Why do autistic people hate functioning labels?

Post Reply New Topic

Is there a reason?

Yes.

An autistic person who usually appears stereotypically high functioning can look more or less functional depending upon context - someone who's overwhelmed and overloaded might look stereotypically low functioning and may not even be able to speak, whereas someone who appears to be stereotypically low functioning might have all kinds of skills that no one expects them to have because people think "low functioning" means having no skills whatsoever.

A compassionate and factual understanding of autism wouldn't rely on functioning labels to define people, but would address them as people with different sets of skills and abilities.

From a clinical perspective, being "low functioning" means having an IQ below 70. And "high functioning" means anyone with an IQ over 70, that's a wide range of people with varying levels of intelligence. And having higher intelligence doesn't always mean having higher functioning. It's kind of a misnomer, because it doesn't really say much about how well the person actually functions in life.

Because autistics often function very well in one area and not very in other areas even seemingly related ones.
Because the term high fuctioning to most non autistics implies the "good"or "easier" kind of autism causing many to negate, deny and belittle the significant struggles people labeled high functioning often have thus making these struggles greater.

Autistics are a diverse group so making a blanket statement that "autistics" do not like the label is incorrect.

I appear low functioning, but my IQ is above 70, so technically that makes me high functioning. But I need to be looked after on about the same level as 5 year old in many respects. But I sound like a college grad in how I write.

So personally I don't hate labels, but sometimes they can be confusing and misleading.

Last edited by EzraS on 27 Oct 2015, 2:07 am, edited 1 time in total.

ASPerger can can be sever Roughest than other Autism

"High" and "low" functioning contrasts the "severity" of autistic traits compared to neurotypical traits. As in, it suggests "high functioning" autistics are closer in nature to being neurotypical than "low functioning" ones.

Personally, I propose that this type of thinking is... how shall I put this... incredibly sh*tty.

See table 2:

https://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autis ... c-criteria

I think the problem people have is if they have uneven abilities in what they can and can't do, but are expected to be able (or not able) to do thing X because they're level Y.

Or people thinking high functioning means autism without the disability parts so high functioning autists are just shy and quirky and can do anything anyone else can. And yes, I've seen people say that.

I don't hate them. I consider myself high-functioning. I have a job, I'm in a relationship, I can go out and about by myself, I can make decisions wisely, I can do stuff around the home, and I can dress myself and keep myself clean and all that. So I never even look low-functioning, even when in distress. I just seem eccentric, anxious, hyper and highly sensitive.

Have you ever seen those YouTube videos of this adult with severe Autism? I think his name is James, and he needs 24-hour care. He wears diapers, is non-verbal, even needs his teeth brushed for him. I don't think you can get much low-functioning than that.

But I suppose most people on the spectrum are in between. But people like me definitely fall right at one end of the spectrum, and people like James fall right at the other end of the spectrum.

So you are saying only autistic's who also have an intellectual disability are LFA?

That would make functioning levels pretty obnoxious since in that case it would indicate they aren't actually based on functioning level rather whether or not you have a comorbid intellectual disability.

because they are misleading and I think the term mild is very misleading for anyone, doesn't matter that disability they have.

I am mild but someone else could have thought of me as a child "League girl doesn't need an aide, she is mild" "League girl doesn't need her work modified, she is mild" "League Girl should be able to understand right from wrong and not get confused by other kids because they are acting inappropriate, she is mild so she shouldn't have that problem" "League Girl is mild so she shouldn't be letting kids take advantage of her so she should be able to know what they are doing and not give into the pressure" League Girl is mild so she shouldn't be acting out in class and she should be able to keep her anxiety from coming."

I take "mild" as a grain of salt and "high functioning."

I'm partially hurt by them and partially confused by them. The "hurt" part is on me, the confusion perhaps not so much.

My son, for example, would be considered "low-functioning" due to his IQ (that's the "hurt" part) although he is far better at self-care and is very aware of and interested in interacting with others, often more so than the higher-"functioning" (as labeled) children in his class, and he also has fewer stims and less sensitivities, often, than the former-Aspie DX/current HFA children (that's the confusing part).

I SHOULD feel "good about" being high-functioning myself but the thought makes me feel guilty (the hurt part), and at the same time, with as much as I'm able to accomplish, including a home, work and family, all come with a significant price and nearly 100% denial of how I actually feel anxiety-wise as well as of who I actually am inside which have at times been crippling and caused me to temporarily NOT be able to function despite my supposedly being high-functioning (confusing part).

Well "Functioning levels" don't really capture the unevenness of abilities and within certain contexts is VERY variable (sometimes by the hour!) and they don't always accurately reflect what the totality of ones true ability and intelligence are(not to mention that IQ tests are not set up with our neurology in mind and they really only measure our linguistic ability and not our practical know how and [i]fluid[i] intelligence.

YES! Yes! Yes!

I don't have much problem with functioning labels, their usage seems ok to me.

As one might imagine, I hear a lot of people describing themselves and others as being on the spectrum. There seems to be a backlash against the functioning terms, yet autistic people often still use them. I hear a lot of "I don't believe in labels but..." or "what would have been called..." Because it's hard to describe oneself or others without using terms like LFA, HFA, and AS. Less often, I hear people disliking the term "spectrum" because it means continuum, which means sequence or order. This is on the basis that a spectrum is linear, which brings us back to functioning levels. But I don't think an order or sequence is necessarily linear. I'm sure someone else here would know.

Anyway, my personal conclusion is that the terms have become like racial terms. As a white person, there are certain words that I shouldn't use, but I also can't expect people OF that race not to use them. If you are autistic, you have a freedom of word usage now that I don't think should exist for neurotypical people. I think LFA, HFA and AS are gray area terms and it's more correct to say "autistic" and "on the autism spectrum." Perhaps also "diagnosed with autism."