increased and exceed the individual’s limited capacities. "

I've never been able to get my hands on a full copy of the LD section (I'm thinking the DSM is proprietary), but the document below quotes large pieces of it (including above, on p9):

http://www.ldac-acta.ca/downloads/pdf/media_release/LDAC-DSM-5-Statement-March-2015-FINAL-CL.pdf

If you're enough of a masochist, the following detailed critique of the draft definition is enlightening:

http://dyslexia.yale.edu/CommentsDSM5ColkerShaywitzSimon.pdf

ETA: DSM-V was released in 2013

Just a reminder, most official agencies in the USA and Canada do not require/recognize use of DSM-V. Medicare/Medicaid and Canada Health both use variants of ICD-10, which is more acceptable to LD researchers and advocates. Public schools use the relevant portions of special education law, which is why having a DSM diagnosis is neither a slam dunk for an IEP, nor necessarily an obstacle.

I have a copy of the DSM-5, and those quotes are substantively accurate.

I personally found the differences in terminology and use of criteria between school and professional psychologists/etc one of the more difficult issues to understand and wrap my head around in order to advocate when I was starting out on the journey of a parent with a child who was clearly struggling. My knowledge at this point is terribly outdated, because my children were young when DSM-IV was still used, and before RTI was introduced into our schools.

Just my perspective, but what ultimately matters more isn't the actual terminology or even perhaps the boundaries/definition as much as providing guideposts for parents who need information and help - and monetary resources. For all that it was beyond frustrating advocating for my child at his public school, the issue wasn't so much about us or about lack of understanding or lack of wanting to recognize needs on the part of the school - I think the larger part was lack of adequate funding and lack of adequate staffing - not all due to funding, my understanding from a friend who was studying to become a speech pathologist at the time my ds was young was that our school district couldn't find enough OTs and SLPs to hire to meet need even if they had the $ to hire as many as they felt they needed.

So back to the DSM - having a DSM diagnosis really did help us in advocating, in more than one way. The first way was having a solid report that stated clearly that my ds had a diagnosed issue. The IEP process doesn't look for that diagnosis - it looks for impact on academics and access to FAPE. Somewhere in the middle ground we ran into a lot of school staff arguments that our ds wasn't struggling - basically arguments that felt planted due to a push to not qualify students due to the issues I mentioned above. Packed on top of that was the difficulty to recognize that ds was struggling when comparing a 2e student to the full population of students in his grade - yes, he was having enough issues to be recognized as struggling by his teachers but no, his test scores and school evaluation measures didn't fall far enough below the very low cut-offs to qualify directly for services. To be fair, there were also most likely quite a large chunk of non-2e kids who faced the same issues with cut-offs simply because the bar was so very very low. With the DSM diagnosis, we were able to point to a report that stated, ds struggles with (fill in the blank), and then correlate that to how the challenge impacted him at school.

The second way having the DSM diagnosis helped was giving me, as ds' parent, an understanding of what ds' challenges were, as well as opening a discussion with his evaluator re the road forward, what his needs in the short term and the future would most likely be, and where I could turn to get help (inside and outside of school). It also gave me a medical code which in some instances helped get insurance to cover other therapies.

I haven't read the entire update to the DSM-V re SLD. I thought (and I might be really wrong about this - would love some clarity!)... that when the DSM-V was being developed, referring to SLD (the specific language) was something new and intended to help line up the DSM a bit closer with school/IEP language? Wasn't part of the issue that dyslexia wasn't actually addressed in DSM-IV? Or am I remembering that really fuzzily at best?

FWIW, I am still struggling to this day trying to understand my 12 year old's reading challenge - and wish like everything we had a clear diagnosis from the DSM that fit it!

Best wishes,

polarbear

I hope my reply didn't come across as disagreeing with you spaghetti - I totally understand and agree!

polarbear

DSM-5 came out in 2013. Here is the Wikipedia webpage for DSM-5, and for Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders.

I wish it didn't matter, but for us it does, far too much. Waving the DSM, our district is increasingly moving to a model where they don't assess (not that they were doing a lot of it), they just aim to support "low achievement".

In young kids - the years you want to catch and remediate whatever possible - the range we consider "normal" is massive, and "below grade level" is quite hard to get to. Huge portions of LD kids - never mind 2E - compensate and mask well enough that they'll be thoroughly broken with anxiety long before their grades fall enough behind to be considered a problem.

Well said.