Different types of Autism

Post Reply New Topic

This is a repeat of a post I made on an earlier thread.

Some ASDs severely limit the ability of sufferers to get through the day unaided. But other ASDs operate as a lifelong slow burn, which sometimes results in a high level of 'success', but mostly leads to a lifetime of unrecognised struggle.

So far as I am aware, there is no professionally recognised distinction between such widely differing dysfunctions.

What do you think?

Funny you should create this topic. I was considering the last couple of days in creating a similar topic about AS and ASD "fringe groups."

If the spectrum exists truly, then there would be, by definition, some individuals with AS or ASD just inside the event horizon; NT in every way but ... what? How should the fringe of AS and ASD be determined? What would the criteria be at the edges of the spectrum? What would that one individual who is closest to NT, but isn't, look and act like?

Your descriptive term of "lifelong slow burn" among almost NTs is apt, in my opinion. Should those who are NT in all but one characteristic still be considered on the spectrum? I would argue that they should if they choose to claim it (and probably even if they don't; after all, a disorder is a disorder whether admitted or not). Otherwise, who would be delegated with the authority to pick among us all who is on the spectrum and who isn't? On the other hand, where is the bridge too far? AS is especially now a chic experience where some NTs wish and act as if they had it. Allowing diagnostic criteria to expand without limits would create just as much trouble as limiting too much.

The spectrum, if it is such, should include the classically autistic who require many supports as well as the "lifelong slow burners" who have learned to adapt despite the exhaustion it gives them. Anyway, that's what I have been thinking of lately.

I feel like it is such a tricky thing to find a balance. If you look at it as simply a medical condition with a medically defined diagnosis, I feel that autism/Aspergers should be diagnosed by wether it causes the person to have marked challenges in standard day to day functioning, and not just diagnosed on whether the symptoms are present or not if they don't interfere. But then you would have to define "challenges in day to day functioning," which could be really tricky. When or how do you draw the line?

But if you are looking at it as the presence of the symptoms, then I think it gets even more tricky. I really like the concept of the broad autism phenotype. I personally think that the symptoms get less and less severe and eventually fade into "normal." But at what point would a person be considered NT? I've met plenty of people who are not on the spectrum(mostly because their traits are so mild) but who are definitely not NT. Then there are people who have a couple traits that are more like tiny quirks who I would personally consider NT. I mean, clothing tags bothering you and feeling a little awkward sometimes at social functions doesn't make you autistic. But again, where do you draw the line? I can't think of any scientific or definite way to do it.

A really weird thing is that I've been thinking about this recently too!

I think we need to respect the efforts of various researchers to come up with a clear-cut explanation of this thing we call Autism. It is sometimes said that everybody is, at some time in their lives, likely to show every single symptom of every single ASD. The big debate is about defining the points at which peoples' behaviour patterns and mental processes move from normal, to odd, to disorder.

The autism word is very useful for parents and schools to try to justify and/or modify the unacceptable behaviour of children, but at the age of 18 or so, society gives up the unequal struggle and 'sufferers' are, mostly, left to their own resources

To me, the 'value' of a professional diagnosis of ASD remains somewhat dubious. The sufferers and the professionals are jointly engaged in the same search, but there is a shared perception of 'them&us' - sufferers are desperate to be formally acknowledged by the self-appointed experts, whilst the professionals are happy to peddle their constantly changing professional opinions to anyone who will listen.

I fail to see how some NTs can act as AS, chic experience or not.
In the same fashion I fail to see how AS can act as NTs... and get away with it of course....I did try but couldn't fool anybody