What category would you select

Post Reply New Topic

Came across a form which asked you to check a box to say which disability you have. One option had Austism under the category of Learning Disabilities. Would you be offended by that? Or would you just tick it and keep on filling out the rest of the form? What category should Autism be under?

I wouldn't be offended because I understand that people don't know everything and at first glance autism can look like mental retardation. It's just not knowing. It's not purposeful trying to offend people.

Autism is a neurological disorder which affects how you socialize with other people.

To place it under the category of "learning disabilities" (within both US and UK/European contexts) would be quite incorrect.

This is illustrated even better when one actually meet people with "learning disabilities." They tend to be the "anti-autistic" in overall attitude to life. They tend to be gregarious and have decent "executive functioning" abilities. They tend to do rather poorly academically.

Would anything else go under the category of Neurological Disorder? I'm trying to work out how to explain this to someone.

There are neurological disorders of a "physical" nature (e.g., cerebral palsy, ataxia, traumatic brain injury)

Then there are neurological disorders of a more "emotional/social/nature" (e.g., the autistic spectrum).

Autism is a neurological disorder with a high degree of differences amongst Spectrumites as to severity and symptoms. Hence, the truism: "When you've met one autistic person, you've met one autistic person."

This fact is so salient that there are people who believe that there are "autisms," rather than one "autism."

There might be co-morbidities with autism (even "learning disabilities, at times). But autism, at the very heart of things, is a neurological disorder of an "emotional/social nature."

Could it not be accurately conceptualized as a socioemotional learning disability?

Perhaps you're right.

Hmm I don't tend to tick that I have a disability because I don't claim benefits for AS, but I put 'mild autism spectrum' and just specific things I struggle with and how I can manage and what can help. (if it's on a work medical form)

Offended?

I applied for the state department of occupational rehabilition to help get a better job. Identified myself as having aspergers (to qualify for more help), and when I got the paperwork back I was identified as "autistic and ret*d". I complained to my case workers, and she was sympathetic and apologized but said thats how they do it. You cant be ID'd as being on the autism spectrum without them tacking on 'ret*d'. So I am a Mensa member who is also 'ret*d' I guess (according to the state I live in). I will happily take 'learning disabled' over 'ret*d' any day! And...aspies are kinda socially learning disabled. So its not totally inaccurate.

I don't think learning, per se, is disordered in autism (absent other co-morbidities). I believe it's more subtle than that. I believe, at times, that what is cognitively inferred could be somewhat narrower in autism. One doesn't get a broadened vista of ideas--one, instead, obtains a rather narrow impression of said ideas.

There are times when things which are intrinsic to non-autistic people (e.g., discerning when to enter a conversation) must be learned by autistic people. These sorts of things are very difficult to learn step-by-step--primarily because they are designed to be learned in an intrinsic matter. Thus, there is the impression that there is a disorder in learning social nuances.

There are times when I believe that autism could be a disorder of visual perception (e.g., not being able to discern facial expressions). This adds to the impression that it's a neurological disorder.

Naturalplastic, that's awful.


I would not be offended at all. In fact, I kind of *do* see it as a learning disability. (Don't hate me)

Learning disability, to me, means that you intake information in an atypical way. (One could definitely argue for "difference" over "disability", but, for me, honestly, it has been disabling!)

I definitely don't consider Aspergers to be primarily a social disorder. Not at all. In fact, I tend to think of all the social stuff being "on top of" everything else--and more variable. ...and sometimes just an illusion.

I wouldn't be bothered by it sense I have learning disabilities in addition to my Aspergers. I would figure they put it under that because there wasn't a better category for it.

I was under the impression that many with learning disabilities struggle with executive functioning abilities too. I myself am likely learning disabled in math...not anything specific like dyslexia more like learning disability NOS, at least according to the neurologist who diagnoses the autism spectrum disorder/aspergers, and clearly I am not the opposite of autistic.

The form actually used the term 'ret*d'...or mentally ret*d and not say intellectual disability? that is odd since due to human immaturity the term mentally ret*d is politically incorrect I figured that stuff mattered on official forms, though in theory the term shouldn't be so controversial since the definition of the word in the context would make sense but of course usually people use the term negatively as an insult...so thus its not a correct term anymore. Though not everyone with autism has any such disability.

Believe it or not that's what it said.

'ret*d'.

They may have changed the wording in the last couple years. But even so...

Laypersons tend to lump autistic and ret*d together. And I guess the forms are written by laypersons.

Depends where you live.

I lived in a more progressive state, 15 years ago and the word ret*d was replaced by "developmentally disabled". No one used ret*d, and it was definitely seen as politically incorrect. I'd be surprised to see it on an official form there.


Where I live now...it's completely still in circulation. ...at all levels, including schools and doctors.

(I don't live somewhere that is progressive now...)