Social and Tertiary Health Identities as Argument in the DSM-V Asperger's/Autism Debate

Abstract

This study rhetorically analyzes print news coverage surrounding the DSM-V debate about the integration of Asperger's into the autism spectrum. News coverage frames the Asperger's debate about the definition of Asperger's as a social identity or a tertiary identity. The social identity argument is predicated on how individuals with Asperger's define themselves as a disability community through the use of monikers, beliefs, and customs. The social identity argument focuses on how this creation of an “Aspie” community allows people with Asperger's to challenge conventional definitions of “normal” and advocate for acceptance. The major arguments used for the tertiary identity utilize scientific knowledge and experts, focusing on defining self as pathology and relying on biological factors in order to craft a tertiary identity. The tertiary identity argument seeks to emphasize the lack of medical difference between the two groups, arguing that incorporating Asperger's into the autism continuum helps the general public understand and think about neurodiverse disorders. The findings from this study problematize the idea of “expertness” and the use of social and tertiary health identities in diagnosis and treatment.

Keywords:

• Asperger's
• Health Communication
• Health Identity
• Health Policy
• Public Argument

Acknowledgments

A version of this article was presented at the 2011 National Communication Association annual conference in New Orleans, LA.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Heather J. Carmack

Heather J. Carmack is an Assistant Professor in the School of Communication Studies, James Madison University.