Autism as a Disability

Post Reply New Topic

That’s why Autism is often referred to as a hidden disability.

The disability or biological fault of autism in many cases is often revealed deeper into a person’s biology and genetic status. Many autistic people have genetic errors and auto immune dysfunction like folate antibodies that prevent vitamin b9 entering the brain in young children eventually causing autism.

These type of “differences” are not benevolent and lead to some type of impairments / disability depending on the choice of wording.

The main problem is the DSM itself is poorly set out using the 1940’s label autism that was originally seen in just a relatively small sample size at the time and trying to apply that to millions of people in the 21st century.

Hopefully that will change in the future as Autism is divided into subtypes

I have explained this elsewhere before, but this kind of thinking is cognitive dissonance and doublethink, basically.

You cannot claim to have special needs & requirements and then claim you are not disabled.

No NT believes that for a second.

So even if you believe that, NT's don't - and they'll lower their opinion of you for thinking that.

Then your state benefits get taken away because you claim that you are smarter than other people think you are.

In your Autistic mind you are asking for respect - in other people's (NT capable) minds - you just look like an entitled intellectually impaired person, begging to be punished societally.

You shouldn't want to be seen that way as an Autistic person, so you need to conform to NT standards in some way. Unless everybody becomes Autistic suddenly and within your lifetime, which they won't.

You'll then die unhappy or perhaps happy & deluded, feeding off of fellow Autistic kool-aid if you choose the easy option of non-conformity to NT standards.

I'm disabled----but I am fortunate in being able to be independent.

if I wasn't disabled, I would have been a professional person, rather than just a clerk.

But isn't that at the heart of what autistic people, and disabled people in general, are trying to change? This idea that you are either disabled and completely unable to help yourself, or you are not disabled and should be able to take care of yourself and everything else in your life without problem or help?

I am an intelligent person. I have a job, I graduated from college and grad school. But I still have difficulty with sudden changes in my routine, I have issued with loud, sudden sounds (as in actual panic attack), I still need my friends or mother to explain social behaviors to me, when I become overwhelmed I become non-verbal, I cannot use 'night mode' on electronics because the yellow tint makes it very hard for me to see the screen. I do need help with things that NT's usually don't.

You're basically re-enforcing the NT idea that if you are disabled you are incapable, but if your are capable you cannot be disabled. Or as I put it when I struggled with my college professors, I am successful in class, so I can't be autistic, because if I was autistic I wouldn't be able to succeed in class. When you put lack of success, or inability to care for one's self as the only qualifying factors for disability, then you are innately tying success in life with being abled, and being disabled with failure, which is kind of at the core of ableism.

Stevie Wonder is an amazingly successful musician. He is also blind. By saying that because he is a successful musician, he should not receive help for his blindness completely ignores the concept that people with disabilities are still fully complete human beings and not only their disability.

I am incredibly disabled, yet I have a reasonable set of social skills & I am intelligent. So I understand what you are saying.

I shall say this - we can only work with what we have. An idea can only be achieved by living people.

Even if your philosophy regarding something is superior, if nobody is willing to achieve your goals... you cannot progress anything, as everything will be undone if people don't like the way you do things.

If you are constantly making NT lives miserable - they might just end up cancelling you completely.

I like Stevie Wonder - I relate to the guy.

"Constantly making NT lives miserable" that's kind of the crux of it isn't it? I make sure to go out of my way to be accommodating to others, knowing that my tolerances are different. When I go out with friends, I try to make sure I drive myself, so that way when I need to leave I can leave, and not cause anyone else to have to leave with me, or break up the party or anything.
That said, I'd like people to understand that my tolerances are different, and while I try to be as accommodating to NTs as I can, I would also like NTs to understand that sometimes I can't be that accommodating. For example, some days I only have enough mental bandwidth to either do my job, or have small talk with coworkers, I can't do both. Most times I prioritize doing my job over socializing, because it is work, that is what you are getting paid to do. I am not being paid to socialize with co-workers, although it is nice. So the idea that on these days, when I can't handle both, and I would prefer to be left out of all non-essential conversations, I would like my co-workers to be understanding and not try to badger me into conversation, or get upset or offended because I choose to work over speak with them, even though I've had conversations with them many times before.

I've brought up this in another thread, but I don't think I've mentioned it here, there is a very good book I've read called "Nobody's Normal: How Culture Created the Stigma of Mental Illness" by Roy Richard Grinker (it's also available in audiobook format if that is more convenient for you). Because I honestly find the core of this debate is in how society decides to view people who deviate from what is considered 'normal', which in most western cultures is negatively, because disabled people are 'less economically productive' than others (as in the ability to work and contribute to the economy in the most traditional sense), which wasn't a problem until around the industrial revolution or so. There is also this vehement dislike of accommodating someone who 'doesn't need it', where the issue of invisible disabilities comes into play. If someone can't physically see that you are disabled, then you might be faking it, and therefore should be denied help of the off chance you don't really need it. And if you really need help? Well you have to jump through hoops to prove to others that you really do need help, and even then the veil of doubt remains.

We need to have an honest discussion about what it means to contribute to the economy (because GDP was invented during WWII and is therefore tied to war-time industry and business, which doesn't account for the vast majority of work performed by women). Because there are a lot of people who are productive, but because it can't be measured as GDP or anything, then society doesn't count it as being productive. And besides that, a person's value shouldn't be based only on their ability to produce something in the tangible sense.

I'm 'independent' in the sense I live on my own. I do get a fair bit of support to maintain it though.Giving my step daughter 'power of attorney' is a distinct possibility.

If I hadn't been disabled I'd have liked to have been a Labour politician.

I have the ability to live on my own, but I am not financially able to, so I still live with my parents.
My parents have named me as the executor of their will, since I'm the eldest, but I'm honestly thinking about talking to them about making my brother the executor, since I'm unsure if I'll be in any kind of mental/emotional state to take care of legal stuff like a will when they pass. I know my brother will be equally upset, but he doesn't 'shut down' like I do.

I'd probably have a librarian position if I wasn't 'disabled'. Because library interviews use 'behavioral interviews' which are uniquely designed for aspies to fail. That and when I did some digging for autism in libraries, I realized that no only are libraries just beginning to grapple with the idea that autistic children become autistic adults, who would still like to use the library, so the idea that autistic people can work in a library (in a capacity other than book shelver) is just beyond them. I have my MLIS, so I'm qualified to be a librarian, but I'm currently a library assistant, a job you only need a high school diploma to do. When I look at a forum where library directors were asked about hiring an autistic librarian, a lot gave the non-committal 'the ADA says...' answer, although they add that 'you need to be good at communication so...' The one answer that really hit me hard was (and I'm paraphrasing) 'Well, I'd hire them if they're qualified, but they'll need to let the library patron's know that they are autistic in case the say something rude'. So, in order to get a librarian job I'd have to disclose my disability to every person I help, in case I say something that I offend them... so what are the NT librarians supposed to do when they offend someone?
I shared this with a co-worker, who is also a library assistant, and she has now gone all in as an autism ally, because she is so offended that people just dismiss someone with autism because they have autism, and nothing else that is relevant to the job.

I'm also a library assistant at a college library

Suppose you asked deaf, paralysed, blind, person what is the upside to there being the way they are. How would they answer??Chances are they would dismiss the question as irrelevant just as it is irrelevant for an autistic person to be asked that question. What is the agenda behind that question? A disability is a disability. It doesn't make anyone a lesser human being. Stigmatising support through denying that someone struggles with various things, thus disabled is harmful I would argue. Such denialism is a form of narcissism at the societal level.

Perfectly stated, I think developmental delays are the worst part of autism. Autism has some developmental delays as a rule such as the deficits in social interaction and communication. However developmental delays are much than that and stuff such as delays in things like academics and cognitive skills don't meet the definition of autism. Developmental delays are also present in people without autism to and saying you want to cure autism is like saying you want to cure allism because a person without autism can be developmentally delayed to.

Britannica defines autism perfectly: Any group of neurobiological disorders that is characterized by deficits in social interaction and communication and by abnormalities in behaviours, interests, and activities.

It's a great shame that autism can't be treated with medication. I think there should be a pill to boost social performance and lessen sensory issues. Surely it isn't impossible. Some autistics are miserable and want to be normal.

You speak the truth regularly & I admire this quality, Joe90.

I'm just as honest in saying that there's no shame in having autism.

I hold my head up high because I know I'm an okay person, despite having autism.

As usually, those who appear outwardly disabled are often underestimated and those who appear outwardly abled are overestimated.

Tough one for me. There are definitely aspects that are more or less disabling: (in)ability to communicate with others, (in)ability to self regulate emotions, etc. In my case, I don't feel disabled unto myself, but relative to outside demands I am ... troubled. I have ASD burnout right now. Is that ASD or GAD? Both? The anxiety is rough; could be internalized ablism - I don't know. My mom says I was as happy as could be until I stated school. Having to navigate social standards and power structures is a drag. Sadly in my culture there is still a stigma to disability and I would like to avoid that --- but better yet, I'd want to find a place I can be myself (in all my abled- and disabled-ness).

I respect each individual's view on their level of disability (or not). It's not one size fits all. I think "comorbids" definitely come into play, and the environment can be a large factor.

Apparently it's trendy among teenagers these days to have a major mental illness/disability. I see self-diagnosed people in Reddit's schizophrenia forum acting as if it was the cool new thing, rather than an incredibly disabling illness that robs you of most of your life. In that vein, I can see the neurodifference movement being highjacked by trendiness in making autism a "flavour of le unique" rather than a specific disability which opens up possible routes for government aid and social skills training.

I'm not very disabled by society's standards (In my own opinion I'm like a car fitted with square wheels.) I could use some of my analytic skills as a crutch. I also have the benefit of not being particularly thirsty for social belonging in the first place. I think it's been almost two years since last time I talked to another person from the Western hemisphere in person.