Is Asperger's syndrome / autism a disability?

Page 7 of 7 [ 109 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7

Willard
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Mar 2008
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,647

25 Jun 2009, 4:13 pm

gbollard wrote:
Michael,

Aspergers is a disability only if you let it become one.

In the early years of your life, it's crippling because people with aspergers are so different from neurotypicals and it makes friendships and relationships very very difficult.

As you get older, you learn to adjust, to build on your strengths and to compensate for your weaknesses.

Eventually, with the right attitude, you can rise above it.

It takes time and effort, but it's certainly possible.



This is a crock of horse manure. But its the sort of horse manure I might have spouted myself when I was younger and still held out hope of finding some employable niche for building a stable future. Get back to me when you're fifty, obsolete in your old profession and unemployable in any new one because your very age raises employers' insurance rates.

AS makes life very difficult socially and emotionally as a youth, during middle age it's easier to build coping mechanisms and almost forget that you have it. But once you pass middle age, unless you come from a wealthy family or own your own business, you're going to find yourself in trouble. Being unique, different, avante garde when you're twenty or thirty-something is chic. Once you pass forty you're just an oddball. Beyond that you're strange and eccentric and a little scary.

In the US, to answer the question simply, Asperger's Disorder, like any form of autism, is considered a qualifying disability under the Americans With Disabilities Act. You can apply for disability benefits; whether you get them will depend on how serious mental health professionals determine the effects of AS to be on your quality of life and your ability to survive on your own.



Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

25 Jun 2009, 5:06 pm

Oh, come on; it's not that bleak. By the time my generation is fifty, we will hopefully have managed our own disability rights movement, and gotten at the very least semi-equal treatment analagous to what black people have in the United States now.

You have to remember that it's not really, in most cases, the disabled individual that is unable to work; it's that there are these obstacles--in many cases, really minor obstacles--that come up because the workplace is designed for the mainstream, typical individual. Those obstacles can be removed; and a whole lot of new people could enter the work force. The "burden" of disability is almost entirely artificially created when the disabled are shut out of being able to do what they are capable of doing to support themselves. If those who could work were allowed to work, then there would be plenty left over to support those who couldn't. The number of disabled individuals is rather large, and this sort of prejudice is robbing the world of a valuable economic resource. Once they understand that it is profitable to hire us, believe me--once money starts talking--they will make those little adjustments.

Young? Idealistic? Well, can you blame me, when we've got our first "minority" sitting in the White House? It wasn't so long ago that they wouldn't even have let him vote. Things change. They will not always be so bad. And if you are fifty now, I think you will live to see it.


_________________
Reports from a Resident Alien:
http://chaoticidealism.livejournal.com

Autism Memorial:
http://autism-memorial.livejournal.com


JanetFAP
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

User avatar

Joined: 25 May 2009
Age: 70
Gender: Female
Posts: 206
Location: Phoenix, arising from the ashes

25 Jun 2009, 10:50 pm

Callista wrote:
Oh, come on; it's not that bleak. By the time my generation is fifty, we will hopefully have managed our own disability rights movement, and gotten at the very least semi-equal treatment analagous to what black people have in the United States now.


You go girl!! ! This is a civil rights issue!! !

In my generation, parents of newborns with identifiable syndromes or other non-mainstream appearances (e.g. CP) were counseled to deposit them in an institution before they got attached to them. Kids with profound autism followed at 2 – 5 years of age. Those who couldn’t afford an institution hid their children. Only very dedicated parents kept their children (my mother also breastfed us much to the nurses’ horror) and raised them as part of the family. (oh yes, the good ole days!!)

My sister (an aspie - all four of us are) was one of the first special educators in the country (1970). Her first task was to go door to door following up on rumors to gather up kids for her classroom (a cardboard room), but they were not in the regular schools. We grew up not even knowing such people existed. In 1981, the first institution (New Hampshire) closed soon followed by the second (Vermont). They made a documentary of it and I knew a man who had spent his entire childhood in the Vermont institution. It was not that long ago.

Vermont has been integrating all learners in classrooms since the 80s, but I am in Arizona now where its still pretty scary (remember how separate, but equal played out in racial segregation?). It is great that special educators, enrichment (gifted) specialists, SLPs, etc all support the classroom teacher in differentiated teaching for all student’s benefit, but one of the most important aspects of integrating all learners is that the mainstreamers grow up knowing all sorts of people. Classrooms are melting pots of diversity.

Please know, dear youngsters, that we did not have the benefits you are enjoying. No one had a clue what was even wrong with me let alone what to do with me. It was hard for us then and it still is. But each generation gets closer to full integration and acceptance.

You will succeed!!


_________________
I yam what I yam and that's all what I yam! (Popeye)


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

26 Jun 2009, 7:42 am

Willard wrote:
This is a crock of horse manure. But its the sort of horse manure I might have spouted myself when I was younger and still held out hope of finding some employable niche for building a stable future. Get back to me when you're fifty, obsolete in your old profession and unemployable in any new one because your very age raises employers' insurance rates.


Ohhhh. So dark and cynical.

Can I be your best friend? :lol: :wink:

I agree.

As far as I've seen, the ADA helps nobody compared to before it was enacted. Disability groups have cried out that it has only increased workplace discrimination for most handicapped people more than it has ended it. Even then, it most benefits the "obviously handicapped" (blind, deaf, wheelchair bound, etc.). Those with more subtle disabilities can find themselves harder pressed for employment, and it should be no surprise when people with health issues are more often finding themselves laid off for the unspoken reason that the group health insurance carrier would either raise the employer's cost for benefits or cancel the plan because of too many "sick" people working for him.

I agree. NT or AS, the fact is that at 30, employers start looking at you differently. At 30, you learn enough to know that your career isn't your life, so some don't want people who still don't blindly live for career first. Other employers expect accomplishments on the resume by 30, and if you don't have them, they question your ability to do the job.

At 40, it gets significantly worse. I cynically say that your working life is effectively over at 40 if you don't have a nice list of impressive accomplishments on your resume.

By 50, you're on the edge of "retirement age" and nobody wants you compared to the fresh 25 year old out of college.

That's the cold reality most people face in the workforce. It's even worse in a bad job market.