Do people with HFA do better as adults than those with AS?

Post Reply New Topic

It has been my observation, that in general, people with HFA often grow into relatively normal seeming adults, and seem far more likely to lead a relatively average adult life, than those with AS.

They seem far more likely to get married, have kids, and have no trouble getting or holding down some type of 9-5 job. They also seem a lot more oblivious to their condition (in general), unless they have been told by someone else they are different, and I am wondering, as I recall another member suggesting, that this might have something to do with their success.

Conversely, most of those with AS seem to be acutely aware of their condition even in the absence of any external input, and seem to express far more difficulty at obtaining a partner, getting, or holding a job.

I would think that adults with AS would do as well as those HFA since they are the same.

I guess not all people think that they're the same. It is an interesting question. Supposedly the "language acquisition" problems are what differentiate the HFA person from the AS person. I've also heard that HFA's tend to be very well-coordinated regarding motor skills, whereas AS's are generally clumsy. It'd be interesting to hear what others say, though. With these categories, pretty sure I had no language acquisition problems (I was in fact somewhat "hyperlexic"), and also have no problems with motor skill coordination.

I've heard there's some evidence that people who originally had a larger number of observable autistic traits do better in adulthood.

Of course there's always the question of what's better. Most people would say that I do worse than most people here (by far), but I am also happier than most people here seem to be, and I would think that would be more important. But most people don't seem to think it is therefore I have a "very bad outcome" end of story or something.

FWIW, I'm diagnosed with autism, no "HF" attached.

I really have no idea if I have HFA or aspergers, I have symptoms from both. I'm trying to understand what I have but it's hard because some symptoms I have and some I don't, I guess I shouldn't put a label on it.

I am DX'd Asperger's but I think it may be incorrect based on:

(2) qualitative impairments in communication as manifested by at least one of the
following:
(a) delay in, or total lack of, the development of spoken language (not accompanied
by an attempt to compensate through alternative modes of communication
such as gesture or mime)
(b) in individuals with adequate speech, marked impairment in the ability to
initiate or sustain a conversation with others


I can be quite verbose. But even at age 52 I really don't do well with initiating or sustaining conversation. Something has to get me going. And something has to keep me going. In a group I will mostly sit in silence until someone talks to me. I do OK if I have a specific thing to talk about - like going to a store and asking a clerk for help. But that isn't social communication for me. It's just a step in the sequence of me getting something I need.

I honestly don't see a difference at all between HFA and AS. I'd say AS *is* a form of HFA.

Call it.. VHFA? very high functioning? (because avg HFA diagnosis does generally include some learning/memory retention difficulties associated with autism whereas AS does not).

Anbuend has some very lucid posts on HFA/LFA and the futility of such labels. They're worth looking for.

Lots of clinicians ignore the criteria that says if you fit another ASD as well that it takes precedence. They preferentially diagnose AS even when autistic disorder would fit. This is, I think, one of the things that make the distinction irrelevant.



I believe existing research indicates no distinguishable difference in outcomes between those diagnosed as "HFA" and those diagnosed as "AS," keeping in mind that HF/LF are not actually diagnoses, but modifiers used to describe whether an autistic person can speak and appears to have a typical or high measured intelligence.

I think functioning labels have little validity, but I would hate to see further terminology developed that suggests that Asperger's Syndrome is even milder autism. I do not believe that AS is actually in any way defined by severity or lack thereof and is strictly categorized by what the diagnosticians choose to categorize it with. So you take autism and you say "Autism without speech delays, and with intelligence measured as typical or higher is actually Asperger's Syndrome." And this was necessary because autistic people were not being diagnosed at all because of the lack of speech delays and having intelligence "measured as typical or higher."

But these symptoms do not indicate severity at all. You can have multiple severe symptoms and still be AS. You can have apparently mild symptoms and yet have other difficulties (typically defined as "executive function impairment" but anbuend has posted about a movement disorder called "autistic catatonia" that can cause this) that cause significant problems but this doesn't even appear in the criteria and there is no link between what you're diagnosed as or their severity.

The scales used to demonstrate self-help skills and ability to live independently make it pretty clear that with autistic people, these skills are not related to measured intelligence. The Vineland II test, which tests adaptive living skills, tends to show a discrepancy (sometimes fairly large) between measured intelligence and adaptive skills.

Also, there is no actual clinically significant link between autistic disorder and intellectual impairment. Measured intelligence measures cognitive capabilities that are culturally valued and thus do not fully measure any given person's intelligence, just the parts deemed important. And even then, they can miss particular aptitudes. Most existing tests also fail to accurately test nonverbal individuals' cognitive abilities because they rely on receptive and expressive language.

So I guess the short version is: I don't see the point to defining AS as "very high functioning autism" because I don't believe functioning labels are accurate, and even if you use them, I don't see what makes AS "very high functioning" as compared to individuals who are considered "HFA" and yet have virtually identical life outcomes.

Err not this one. Still living at home, unemployed since forever, very very bad with change and could probably go 5 years without talking to someone and not realise it. Except I'd run out of food, be hiding under my bed every time someone knocks at the door, the phone rings, or I hear noises outside at night. There's no way I'm going to meet someone, fall in love and get married and have my own paranoid of sudden noises children.

It's hard to tell the difference because people that get diagnosed with AS or HFA could be diagnosed either way.
I can tell when someone autistic does get better skills though. There's still some physical peculiarities I can pick up on.
When I hear parents talk about their autistic and AS kids I can just tell. A lot of socially inappropriate behaviour seems to be done by the classic autie than the AS kid.

Wouldn't people with more observable autistic traits be more likely to get coaching or help of some kind?

THis is all the same for me.

I have just started saying that my son has mild autism because I just don't know how to categorize him. He is clumsy and has poor motor skills which seems like AS, he had words on time, but was not using them in a conversational way until he was given a couple of years of speech therapy. He does have special interests, but he does not talk about them like a little professor. He is not real rigid, although he has started some little routines, but they change pretty regularly. He doesn't have extreme sensory issues. He has absolutely NO interest in interacting with his peers. He is learning pretty well, can memorize just about anything. But when he was given an IQ test at age 4, he came in at borderline mentally ret*d (which I totally do not agree with) So does he sound AS or HFA? He is 5.5 yrs old. The other day he told me "Mom, I don't like kids"

That seems to be be true for a lot of aspies. My guess that the shrinks consider the ability to have a conversation about anything, no matter how limited the subject matter, as a sign that there is no "marked impairment".

I think that my mother is even more Aspie than me, at least in some ways, but she is a lot better adjusted. She is so wrapped up in her thoughts, that she often seems barely aware of the world. In some ways that seems to have protected her from things.

He would probably be HFA. I don't know how someone as young as 5 can take an IQ test. Maybe I was just a really ignorant kid but I've done a lot of IQ tests and I wouldn't even pass the spelling test on them. I was still trying to remember by ABC's and count up to 100 when I was 5. I couldn't read simple books. And because IQ marks your performance too and I didn't talk at all to people not in my family (and I barely talked to them) I would have such a low score.