HFA or aspergers?????

Post Reply New Topic

Well, I basically have the symptoms of Aspergers, only I can't, since I was severely Autistic (I didn't speak until I was 5, and I was pretty severe until grade 6, where I started to get very high functioning)

ebec11,

It's possible for people to be diagnosed with autism as younger, and then they're rediagnosed as AS as an adult for they can then speak adequately, and they improved in the other facets of the disorder (rituals, distress of change, parts of objects, etcetera).

"LFA" denotes mental retardation, not nonverbal.

I consider HFA and Asperger's to be essentially the same thing. By current diagnostic criteria, I would probably be most appropriately labelled as HFA rather than Aspie, even though Asperger's is my current dx. There has been controversy over whether HFA and Asperger's should be separate diagnoses, the DSM-V is expected to "resolve" the issue.

They're not the same thing going by the DSM-IV-TR; whilst they superficially look the same via a quick perusal of the diagnostic criteria, they're different in the majority of the cases.

At least until it is changed in the DSM-VI.

From the mouth of the DSM-IV-TR:

LFA has different meanings to different people,a lot of auties who have always tested as MR-including am,are at the least not significant MR, but are low functioning.

LFA and HFA are both controversial terms with several usages. I use them to refer to myself, when comparing my present high level of functioning with my childhood, but not as labels for "types" of autism.

The people who coined the two terms based it on an IQ threshold (it was researchers) to see outcomes between those with and without mental retardation, and other comparison studies; <70-<80 seems to be the line for "LFA".

The only problem I have with the terms is that people see the "high-functioning" label and incorrectly assume that it's closer to normality than autism; conversely, people see the "low-functioning" label and incorrectly assume the worst cases imaginable, which are rare.

Whilst it's self-evident that the outcome of those with "LFA" sucks in comparison to those without autism, it's really not that much better in those with "HFA" (to the surprise of the researchers; I don't know what they were expecting, personally).

I don't think that overall intelligence and verbal ability have much in common other than specific IQ tests; I had an IQ test when I couldn't read/write, and I still generated a "high" score, and I only gained the ability to speak adequately a couple of years prior.

If one uses some type of self-help/independence scale to define functioning, then most of those with autistic disorder would be "LFA", no matter how intelligent they are.

I look at myself with this "HFA" label (no Axis II mental retardation), and ask how the hell can I be seen as "high-functioning" by anyone?

ive heard this is more common with just NLVD and not necessarily autism/AS... but they all "overlap" so idk.

i think this quality in development and learning is what interests me in the synapses i study and their possible involvement with autism.

i think there are many different paths brains can take to maturing and "functioning"

And then of course if you use the purely-IQ definition of LFA, then almost no autistic people (an estimated 5%, I think) are LFA if you use the right measures.

What they've found in autistic people as far as adaptive functioning, by the way, is that below IQ 70, there's a fair bit of correlation between IQ performance and adaptive functioning (which probably just means that a person has trouble doing standard IQ tests for the same reason they have trouble with daily living, not that they have an intellectual disability in the usual sense as the cause for both, given that most autistic people below IQ 70 will score above IQ 70 on the right tests), and that above IQ 70 there is almost no correlation between IQ and adaptive functioning, and increasing score on a standard IQ test doesn't change an autistic person's daily living skills much if any at all.

(I have had IQs in the highly gifted range, the high average range, and the low-average/borderline range (depending on where you draw the line), in that order, my guess being that this is because I had skills develop ahead of time as a kid that came into being fully formed and thus were less impressive as time went on, and because of increasing voluntary-motor problems. The only time anyone ever did a test of my practically-applied adaptive skills, the results were low even in my best areas, and way lower than IQ would predict.)

I think somebody who was nonverbal more severe growing up becomes more higher functioning yet still faces the challenges like not being able to do their own hair or make a bed right(for instances me ugh!) or can't nessacarily live on their own without assistance unfortunely, but since I can drive, and have a bf(even though idk how hes still with me) I'm considered High Functioning Autism rather then Aspergers. Does that make any sense to anybody?

Yep, overall cognitive functioning on standard tests is a poor predictor for overall "functioning". For the most part, "HFA" sucks just as much as "LFA"; this is if one uses standard IQ tests that may or may not correctly measure the intelligence of the individuals with autism.

Age1600,

People actually make beds? Whilst those with Asperger's don't have it that much better than those with "HFA" in reality, there's differences in the presentation of both; from what you've written and I've read, you'd still be classed as "HFA" in my far, far from expert opinion.

It kinda makes sense then - that my HFA son, who goes to a school for kids with AS, is the only one who can't put his own clothes on after gym, although he does well with maths, reading ect.
What made you start talking/functioning at a higher level danileismyname/ebec11/age1600? Don't have to answer if it's too personal.
BTW my son is very interested in being social, but it is SO hard for him to get it right. Even his humour is pretty warped - I think he is hilarious - he thinks he is hilarious - but lots of other people think he's over the top!
There was talk of changing his diagnosis from "infantile autism" to AS. I feel ambivalant about it. Obviously, he is verbal. And the AS diagnosis is pretty cool. But I do see a big difference to the AS kids.

My first sentence was, 'Eyes not going to die?' as I was being stitched up at 5 (to the surprise of my mother); like many with autism, it took an emotionally upsetting event to get me talking. I spoke in sentences from then on rather than basic expressive/receptive language (one to two words). A year of speech therapy to correct my pronoun reversal, third person, and grammatically incorrect speech made me speak well from then on.

I was ok with math from the start, but it took me a few years to catch up with reading/writing.

Overall, I don't speak much, even though I have the ability; I cannot speak in a social setting, and I still revert to basic expressive/receptive speech when I actually talk to people, which isn't often. The only place I can speak adequately is in response to my mother, to a camera, and to a professional (my mother says I'm not that good with the latter however; I think I'm ok).

I was never interested in socializing; if people didn't approach me, I wouldn't have interacted in my school years; before then, I didn't interact even when people approached me (I'm like this now).