Autism and Asperger's are invisible Illnesses? (Um, no!)

Page 2 of 2 [ 19 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2


User avatar

Joined: 17 Jul 2004
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 102,154
Location: In a quiet and peaceful garden where Mick Avory-like Sweet Peas grow

30 Mar 2011, 6:37 pm

They're not illnesses. They're pervasive developmental disorders.


Kanye West 2024



User avatar

Joined: 26 Jul 2010
Age: 32
Gender: Female
Posts: 2,817
Location: My World, Highview, Louisville, Kentucky, USA, Earth, The Milky Way, Local Group, Local Supercluster

02 Apr 2011, 11:03 am

Oodain wrote:
Bethie wrote:
Autism is not an illness at all, but a disability (though not always).

It IS invisible- one cannot look at an Autistic person and tell they are Autistic.

through extended observation i think it is quite possible to identify an aspie by looks and mannerisms alone.
can you tell it in someone just walking pas you however, i doubt it.

Mannerisms, yes.

It is not a deformed leg or missing eye, however.

For there is another kind of violence, slower but just as deadly, destructive as the shot or the bomb in the night. This is the violence of institutions; indifference and inaction and slow decay.


User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Age: 51
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,762

05 Apr 2011, 8:13 am

One more post to clarify my thinking (from the person who started the thread).

See, I don't take the terms "invisible" and "illness" as being black and white as far as how well they fit autism and asperger's.

Illness is never the right word, true, but, how far off it is varies. It's never the right word, but it's more off base for some than for others.

And, it's never completely invisible (after all, the diagnosis is based on social interactions), but sometimes it's close enough that using the term is understandable. But for others with autism, invisible just doesn't come any where close to working.

Autism is a spectrum.

And where "invisible" is closest to being true is the same part of the spectrum where "illness" is most ridiculous.

And where "illness" is merely not the best word rather than ridiculous, there, "invisible" is just not true of autism for those people.

Like I said, to get my thinking, you have to be able to understand each of these terms as fitting some people on the spectrum better than others. If you can't do that, you won't understand why I find "invisible illness" and even wronger than just plain "illness", which is already incorrect.

not aspie, not NT, somewhere in between
Aspie Quiz: 110 Aspie, 103 Neurotypical.
Used to be more autistic than I am now.