Labeling of Autistics ('HFA', 'LFA', and even Aspergers)

Post Reply New Topic

Also there isent actualy a difference between Aspergers and HFA, infact the definition of Aspergers is "A high functioning form of autism".

Autism is a 'spectrum' meaning that it is the same condition in everyone, it just effects them differently. I dont describe myself as 'aspergers' or 'HFA' or anything else because its all the same thing

I don't see what's so hard about treating people as individuals, with individual patterns of strengths and weaknesses. Trying to force people into boxes seems, to me, to be a major cause of all the "you can do x so therefore you should also be able to do y" and "you can't do x therefore you cannot do y" crap that people so often spout.

I think support levels could fill that need without being so stigmatizing. There's not too many expectations and stereotypes attached to the phrase "needs intensive support", and it's a phrase really only used by therapists and such when considering which accommodations are needed; whereas "low-functioning" is considered to be global and predictive of the future. You could put "intensive support" on somebody's file for a lot of reasons--maybe they have CP and need an aide; maybe they've got Down's and moderate MR; maybe they're an autistic college student with a self-injury problem that's in danger of causing retinal damage. I mean, it could be a million different things; and when they use that term, they acknowledge that it could be. It's simply a statement that "this person needs help with most things, on most days." But "low-functioning"? That doesn't give us any information; it just creates stigma where none is needed.

I voted no because (a) grading is clumsy because it is a spectrum disorder and (b) because there are many different factors that affect coping skills (IQ, environment, etc).

Sorry, I was using a device that made it really hard to type.

Anyway, the alternative I always recommend, to functioning labels, is to describe exactly what you mean.

Like do you mean autistic people who can't talk? Autistic people who can drive? (Just don't make the mistake of thinking those are mutually exclusive, or assuming any abilities besides speech and driving when you discuss that matter.)

Sometimes, people have a really hard time coming up with a better term. Not because of language difficulties but because they genuinely don't quite know what they mean. And in that situation I'd say the best thing is to leave it alone until you do know what you mean, and then say that. Otherwise it's just saying the usual words just to say them, and that doesn't really communicate anything useful.

My caregiver and I were just discussing this. She had a similar idea to mine as how to fix the clinical and services issues without giving people labels based on functionality overall.

Much like anbuend said, "autistic people who can't talk" or "autistic people who can drive" and similar statements can give a better image of a person's abilities rather than the labels of "HFA" or "LFA". My caregiver and I were discussing the creation of a system to supplement a diagnosis of autism under the DSM V that would go through many different abilities and each one would be rated separately on a scale of how well the person could do something at the time. Fluctuations according to the situation or abilities that are not constant could be noted underneath. As abilities change, this sheet would have to be updated often but it is a much better system than labeling.

Labels such as "HFA" and "LFA" and Aspergers may help some people get certain services. Those people may not need all of the services that they get and they may need ones that they are unable to get due to their label. No one tightly fits in any classification unless the classification itself is built with that person in mind. Even then, they will only fit that label at that specific time. No one can fit any label exactly all the time or even some of the time if it is a generalized label. A system labeling someone's strengths and challenges in many different areas will be able to get a person the exact services that they need and will aid professionals in better understanding that individual as just that... one unique person and not someone who a single term fully describes.

Most of what causes these subjective terminologies to exist are to differentiate between an autistic individual with and without intellectual disabilities. The termin "functioning" defined by their level of independent living skill, communication and apparent IQ. But it has been shown that standard IQ tests do not neccesarily show an autistic persons true potential intelligence and that a number of non-verbal autistic people voluntary choose to withdraw and become mute in their communication.

When such diagnosis criteria are put into practice you end up with situations such as HFA and aspergers syndrome diagnosis. Were all that seperates two people with the condition is whether there was delay in the development of language in their early infancy. There is evidence which shows it is actually more helpful to identify unusual language development such as advanced/early development of language which occurs in significant numbers of children who present with ASD's but its relation to the condition has not really been studied. The link between language delay has little evidence base and it is more useful to examine if you are trying to ascertain whether someone has global developmental delay in addition to an ASD

StuartN- No. In what I said about building a label around a person I was not suggesting that be done. The next day or even the next hour the person may not fit the label that had just been made for them. That was a poor and potentially confusing example on my part of how even if someone fits a stereotype perfectly one time slapping that label on them will do no good because it will not always hold true. The second paragraph of my post is what I am actually proposing. The third, which you quoted, is discussing flaws in the current labeling system.

Laz- I think you have something with identifying early language development as well. I have heard that is fairly common in ASDs and often what gets a label of 'gifted' slapped onto a young child which can actually make it hard to find out that they do have an ASD later on. Because of this I was diagnosed a bit late for someone born when ASDs where fairly heard of (age 7) despite autism being very obvious. Yes, that same child may be gifted but this label becomes a problem when the child runs into problems and is assumed to be 'not trying' and perhaps even disciplined for it.

Also, I agree that IQ tests are completely broken especially when testing autistic people. The issue with using IQ, independent living skill, and communication to identify a functionality level is that a person may have very different abilities in all of them. Someone could test with a very high IQ but have lots of trouble with most independent living skills. This is a case in which the assumed challenges within a label do not line up and a person could not get help with independent living as a result. Someone could also have a low IQ and not be able to communicate verbally but can type or communicate in many other was very well. The low IQ and apparent lack of communication can lead to harmful assumptions about the rest of that person's abilities. Labels not only give a skewed picture of a person but they can be very harmful.

As far as voluntarily choosing to withdraw, this may be true some of the time for some people. I know that I become nonverbal when overwhelmed not by my own choice. I also do become nonverbal in other situations so that I can slow down the processing of information and focus on navigating safely.