Any High Functioning Autistic people here?

Page 6 of 7 [ 93 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7  Next

hellhole
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Posts: 169
Location: UK

20 Aug 2016, 9:22 am

I'm higher functioning, but not necessarily high functioning -- or in other words my intellect is average (105 estimated), but I'm still mildly autistic. Remember that IQ defects are not always synonymous with autism, you can have high IQ and be severely autistic at the same time.

It means I can live self-sufficiently for the most part, but I still need occasional outside support from family and whatnot.


_________________
"Autistic traits" (pdd-nos).
Normal intelligence, social and language development.

Other diagnoses: Body Dysmorphic Disorder (http://bit.ly/2wlDqGU)

Our internal representation of reality: (http://bit.ly/2BJuj5o)


naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,740
Location: temperate zone

20 Aug 2016, 10:19 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
He probably wants to create a euphemism which takes away the impact the term "high-functioning autism" has upon someone hearing the phrase.

The DSM V might have addressed this somewhat---creating Level One, Level Two, Level Three.


I dont follow your logic.

What is wrong with the "impact" of hearing the term "high functioning autism"? As opposed to hearing any other possible label for the condition ?

A "euphemism" is a soft term for a hard nasty thing.For example: "Life insurance" is really "death insurance". So the term "life insurance"is a "euphemism" for what it really is.

"Autism" sounds bad, but "high functioning" sounds good. So it cancels out if they are both in same phrase.

If you change HFA to "autism level one" you are retaining the bad sounding "autism" part of the label, but youre replacing the good sounding "high functioning" part with the meaningless (to most people) moniker of "level one". So you retain the bad part but remove the counterbalancing good part. So you make it sound worse rather than sound better. So if anything "autism level one" is the OPPOSITE of a euphemism. Lol!

BUT...if you are the rare person who knows what "level one" means, and knows that it means "needs less support than do most other autistics" then...you are aware that "autism level one" just means the same god damned thing as "high funtioning autism". So hearing it would not make one jot of difference to you from hearing the old term.

So "autism level one" either sounds worse, or sounds the same, as hearing the old term of "high functioning autism".

So how is the new term "autism level one" more "sensitive", or more "euphemistic" than the old term?

(I tend to agree that the new level one, two, and three,terms combined with salient modifers like 'lacked speech delay', are more precise and scientific than the old terms of HFA,LFA, and aspergers. But I dont see the difference in emotional impact they would have).



xile123
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 495
Location: australia

20 Aug 2016, 7:41 pm

Functioning labels are silly because you can rate neurotypicals on their functioning levels as well.

In the DSM-V there are no functioning labels, just levels of support your assessors think you might need.



lostonearth35
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Jan 2010
Age: 45
Gender: Female
Posts: 9,342
Location: In a cuckoo clock

20 Aug 2016, 7:46 pm

The phrase "high-functioning" is offensive. :x



The_Dark_Citadel
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

Joined: 20 Jul 2016
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 339

21 Aug 2016, 12:39 am

anbuend wrote:
I'm diagnosed with autism. No "high functioning" added, thank goodness (I loathe functioning labels, and think they promote inaccurate at best and dangerous at worst stereotyping).

I don't like the way some people here use the term aspie as if it includes all of us and don't consider myself aspie. I think autistic is a more inclusive term for the whole spectrum. I also don't think the difference between those labeled HFA and those labeled LFA is intelligence, I know people labeled LFA who could run rings around some people here intellectually.

I agree. When there's a post that applies to aspies then I feel like I can't go check it out because I am moderately (somewhere between LFA and HFA) autistic, not Asperger's.


_________________
If I were a knight, my name would be Sir Stimsalot.


kraftiekortie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 4 Feb 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 64,021
Location: Queens, NYC

21 Aug 2016, 9:59 am

"Autism," in and of itself, doesn't carry negative connotations. It's just a condition, like Down Syndrome is just a condition.

Nobody is "blamed" for having autism.

Unlike something like psychopathy or narcissism, where some blame, and much stigma, is attached to a person who seems to have these "conditions."



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,740
Location: temperate zone

21 Aug 2016, 11:36 am

kraftiekortie wrote:
"Autism," in and of itself, doesn't carry negative connotations. It's just a condition, like Down Syndrome is just a condition.

Nobody is "blamed" for having autism.

Unlike something like psychopathy or narcissism, where some blame, and much stigma, is attached to a person who seems to have these "conditions."


Dude, we are not talking about what should be, were talking about what is stigmatized in our imperfect world.

If right now I accused you "having Down's Syndrome" you would go screaming to the moderators, and I would end up being either suspended, or being banned from WP because "Down Syndrome" equals "retarded" which is about the worst thing you can say on WP. And so would I, or most anyone else, if you did that. Claiming that "Down's Syndrome" doesnt "carry a connotation" is absurd.

By mentioning Downs Syndrome youre just slitting the throat of your own argument.



xile123
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 28 Oct 2015
Gender: Male
Posts: 495
Location: australia

21 Aug 2016, 6:19 pm

naturalplastic wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
"Autism," in and of itself, doesn't carry negative connotations. It's just a condition, like Down Syndrome is just a condition.

Nobody is "blamed" for having autism.

Unlike something like psychopathy or narcissism, where some blame, and much stigma, is attached to a person who seems to have these "conditions."


Dude, we are not talking about what should be, were talking about what is stigmatized in our imperfect world.

If right now I accused you "having Down's Syndrome" you would go screaming to the moderators, and I would end up being either suspended, or being banned from WP because "Down Syndrome" equals "retarded" which is about the worst thing you can say on WP. And so would I, or most anyone else, if you did that. Claiming that "Down's Syndrome" doesnt "carry a connotation" is absurd.

By mentioning Downs Syndrome youre just slitting the throat of your own argument.



lol nice analogy at the end there.



wittgenstein
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 13 May 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,397
Location: Trapped inside a hominid skull

21 Aug 2016, 6:32 pm

Ummmm, yeah! At Harvard that usually lose at sports, they chant, " that's all right, that's OK, you are going to work for us one day". http://www.disabled-world.com/artman/pu ... 2086.shtml


_________________
YES! This is me!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-gtdlR4rUcY
I went up over 50 feet!
I love debate!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BtckVng_1a0
My debate style is calm and deadly!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-230v_ecAcM


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,474

22 Aug 2016, 1:40 am

naturalplastic wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
It's been 5 years since I posted on this thread!

I still feel the label "high functioning" is a little cringeworthy reflecting some type of hierarchical judgment from an NT perspective

Why not call it functional autism simply saying the person is able to function in mainstram society?


So youre saying "instead of calling it 'high functioning autism' lets just call it 'high functioning autism'".

Lol!

Well Gee whiz. Why didnt everyone think of THAT!?


In an ideal world we wouldn't have labels...but we don't live an ideal world do we...



cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 52
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,474

22 Aug 2016, 1:46 am

naturalplastic wrote:
kraftiekortie wrote:
"Autism," in and of itself, doesn't carry negative connotations. It's just a condition, like Down Syndrome is just a condition.

Nobody is "blamed" for having autism.

Unlike something like psychopathy or narcissism, where some blame, and much stigma, is attached to a person who seems to have these "conditions."


Dude, we are not talking about what should be, were talking about what is stigmatized in our imperfect world.

If right now I accused you "having Down's Syndrome" you would go screaming to the moderators, and I would end up being either suspended, or being banned from WP because "Down Syndrome" equals "retarded" which is about the worst thing you can say on WP. And so would I, or most anyone else, if you did that. Claiming that "Down's Syndrome" doesnt "carry a connotation" is absurd.

By mentioning Downs Syndrome youre just slitting the throat of your own argument.


I have known children who are intellectually challenged and with Downs and they are all beautiful. Both kraftiekortie and I wouldn't react the way you are projecting because most of us don't share your derogatory view of Downs Syndrome...Perhaps broaden your view by making an effort to get to get to know people with Down's as they are not people you "imagine" they are



hellhole
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 19 Aug 2016
Age: 22
Gender: Male
Posts: 169
Location: UK

22 Aug 2016, 5:20 am

*TW*
The thing is, who would willingly want to attach the "low-functioning autism" label to themselves anyway? It's demeaning and difficult to accept -- that's why they put in on a spectrum. Then again, if someone asked if they I "was autistic or not" not only would I be offended, but I would still be reluctant to tell them I was on the spectrum regardless given that there is still so much stigma surrounding it... not that it's any of their business anyway :oops: .

It seems that for the most part the only way certain people with ASD's can accept their diagnosis is by applying the "high-functioning" label to themselves, so they don't have to feel that they've been screwed over intellectually by this. Although maybe this is besides the point, because what denotes "high-functioning" anyway? Mentally I'm average, but in day to day life my overall functioning is pretty low, probably because I scored the highest on asociality (even though I still need contact with friends every now and then) and restricted interests, so it's really difficult to break out of old habits, if you get me.

In fact, I've spent most of my free time outside of education playing video games and typing behind this computer :( Sometimes I think I'll be stuck here to the damn day I die, and I've been like this since childhood. Friends, and certain family members, sometimes invite me out to go places, but to be quite honest, I just don't feel like it -- and that's not a good thing; mentally I want to change but neurologically I cannot.

meh


_________________
"Autistic traits" (pdd-nos).
Normal intelligence, social and language development.

Other diagnoses: Body Dysmorphic Disorder (http://bit.ly/2wlDqGU)

Our internal representation of reality: (http://bit.ly/2BJuj5o)


Jo_B1_Kenobi
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 8 Jan 2016
Age: 50
Gender: Female
Posts: 412
Location: UK

22 Aug 2016, 9:29 am

I see the functioning labels as just a means of grouping people with autism into levels of support so that people working with those folks can have an easy and rough guide on how much support might be needed ahead of time - much the same as the levels 1, 2 and 3 in DSM V. So if I had a child who was diagnosed as Autistic Level 3 coming into my class, I would look to start my preparations for their learning plan in a different place to if I were preparing for a child at level 1. Of course that doesn't mean that everything in that individual will be on the same level, it just means that, on average the child has a certain level of difficulty with things. All it really provides is a starting point for ensuring that appropriate support is given.

I don't really understand why the description 'high functioning autism' is a problem. I find it helpful. I guess we're all different.


_________________
"That's no moon - it's a spacestation."

Diagnosed with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ICD10)


mpe
Deinonychus
Deinonychus

User avatar

Joined: 26 Oct 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 379
Location: Exeter

22 Aug 2016, 12:25 pm

xile123 wrote:
Functioning labels are silly because you can rate neurotypicals on their functioning levels as well.

In the DSM-V there are no functioning labels, just levels of support your assessors think you might need.

Wouldn't support levels also run into similar issues?
Rather than specific types of support.



naturalplastic
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2010
Age: 64
Gender: Male
Posts: 21,740
Location: temperate zone

23 Aug 2016, 8:12 pm

cyberdad wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
cyberdad wrote:
It's been 5 years since I posted on this thread!

I still feel the label "high functioning" is a little cringeworthy reflecting some type of hierarchical judgment from an NT perspective

Why not call it functional autism simply saying the person is able to function in mainstram society?


So youre saying "instead of calling it 'high functioning autism' lets just call it 'high functioning autism'".

Lol!

Well Gee whiz. Why didnt everyone think of THAT!?


In an ideal world we wouldn't have labels...but we don't live an ideal world do we...


Every word that exists in every human language is a "label". Without labels human life couldnt exist. So why do you equate "the absence of labels" with "an ideal world"?

Certain words/labels are problems in certain contexts at certain times. That doesnt make all labels evil.

I am aware that your just parroting the party line of every autism community: that autistics are victims of labels, so therefore all labels are bad. But just because its the party line does change the fact that it's nonsense.