How is Asperger a Disability or a Disorder?

Post Reply New Topic

Hello all,

This is my 1st post here, so be gentle.

I'm having trouble understanding why Asperger is being called a Disability or a Disorder. Asperger seems to be a boon.

4 days ago, a friend of mine sent me an online Asperger test. I got 40 out 50. I was initially a bit surprised it was that high. But not that surprised. I remember reading a discussion on human genetics where someone referenced an article on Wired that claimed that most the engineers and their children in Silicon Valley had Asperger. (So I was already aware of the notion of aptitudes for engineering, mathematics, and science being associated with Asperger.)

After that I started reading about Aspies, and was surprised just how closely it seems to describe me.

I also took the rdos test, which gave me a nice little graph.

After taking these tests, I actually started wondering if the test was like a horoscope. I.e., when you read a horoscope, even one that's not for your sign, it is written in such a way that it always seems to apply to you... I wondered if these Aspie tests were the same as horoscopes, in that if anyone who took them came out as Aspies.

I sent the test to some friends (who are NOT engineers, mathematicians, or scientists) and they all scored very strongly as Neurotypicals. So, that suggested to me there could be something to the test.

I've been reading and reading about Asperger, since 4 days ago. Reading threads in this forum. Reading articles on the Internet. For example....

I've seen the Neanderthal theory. Based on what I got out of reading about that theory, there is not enough evidence to convince me. Which doesn't make it false. It just means there isn't enough evidence. To me it seems that it may be a romanticism. Or perhaps an attempt to create a mythology. I think it's a nice story that people would like to be true. But until there's "enough" evidence, I'll remain skeptical.

I've also seen the extreme male brain theory. It's interesting. But I need to read more about it, before I'll have an opinion.

But getting back to the online test. I was actually surprised by some of the questions. Surprised because they seemed to be asking about things that seemed so "unique" to me.

From my reading of Aspies I get the impression that the vast majority of people in the Asperger range have high IQs. I get the impression that many have unique abilities, even for intelligent people. (Like being very good at counting. Or being more rational than most.)

If my impression is correct -- if Asperger is associated with higher intelligence -- then how can it be called a Disability or a Disorder?

Am I missing something?

As per the diagnostic manual, which sums it up in one small sentence (what the sentence points to is within the book, i.e., the social deficits and repetitive behaviours):

People with AS have a normal level of intelligence (though areas of strength and weakness may be more evident than the normal population, but this isn't "better", just different in regards to intelligence), in contrast with Autistic Disorder where the majority have mental retardation. This is all. It's a little spin to make people with AS feel better, i.e., at least you don't have that, and you're just as smart as the rest of us!

I see it as more of an inconvenience than a disability.it's really nice to have a high IQ, and to be very rational and logical and not controlled by emotions, and I don't have the meltdown problem that other aspies have. but it makes it really hard for to do things like talk in a social manner, or succeed at job interviews or obtaining dates. i also have no idea how I appear to other people, and I can't tell if I sound or type sarcastically. It's weird, because it seems like something that should be obvious, but I can't see it at all.

It's the NTs refusing to view any sort of genetic change as anything but negative.
I am not disabled or disorderly; I have no malfunction. I am not a defective unit.

Not necessarily. My intelligence is most certainly not normal. (Both sides of my family are considerably above average and I'm another step above that.)
Your statement that it's not better, just different doesn't quite work out logically. Technically, there would have to be a net gain or loss. For everything to total up exactly the same would be statistically impossible.

the average IQ of NTs is 100, which seems very low. What's the average IQ of aspies?

IAs far to how it impacts me, it's not

I mean "normal" as within the normal continuum, which includes above and below average scores. People with AS can have an overall IQ of 80 just as they can 140 (the former is more common, of course).

There is a net gain and loss when there's a splintered cognitive pattern. Some people might score 80 on the verbal part of an IQ test, but 120 on the performance part; it equals out to 100 (the average IQ), but there's a gain in performance abilities and a loss at verbal abilities (there's many iterations of this), whereas the "normal" person will be 100 on both.

Back to the original question: how is aspergers a disorder or disability?

A normal person has a model at the base of their world view that includes other people. It's based on visual perception and movement, and a reflex loop that works in the 10-200 millisecond sort of response time. Trust, followship, leadership - it figures in all of them somewhere. It's so basic for normals that most of them don't know it exists, and most of them wouldn't notice they'd left an aspie out of their reckoning.

The absence of that basic building block is the disorder.

Add being permanently left out to a lifetime of not knowing why you're an outsider, and you have the disability.

Add to a child's life experience exclusion, confusion, rejection and you have something of which to be ashamed.

No matter what your strengths may be intellectually, if you can't acclimatize socially, those intellectual strengths may ultimately be for naught. A brilliant physicist can't make a decent living if his peers see him/her as someone who can't follow standard academic rules of procedure. I'm not talking about being able to deduce scientifically, but about knowing how and when to gladhand and compromise socially.

These skills, which over time may be intellectually developed, (in that we may know what should be done), don't change the fact that in many such situations involve things we simply can't find it within ourselves to do naturally and comfortably, thus can still leave an exceptionally intelligent person unemployed and homeless.

On the surface, one may appear merely oddball and eccentric, but if the lack of ability to fit into the accepted social mold make one seem obstinate or indifferent to the established 'system', then long term 'success' will be terrifically elusive. Its by all means possible to be both brilliant and unable to sustain a stable career.

Not everyone with AS falls easily into a career with NASA.

People in the neurotypical world are amazingly intolerant of those who don't fit their behavioral mold.

You'd be astonished at how easy it is to be both exceptionally bright and ultimately dependent on public assistance to survive, when your ability to hold down a long-term job is dependent on your ability to focus only on specific personal interests.

Last edited by Willard on 20 Nov 2009, 3:06 am, edited 3 times in total.

As for the original too,

Two parts; social and obsessions,

Imagine never developing innate social ability; at best, all you have is a script to read, and you don't know what the other person's script is, so you're constantly unsure of what's going to happen next

Imagine never being able to think of or partake in something you aren't obsessed over for more than 15 minutes or so without an hour long break to pursue your obsessive interest--this is at best (per Julie Fox, an underling of Professor Attwood)

This equates to disability in life.

Part of the issue seems to be that the 'difference' comes with benefits as well as downsides. I have personally learned to deal with a lot of the downsides, through help from friends with psychology degrees and textbook study on various types of social interaction, and I am able to take advantage of the benefits which in my case allow me happily deal with lots of data and understand computer programming easily. Doing one of my obsessions as a job works out well for me.

As far as I understand the average IQ of neurotypicals is 100 because that is actually part of the definition - if the general population got smarter, the average would still be 100. IQ is really a measure of how different to the average you are.

On the one hand, I don't like the word "disorder" - in the UK now, ASDs have become ASCs - autism spectrum "conditions", and I like that better.

I do think the word "disability" applies, but mostly because of the comparative disadvantage of having to get along with a majority who function differently socially and who tend to exclude those who don't fit into the mould.

But there's definitely impairment in the executive function, and this is certainly disabling. I get sick to death of not getting support on the grounds that I am "intelligent". I may have excellent cognitive function (knowledge, memory, etc.), but my executive function is seriously impaired.... my ability to ascribe appropriate significance to the different pieces of knowledge I have, my ability to bring my knowledge together to form a big picture, my ability to utilise my knowledge to make personal choices, my ability to structure my time, to break down multiple tasks into sequences... all of these things are pretty much shot to pieces

I have an IQ of 150, but I can't get it together to make a peanut butter sandwich. And I like peanut butter sandwiches....

I think this is a great attitude to have.... for me it's not that having a "disability" means that I am utterly incapable of everything (even if I can't get it together to make a sandwich! ) Just as blind or deaf people can still function to a very high degree, but with certain limitations, so a person with AS can still do an awful lot, just as long as the situation and the environment are right. The Disability Discrimination Act in the UK really helps with this, since the employer is legally obliged to make adjustments to their working practices or environment to help an individual work to the best of their ability.

For me, this might mean adjustable lighting, a quiet working environment, clearly structured time, clear instructions with tasks broken down for me, and education of other staff members to understand my condition and how it affects my social interactions.

Just do a search for webpages on it. Youll find a pretty hefty list of disabling features.

For me the few good parts about it are outweighed by the complete lack of motivation and future.

Thanks Robinhood I've actually been referred for diagnosis specifically to help me out at work. Verbal instructions are pointless without written backup because I may only get a small part of them. I still sometimes have difficulty getting my point across and I've been accused of being aggressive when I'm trying to be assertive.

I Like the ASC description a lot more as you could say that to a NT without them instantly putting you in the category of 'disordered'.

Oh and Robinhood I totally get the sandwich thing. There's a very good reason that my fridge has 6 baking potatoes in it, my cupboard has 6 cans of beans in it and I have a packet of pre-grated cheese. It means I can organise dinner for the next 6 days without giving up and leaving the kitchen hungry.

Well, the problem is that Autism is a spectrum of dysfunction.

If you have AS and are blessed with most all the pros but very few of the cons, it is a boon. These are the lucky ones.

Sadly most people with AS get a nice dose of the cons as well. Some have symptoms that make them dysfunctional enough around other people that getting a job and supporting themselves is almost impossible...even though they have the intelligence, talent and desire to be self-sufficient and successful.

AS affects our ability to perceive emotional/non-verbal cues and properly process and respond to them instinctively. For many of us, if society was more tolerant and understanding we'd do much better, but we struggle to conform to the "norms" of society, and it is the result of a neurological difference from how we are supposed to be. Hence, it's a disability.

Some could just call being autistic a "difference" but I disagree. Survival means being fully functional, and responding correctly to emotions is a key factor in survival. People with AS might be brilliant thinkers, but if they can't properly assess emotional cues and respond appropriately, they would be easy prey for the predators out in the world.