What's the difference between Aspergers and Austism

Post Reply New Topic

And to be a further pain in the ass
In the manuals it is not “Asperger’s”

In the ICD 10 it is “Asperger’s Syndrome”

In the DSM IV it is “Asperger’s Disorder”

When Lorna Wing proposed the separate Asperger’s diagnosis back in ‘81 she did not think they were two separate conditions. She proposed it based on her theory that parents would be less reluctant to get their children assessed for autism if it was not called autism. The autism professionals generally understood that Asperger’s was a form of Autism. Asperger’s was dropped because it was perceived that the Asperger’s diagnosis was being used to over diagnose autism.

While I do not perceive much support for bringing back the Asperger’s diagnosis, that there are multiple Autisms is widely believed among professionals. As imperfect as the Autism diagnoses are I do not favor breaking it up until the science advances far enough to get reasonably accurate categories or different diagnosis'.

I'm aware of that, I was just pointing out that it's not a DSM-5 specific thing that the term has been removed.
Also, Sweden uses ICD and I still got a diagnosis of Autism 1 instead of Aspergers one year ago (or rather both), so it can go both ways.

/Mats

LINK on difference between Autism and Asperger: https://healthresearchfunding.org/diffe ... aspergers/

They are not separate conditions. What was formally diagnosed as Asperger's is now included in ASD - Autism Spectrum Disorder.

Asperger's is at the high-functioning end of the Spectrum.

Asperger's is no longer a diagnosis in DSM (2013) and ICD-11 (2019) used by WHO, the worldwide standard.

Psychologists, Psychiatrists, Advocates do not use the term Asperger's.

Not to be antagonistic, but for what it's worth: when receiving my ASD diagnosis last week, of course my psychologist (whose 35-year career specializes specifically in autism in adults as well as children) explained the DSM-V version of ASD with "...what they used to call Asperger's, but not anymore. I don't think I truly agree with that change."

I've thought a lot about this before, but your comment really got me thinking. On one hand, I'm perfectly happy with being autistic and just leaving it at that. But on the other hand, I feel like Asperger's was an effective and more relatable term (for me, at least). But why?

I guess the conclusion I came to was based on society's general definition of what autism is (which we all know is widely misguided and ill-perpetuated, prompting our favorite phrase, "But you don't look autistic."). So, I guess being able to identify as having Asperger's might somehow make it easier for people around me to ingest? But that comes from my pre-diagnosis habit of trying to make sure others are comfortable with me instead of learning to be comfortable myself.

Plus, sometimes I feel like saying "I'm autistic" might make the parents or siblings of those with a more severe presentation of autism feel like I'm cheapening the condition by jumping on their bandwagon. But again, that essentially ties back to the "you don't look autistic" idea.

Man, I'm really waffling on this one! I really am thinking about this live as I type.

From what I've learned in a relatively short amount of time is that Asperger's is autism, sort of in the way that Sheldon Cooper explained to Penny, "All Jacuzzis are hot tubs, but not all hot tubs are Jacuzzis."

I guess the tipping point for me against using the term Asperger's is the controversial history of Dr. Hans Asperger himself.

There are statements on that page that seem... unsavory.

• "The primary difference between autism and Asperger’s syndrome is that the former deals with cognitive disabilities, communication problems and poor social skills. The latter deals with any one of these three or more!"

This article is already off to a bad start.


• "The truth is that kids as well as elderly people are prone to both the conditions."

Prone? Like, prone to catching it like a disease? I thought being neurodiverse was just how you were made.


• "... Asperger’s syndrome is not confined to any age. Autism on the other hand is confined to an age."

Is the writer actually saying what so much enlightenment has been trying to abolish, that autism only affects children?


• The writer goes on to say, "Autism is typically prevalent in kids and it remains to be a chronic condition." Chronic condition, as in... like a disease? But a second ago, you just said it "only affects children." Ooof.


• "Another major difference between autism and Asperger’s is that the former condition can get severe over time and the individual may not have any special skills or talent."

Um... autism can get severe over time? I understand that some traits can wane in and out, but I wouldn't classify that as "severity." Also, there's an autistic person I follow on TikTok who (if I remember correctly) is mostly non-verbal and seems to require daily assistance, but who photographs model cars in ways that makes them incredibly realistic -- bro has talent!


• "Asperger’s on the other hand can remain the same or can be conveniently remedied with practice and the individual may show extreme talent or natural penchant for a specific skill or acumen."

Okay, so Asperger's can be remedied, like "cured?" Also, I feel like the writer is perpetuating the false idea that all Aspies are savants.


• "Kids with autism would find it extremely difficult to talk and communicate at the age they are supposed to start talking and conversing. Additionally, kids with autism would always have lower than average IQ or be very poor with their thinking abilities. To the contrary, kids with Asperger’s syndrome may not have any difficulty with talking. They may start speaking at the desired age and may communicate, albeit not very fluently and lucidly, with others. These kids would also have desired IQ or can be smarter in some areas than normal people."

There is sooo much wrong with this... I'll dig at just one: as far as I understand, being non-verbal has nothing to do with IQ.

----------

Overall, the article reeks of asserting facts without citing any sources, "As a matter of fact, there are studies and inferred researches that lay down the difference..." What the heck is "inferred research?"

Well, I didn't have to tear it apart like that, I guess. The article does not name an author nor any professional credentials to convey any level of validity.

[mic drop]

That article seems pretty inaccurate and outdated. It mentions something about autistic people have low IQ or are less likely to be knowledgeable or talented in anything. I don't think that's true. Some people with severe "low-functioning" autism can still be extremely smart in some areas.

Are you referring to this report?: https://healthresearchfunding.org/diffe ... aspergers/ - Any other links to reports which might better describe the differences between Autism & Aspergers?

It might be noted that the difference between Autism and Aspergers might narrow regarding social skills - that is common threads are difficulties expanding acquaintances beyond small talk.

^ That article seems poorly written and based on hear-say not any scientific observation - the use of the word “kids” kind of marks it as amateurish for me.

For each statement I could be kind and considerate and say something like “I see what you are trying to get at” or “I can see how you could get that idea”

Basically this problem trying to find the dividing line between Asperger’s and Autism is exactly what led to the changes in the ICD and DSM. But usually these things would be stated more clearly by a scientist as a testable hypothesis - then the scientist would form groups - those diagnosed as Asperger’s would’ve in one group those diagnosed as Autism (using DSM or ICD) and a third group with neither diagnosis. Then they would test the theory - but often the result would be the Autism and the Asperger’s groups would look like each other - and they would both look different from the third group. I read a number of studies like that before DSM 5 came out.

Looks like I'm late enough to the party that my witty inspiration is pretty much pointless now.
Oh well, I'll say it anyway,
The difference between Aspergers and autism is like the difference between 10W30 and motor oil.

“As a matter of fact, there are studies and inferred researches that lay down the difference between autism and Asperger’s syndrome.”
Sources please

Actually, in 2018 Europeans and the World Health Organization confirmed that we are the global standard,
although they have applied their own local spin to that standard,
https://www.autismeurope.org/blog/2018/ ... he-icd-11/

Well I think the difference between Asperger's and autism is social IQ. Asperger's seem less socially inept than autism but doesn't mean Asperger's aren't socially awkward or don't struggle socially.

To put it bluntly, Asperger’s is the name given to autistic people whose particular skill distribution and environment allow them to get away with masking more than some other autistic people ever have the opportunity to.

In my opinion, an autistic person is an autistic person. If you identify with the Asperger’s label, I totally respect that, but there’s pretty much zero difference in the core brain wiring elements.

In my experience, people with an Asperger’s diagnosis are the ones who tend toward the hyperlexic side of speech more often than the hypolexic side, happen to excel in an area that allows them to get through life in our society, and are skilled at hiding their meltdowns/shutdowns (or at least camouflaging them enough to look like just a quirky personality trait). People who, by nature of their environment, upbringing, experiences, et cetera, make it far enough in life as an apparently-functioning human being that they have the chance to get good at masking.

See, one of the core aspects of autism is an uneven skill distribution. Where allistic people’s skills all typically tend to be at about the same level (with some natural variation), autistic people’s skills tend to be way more all-or-nothing. So if you don’t talk till you’re 5, if you have a flat affect and never smile as a toddler, if you fail kindergarten because you can’t do basic tasks, it’s gonna be obvious. People are gonna see there’s a problem, and you’re gonna get labeled autistic.

Whereas if your uneven skills in childhood present in such a way that allows you to do unusually well at the things you’re supposed to do, such as precocious reading abilities or the ability to infodump about your special interests, people just think, “Wow, this kid’s smart/talented and they’re gonna go far!” And they don’t see the more invisible disabilities the kid almost certainly has, such as social issues or sensory problems, or if they do see them, they just explain them away as [kid] being [kid].

And so the latter kids make it far enough through the school system that they’re considered for all intents and purposes to be the same type of person as their peers, and thus they have the opportunity to be amongst the other kids and learn to mask by watching how those kids act. And more often than not, nobody realizes just how much struggle is going on inside, not until the kid grows older, tries to take on more responsibilities, and inevitably has a nervous breakdown somewhere down the line. And these are the kids that get told they have Asperger’s, because they’re weird, sure, but not weird “enough.”

But at the end of the day, a person diagnosed with Asperger’s is gonna have the same general set of traits and characteristics as someone diagnosed with autism, because their brains are fundamentally wired the same way, just with differences in how that wiring presents from person to person.


Also, for what it’s worth, I’m pretty sure Hans Asperger was a Nazi doctor who made the distinction between the two presentation classes so that those deemed “low-functioning” could be sent off to the camps while those deemed “high-functioning” (aka Asperger’s) could be exploited for Nazi efforts. Not 100% sure about the details, but that’s the general explanation I’ve heard from multiple sources.