Functioning Labels

Post Reply New Topic

I think there are better ways to set things down than the "High Functioning" and "Low Functioning" labels.

The first limitation I see with them is they are crude. If my understanding is correct, when they were used as diagnosic terms, if you could score 70 or above on an IQ test you were diagnosed with "High Functioning Autism" if you scored less than 70 you went down as low functioning. I think it possible that ones score on an IQ test is not a useful guide to what supports one might require to have the best out of life.

The second limitation I see is that the terms quickly became used in general speach without any meaning understood to go with the term. Did it mean able to function well in the world, did it mean ability to hide ones autistic features,do any of the public at large understand that it was narrowly defined by that over or under 70 on the IQ test.

The third limitation I see is its lack of precision and lack of consistency. I will attempt an example. Person J is autistic. They often looses their ability to speak. They require someone with them overnight in order to be safe and at ease in their home. They often become spacey if outside in busy environments and become at risk of road accidents. They were found not to be able to cope with going to a place of work. Would person J be called low functioning. Person K is autistic, but they are able to hold down a job with a large organisation. They have written software used to access the organsiation output on line. As a second project they develop software which tracks possible financial fraud which they sell to banks. Would person K be described as High functioning. It turns out person J and Person K are The Same Person.

A fourth limitation I see with the terms is that they are applied to the person and can be perceived as a value judgement on them, rather than a starting point to sort out a better fit between the world and their needs. "X is High functioning, so they don't need support, Y is low functioning so they can't have autonomy." as opposed to JK has substantial needs in the area of sensory stresses. By a reasonable adjustments, such as working from home, JK produces a fantastic set of products for the organsiation.

But perhaps the best word on the subject is from Jamie Knight, co-presenter of the BBC Sounds series "1800 seconds on autism" which he has put on the record in a Blog post :
https://spacedoutandsmiling.com/blog/20 ... -labels-me

That's called Moderate Functioning, which is most common among people on the spectrum. But there are some of us who literally are high-functioning or low-functioning in almost if not all areas.

Again, I am not sure "Moderate" is a particularly helpful description. As I read the persons blog it is clear that the support they need is very substantial, and also the wins they achieve with with strong points of their profile both in their professional life and in making their personal life adventurous and happy are also substantial. To my reading, moderate implies something in the middle while as I read the persons blog it is very much the case that their profile, their needs for support and abilities cluster unevenly and at both ends of any imagined continuum. It is also a term I would hesitate to use at all, as it could be heard in a a way it could be taken that I meant "Mediocre, average, not up to much, not a total disaster, and those do not seem kind or accurate words, or ones I would want someone think think I would use to describe them.

I do see one helpful way forward though, which is the invitation to each person to say how they would want to be described, or which forms or words give the most accurate account of how to set up interactions, or work situations or living situations to give the greatest Win all round.