SteveeVader wrote:
toughdiamond the disability takes two mantra I love it someone who has a mantra simlar to mine
I should confess that it was my diagnostician (Heather Moran) who brought the idea to my attention.....she said something a lot longer to the same effect - I realised the truth of it as soon as she'd said it, because of my experiences with judgemental/uncaring and non-judgemental/caring people, and then I just tidied it up for her. It's good to know that at least one neurotypical is on our side.
Quote:
oh anoher point does anyone here in this thread think mild aspergers should be classed as a disability as in the UK this technicall classes them equal and as disabled as a deaf person or a blind person or a heavily dyslexic dysphraxic, I just personally think being blind and legally blind this is a bit horrible lol as personally seeing only blur is a lot harder but personally I just think its just a bit cheap especially to the deaf peiople as they have it really hard
or another mantra life's what you make it
I might be in a better position to judge when I've found out what adjustments my employers actually end up making for me, though according to my questionnaire scores, I have AS quite strongly, so I don't know what it would be like if it were mild. I'd have thought it would be difficult to get a diagnosis in the first place, if it were just mild. I've never heard of the social services or employers trying to differentiate between mild and severe when deciding what to give them.......I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't make a distinction, and if not, it does seem that rather an unfair advantage is enjoyed by the mild Aspie. I guess the system is always going to be unfair whenever it's too reductionist in its decision making......the one thing they never do is to spend much time on each individual case, as it's "cheaper" to use a one-size-fits-all approach.
So there will be winners and losers, and that's bad. The only way I can see it working better is if we devolved the entire State apparatus down to a very local level, so that everything was divided into small communities, and if we also changed our priorities so that efficiency of overall production and GDP were no longer the main criteria for deciding whether or not everything was working properly. Something a lot more humane in which the number of boxes that can be ticked on a codified form isn't the only thing that governs the decisions. It's not cheap...the overall standard of living in purely economic terms would have to fall, but maybe the sense of belonging to a truly caring community would make up for that.
As for life being what you make it, well I think there's a lot of truth in that, but to some extent there are limits to what the individual can achieve. Sometimes society has a powerful stifling effect on individual effort in certain directions. I doubt that any of my best achievements in life would have been possible if the people around me hadn't happened to tolerate what I was doing, or in some cases, happened to actively encourage me. If I'd never been given love, I guess I'd know of nothing but hate and indifference. In spite of having a huge independent streak, I doubt that I'd have amounted to much without any help at all. But I agree that as individuals we do need to work at realising our ambitions, and if we blame our social enviroment for everything, we won't see far enough to be able to make any changes at all. If we wait to be carried through life, we might end up doing nothing but wait.
01 Aug 2009, 12:08 am
I only get $320 a month. In the US, how much money we get is based on how much we were able to work and pay into the governement. In my case, it was only a year or so after high school that I stopped being able to work. SSI picks up the rest of it, but still.. its no where near $900 a month. In fact, thats closer to what both my husband and I get TOGETHER. (he's on SSDI as well)
