my opinoin on the aspergers vs hi functioning autism topic

Page 2 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

slikk03
Tufted Titmouse
Tufted Titmouse

User avatar

Joined: 1 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 43

03 Apr 2010, 12:30 pm

well lets look at it from this way!! nero typicals are diverse some learn faster some learn slower not 2 are identacal ! same goes for ASD the delayed speech is just a variation just as green eyes are to brown so yes i would say they are the same but differant due to the fact everyone is differant not 2 things are the same in reality .they might be so close one might asume they are duplicates but they are not its imposible almost. but i think all theese self diagnosed aspeis that think they have it should be put in a new catagory called aspergers personality dissorter if they exibit the traits of autism yet they fail to meet the extensive testing and childhood history info needed to make a true autistic aka aspergers diagnosis, in my case this seems to be the problem! i have many sighns of autism yet most did not apear until later in life therefore its unlikly im autistic but i have alot of theese traits, yet they come and go so maby a new lable along the lines of pdd nos and aspergers should be made for the new dsm something inbetween the 2. however i must stress that the docters do not test as extensive as they should for aspergers and this has lead to alot of problems within this community and within myself, for i never get the same dx after i see a diff doc , now i cant get ssi due to all theese misdiagnosis, i cant spell at all and my anxiety is so bad i cant work plus i cant focus on a job since im thinking and i see images of intrest wen i think to the point hours go past me like im watching a movie unfold, it is hard for people to grasp my way of wording since its very disjointed and all over the place to them. so i think the dsm should call for stricter guid lines to dx aspergers syndrome, and yes i think if your not diagnosed throughly and at least by three docters you should not assume 100 percent you have this, im diagnosed but i feel that just due to the fact im odd and have some traits of aspergers an adult still does not mean i have it. thats why in the new dsm stricter guid lines for diagnostic critera should be met, and those who fail those lines should have a autistic like personality persay and be under a new lable to better define the essence of aspergers and autism in my perception this would solve alot of confusion and end the self diagnosing of AS wich in my opinoin is very bothersome, i mean if your not diagnosed dont say you have it say you think you have it!! like isay i am diagnosed but i dont think i have it so im the odd ball of this forum as i am in other forums



SuperTrouper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 1 Jun 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,117

03 Apr 2010, 8:03 pm

anbuend, is the basis of your thoughts on the functioning labels the fact that almost no one is "high functioning" in all areas or "low functioning" in all areas, that we all have areas of strength and weakness? That's how I think of it and why I don't like it, anyway. But at the same time, if you want to use one word to paint a picture, I think it's the best way to do it. I have issues that most folks with Asperger's don't have, but I am able to be slightly to moderately independent most days.



Callista
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2006
Age: 42
Gender: Female
Posts: 10,775
Location: Ohio, USA

03 Apr 2010, 8:59 pm

Why functioning labels are bad:

1. They have no set meaning. There's no central definition for "high-functioning", "Low-functioning", or anything in between. The one concrete scale for functioning levels is GAF, which is a scale that measures how well you are coping right at that moment, and can fluctuate wildly over a person's lifetime. GAF does not reflect the way the High/Low Functioning labels are used.

2. They encourage the application of global stereotypes. "Low/High-Functioning" brings with it a whole group of concepts that are probably not correct about the person it's applied to.

3. They're used as though they don't change over a person's lifetime; but, by any concrete standard you care to choose, they do change. That means that when you label a child low-functioning and don't educate him, or label him high-functioning and assume he is capable of things he can't actually do, you're hindering him for a lifetime. An adult assumed to be high-functioning may end up homeless because he can't do something that's required to find and keep housing; an adult assumed to be low-functioning may stay unemployed because nobody will acknowledge that he's got skills that'll let him hold and keep a job.

4. It leaves out information. People have different skill levels simultaneously. Your average autistic will have some skills that are very bad, others that are very good. If you assume "high-functioning" based on the good skills, you assume that all the other skills are also at that level--which, for autistics, is highly unlikely to be true. On the other hand, if you assume "low-functioning", you will overlook a person's strengths. Either way is quite detrimental.

If you're going to use a functioning label, you've got to define it first. Or, you know, better yet, don't use a functioning label. Just use the definition. (I should listen to my own advice on that one; in my post on the last page, I should probably have said something like "severely disabled" or "non-language-using" rather than "low-functioning", since "low-functioning" is too vague to really be useful.)


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

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