After the birth of a child, parents work nonstop to ensure their newborn is healthy and provided with every resource they need to enhance their growth and development properly.  The smallest atypical behaviors can drive them straight to their pediatrician, especially today as the rate of diagnosis in attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD) has increased to one out of every six children.  In addition to the precautions of a child being disabled, it is just as devastating for a child to be mislabeled.  Now, more common than ever, children are being over diagnosed for ADHD and ASD.  One of the drivers for over diagnosis is screening children at too young of an age.  They may test positive at a young age, but no longer meet the requirements once they are older.  Autism is a "long-term" disability, therefore, this shows an error in testing because once diagnosed, they should not lose the symptoms.  Also, these screenings are so sensitive that they pick up the tiniest abnormalities, which is the starting point for doctors when diagnosing.  Not only do these screenings end up affecting the children's lifestyles, but the misdiagnosis also effects the patients' economic standpoint.  Their caretakers spend an enormous amount of money on therapists and medications for a disability the child may not even have.  Waiting to diagnose ASD until later in childhood will help prevent children from being mislabeled, enhance the legitimacy of testing positive, limit health sources from being accused of false accusations, and prevent the hearty from being disabled.   

As a whole, society has far advanced its medical assistance and information in order to cope with their disease.  Unfortunately, the autism spectrum is far too wide for doctors to assign a child with the disorder without a precise accusation.  The range in severity influences children's misdiagnosis, as parents are uneducated on how serious their child is affected.  Child consultant and adolescent psychiatrist, David Simpson has the experience of working with children and seeing their developments throughout maturity. Simpson argues that "a broad definition risks confusion and over diagnosis, an increasing problem when worried parent demand diagnostic certainty" (Simpson).  By narrowing down the multiple levels of autism, Simpson noted, doctors make more accurate decisions when diagnosing a child, keeping their seriousness of the illness clear.  Simpson advises parents with their child's case and monitors their child as they develop.  Throughout multiple sessions with each child, Simpson carefully notes each atypical behavior which improves his skills on mastering the seriousness of each case.  This is one of the many factors that contributes to narrowing down each case to a specific severity, as psychiatrists are not responsible for assigning the child with a disease, only studying their severity of it.  

The increase of money into these programs is the result of more children entering the program through the broad definitions of autism.  Parents are pressured by pediatricians to have their child labeled as autistic so they can receive more funds for other conditions, such as speech therapy.  Professor Stephen Camarata of Vanderbilt University, has studied and tested children with autism for over twenty years and focuses heavily on the many cases of misdiagnosis.  He acknowledges parents' goals to intervene with their child's development early, however, allows them to see the danger in labeling their child too early.  Directing his concern towards families with children who genuinely need assistance, he claims, "the less precise 'autism spectrum' "label" has had the unintended consequence of diluting resources, research and services to those children and families who most need the support" (Sowell).  Camarata does not overshadow children who have a mild case of autism, but more importantly, he is aware of the children who earnestly need the amenities.  By narrowing down the case for each individual child, this would decrease the likelihood of rights being unequally used.  

Parents want nothing less than what is best for their children, especially when it comes to their health.  Parents are afraid their child will not follow the development checklist, therefore, they monitor their child's moves and report to their pediatrician at the sight of any atypical behavior.  Pediatricians ask parents a set of questions called the Modified Checklist of Autism in Toddlers (M-CAT), in order to see if their child is in need of further assistance.  If needed, parents then seek a specialists who can observe and test their child for autism.  However, parents are the ones who decide whether or not their child is showing unusual signs and are responsible for how soon their child is helped; the worst scenario is diagnosing their healthy child when they are just slower at developing.  A study was conducted examining two year olds who were later tested again to compare results.  "Diagnostic stability for an autism diagnostic was 68%," showing children under the age of 30 months were not fully developed in order to accurately diagnose (Turner).  Although these children did not test positive, they still showed a delay in speaking.  This driver causes doctors to misdiagnose children.  Children may have a delay in speech, one symptom of ASD, however, that does not directly influence whether or not they have influence autism.  This study was conducted to determine the correlation between the consequences of intervening with children too young and more accurate diagnosing once they have matured; children may lack developmental characteristics, but develop them at a slower rate.  

Autism can be difficult to accurately diagnose, unlike other diseases, because there is no medical test to perform.  Throughout different examinations, doctors interview, observe, and screen children in order to note repetitive unusual behavior.  Two of the most accurate forms of testing are the ADOS, a test which examines social behavior and play of the child's current behavior, and the ADI-R, an interview for the parents which answers questions about the child's current and past symptoms in relation to autism.  A report was conducted on 129 children who were observed and examined, in hopes of increasing the accuracy of diagnosing autism.  Through different techniques, they raised the effectiveness of diagnosing, from 71% to 90% (Tomanik).  These results are classified as statistically excellent and make the study very reliable.  According to the authors who conducted the study, the drivers for improving the accuracy of diagnosing was through more specific tests, which asked informative questions about different characteristics in addition to the ADI-R and ADOS tests. "Although the ADI-R and ADOS are among the most reliable diagnostic instruments for autism available, classi cation disagreements highlight the need for thorough diagnostic evaluations" (Tomanik).  Doctors should shift their focus to adaptive thinking and how well a child can comprehend information.  In addition to the ADI-R and ADOS tests, children evaluated from multiple aspects, help specify the problem behind their disability.  Without getting a full range of information about the child, the ADOS only measures current symptoms and the ADI-R focuses on past and current behaviors.  The reporters of this study determined that in order for the most accurate diagnosing for children, doctors should "incorporate both of these measures, as well as additional information about an individual's functioning in other domains" (Tomanik).  By examining the child more in depth and through a variety of categories, the chance of accurately diagnosing autism would increase.  Children are constantly changing and maturing, therefore, multiple examinations must be conducted in order for children to receive precise diagnosing.  

It is just as devastating for a child to be diagnosed with a disease as it is for them to be misdiagnosed.  Experts are too quick to label a child with autism if they are slow to speak, show no interest in interacting with other children, or perform any uncommon childish behavior.  Thomas Sowell, a senior fellow of Hoover Institution, says children being screened under the age of 30 months leads to "unnecessary alarm" for the parents.  Sowell recalls a little boy, Billy, who was diagnosed with autism as a child and, with the passage of time, he was no longer autistic.  Billy's mother questions the purpose of an autism "spectrum" as the danger from mislabeling a healthy child.  Frustrated her son grew up mislabeled and underestimated by his peers, she asks, "would you say that someone who is near-sighted is on the 'blindness spectrum'?"  Both blindness and autism are a serious disability, and should never been taken lightly.  Increasing the accuracy of diagnosing autism would be more beneficial not only for the families mislabeled, but also the doctors who have falsely assigned them.  Sowell satirically gives doctors "wiggle room" for misaccusing these children (Sowell).  "Instead of trying to reduce mistaken diagnoses that inflict needless trauma on parents and often direct children into programs for autistic children that are counterproductive for children who are not autistic," puts autism on a spectrum which allows doctors to make mistakes and not have to admit they were wrong; the spectrum embraces a wide variety of behaviors (Sowell).  By narrowing down the disease, doctors make more confident diagnosis and children are at a lower risk of being wrongly assigned autism.  

Disastrous for families and children, autistic children are given minimum hope for a future.  Dr. Goldenberg, president of the Neruo-Immune Deficiency Medical Advisory Board, created a video in relation to his study on autism.  His intentions throughout the video were to provide families and individuals with reliable information to recognize the connections between neuro-immune conditions such as autism.  In his video, he uses six different families and their real life experiences with the misdiagnosis of autism.  Both the parents and children explained how it gave them no hope for their future and was a disease which underestimated their power as individuals.  At first, these families were convinced by experts that their children would have no connection with the world and minimum, if any, feelings towards anyone.  However, once these children were reevaluated and assigned their level of severity, they gradually matured and were creatively successful in their own unique ways.  

A "society now saturated with sickness" is a caution for many experts as they are forced to make more accurate diagnosis to prevent from harming the healthy.  Not only do these families suffer from the burden of wasting time and money when their child has been misdiagnosed, but more importantly, the child will suffer long term effects from the inaccurate label.  They are at risk for a loss of employment opportunities from having a disability on their record which could interfere with their chance of getting a specific job.  Des Spence, a general practitioner, warns society of the danger from damaging the future of children with a disability on their record, "to be well is empowering, but to be inappropriately labelled with an 'illness' is a straitjacket that many will never throw off, with consequent long term drug treatment and a restriction in lifestyle and employment opportunities" (Spence).  It is crucial for parents and doctors to both decide together the level of severity they label a young child with.  Comparatively, the National Child Traumatic Stress Network, NCTSN, provides statistical research and information to express the perspective from a child's point of view.  "What Might Have Happened" is an article from the NCTSN website which is told through the voices of multiple children who have been hurt emotionally and socially, most importantly whom of which had no control over the situation.  This article highlights how traumatizing it can be for a child to be misdiagnosed.  They are incapable of defending themselves, therefore, when they show atypical behaviors most of the time they are automatically categorized with a disease.  Children are all unique and mature at different rates, therefore, it is crucial to observe a child's behavior before jumping to conclusions with a cure.

While there may not be a medical prescription to cure autism, but between the government and school systems, children are equipped with sufficient resources to enhance their development.  A majority of children sincerely need assistance, but unfortunately there are some cases where families abuse the rights and take advantage of the money and amenities provided.   Children diagnosed with autism will receive more medical funding, especially in Australia where the government will help fund a family if the child is diagnosed before the age of six.  This increases the likelihood that the government can rob children with a severe case of ASD and give it those who know the rules and meet the requirements for scholarship.  Australia has conflicts with false diagnosis because of the pressure to have their child diagnosed before the deadline in order to qualify for their services.  While this does not apply to every autistic case, it is unfair for severely autistic children.  Jean Starling, an Australian author, conducted research on the driving forces for over diagnosing autism.  She received no funding and no commercialization while performing this research, merely alerting the public about the dangers of misdiagnosing autism.  Both optimistic and concerned for the families who desperately need help, she refers to the system as a "two-edged sword."  Families with lower psychosocial statuses are at a "disadvantage being unable to navigate the system rapidly and therefore missing out on effective interventions" (Starling).  Children with genuine autism are at risks for not receiving full access to government funding due to a cut off, enforced by the government.  On the other hand, "those who know the rules pushing for a diagnosis to be made," manipulate the system and receive diagnosis when they do not need it to the extent they are receiving (Starling).  On the positive side, the government's intentions, "for diagnosis is to expedite access to treatments and services that allow ASD people to reach their full potential, not shut the door on their future" (Starling).  As long as health professionals are performing reliable and effective tests for autism, the government's grants will be strictly beneficial.  

On the other hand, parents want nothing more than to raise healthy children.  Their intentions of early interventions are strictly to provide their child with resources and therapists early, in order to prevent their child from getting farther behind on development.  It is the responsibility of the care givers to decide whether or not their child qualifies for autistic evaluations.  Doctors and experts investigate the case and promote different medical services for the children, however, when the child shows any atypical behavior the care takers have the most reliable judgment on how serious their child needs help.  Author Enrico Gnaulati studies the 78% diagnosis rate for ASD and notes the dramatic rise.  Gnaulati says, "the earlier an evaluation is conducted, the greater the risk of a false diagnosis" (Gnaulati).  An innocent idea by parents to act early is only a temporary benefit for their child.  More common than ever, children have a delay in speech, play individually, and develop at a different rates which is crucial to consider when parents fret about their child getting behind.  Saving time, money, and a disastrous misdiagnosis for their children, parents should allow their child to grow before drawing conclusions they may be developmentally challenged.   

A dramatic rise in the diagnosis of autism, a disease with no medical prescription and long term effects on individuals, is a concerning factor for both doctors and families.  A rush to ensure children are equipped with full medical assistance and services influences the increasing rate of over diagnosis of autism.  Instead of diagnosing a young child with autism, doctors and parents should help these children practice and adapt to their environmental lifestyles to enhance their maturity and growth.  Allowing children to experiment the world and its surroundings before concluding they are incapable of reaching certain developmental milestones, will increase the validity of autism.  The younger a child is, the more malleable their brain is; this allows for growth and intelligence to adapt to their surroundings and enrich their development.  Also, because the autism spectrum is so broad, by narrowing down on an autism definition, doctors and experts will increase the reliability of a diagnosis.  Choosing to diagnose children after thirty months will prevent the healthy from being claimed sick, improve the reliability of diagnosing a child with autism, and most importantly spare the children from long term effects of a false diagnosis.   

