Average functioning autism?

Post Reply New Topic

From the experience of people saying to me, "You aren't like them," and trying to explain the difference between High-Functioning and Low-Functioning Autism, I have been pondering on why there is the cognitive disconnect? Why should people find it difficult to understand the difference? I had the thought today that maybe there isn't a difference? Maybe the only difference is the manifestation of the autism (the part that people see and experience). The underlying autism is essentially the same for all autistic people but manifests differently.

Why don't we have something called Average Functioning Autism? The reason I think is that sounds very bland and uninteresting. If we told someone we had Average Function Autism, it would be very difficult to explain. I am not seriously proposing to create such a category of autism. I am proposing that the whole notion of high and low functioning autism is not terribly helpful because it labels half of us in negative terms and then for the rest of us, we are seen to be actual or latent geniuses. Of course, if we achieve things expected of geniuses then that is great, but if we don't we are failures to some degree. To be known as having high functioning autism can often be a source of incredulous disbelief and suspicion that is a ready-made excuse for not living up to our true potential. This puts a lot of pressure on those with high functioning autism. I personally prefer the term "Aspie" because it has no immediate implication about personal performance. I think too that many so-called "low-functioning" autistics are highly intelligent but trapped in a neural battle to express themselves. Good examples of those who break through are the savants who paint or draw the most incredible pictures but are profoundly autistic.

Should we not work on new terminology to describe ourselves?

I just say I'm autistic. I mean, my diagnosis says "autism spectrum disorder without language or intellectual impairments", but all that says about me is that I'm verbal and not intellectually disabled.

When I go out in public I generally blend in. I may act a little eccentric, but hardly anyone suspects I'm autistic unless I tell them. Then again, most people have no idea what autism actually is.

That said, I once went to the hospital when I was having an anxiety attack, and one of the nurses asked me if I had ADHD or Aspergers. I don't remember exactly what he said, but it seems that under duress, my symptoms do become obvious to a trained eye.

I absolutely feel the problem you describe, but I don't know if there is a solution. People like labels and categories, and I probably look more like an eccentric smart guy than what people expect from a person with autism. Even when I disclose, and try to explain, people often find it difficult to bear in mind.

However, I don't think that I'd prefer if people overdid it. I don't want to be coddled.

The final issue is how I'm doing on any particular day. Everyone has better and worse days, no matter what their mental health status. Most people with autism probably have some comorbid conditions from the stress of having autism.

To sum up, I don't know if any system of labels can make things better overall. It would be great if people had a little more practical understanding of how to communicate effectively with us, but people have their own problems, too.

Autistic people can be of average intelligence or life skills just like NTs. There are low-functioning, medium-functioning and high-functioning NTs as well as autistics. Some people call it LFA, MFA or HFA.

I feel you make a valid point. While I am not low functioning I am not a college professor either.

I'm in that same range: definitely not a college professor!

When people speak of "high-functioning" autism, they tend to think of people with an IQ over 70, and who have useful verbal speech, and who communicate at least fairly well most of the time.

More labels is like being told to buy specific types of peanut butter and jelly at a store, and finding that none of the labels match what you have been told. Most people can't deal with that many labels, especially when they don't match.

I never took high functioning autism to mean that someone is a genius. I just got the impression that it meant an autistic person, who in spite of the challenges they face, manages to support themself and live independantly.

High Functioning autism means a person who is autistic and had average to above average intelligence often defined as IQ above 70.

I agree there should be the labels average or moderate functioning or moderate in addition to "high functioning", "low functioning", "mild", "severe/profound"

I believe the lack of reconition of "average" autism is very harmful in a number of ways such as enhancing stigmas and improper treatments.

You are way over thinking it. It isn't a level of achievement but catagories to seperate mild and severe. Autism was discovered at the same tine as AS. Both named Autism hence the spectrum high functioning means either iq above 70 or that you can speak it DOES NOT mean that your a college professor or that lfa is someone who can't function at all it is a SPECTRUm meaning it varies. Some lfa learn to cope and despite being unable to talk are successful some hfa fail at life and simply can not cope. That being said they should have A in between level for those who can talk and have language impairments. End of story. You are overthinking this.

This is a convenient label for medical practioners but it's not very representative of intelligence in the real world. My daughter's school report indicates she is exceptionally intelligent but she has never been able to complete an IQ test


Except there are plenty of non-verbal folk who wear the LFA label but have the ability to complete university degrees with the help of computers and learning aids. Function really only applies to an ability to socially function rather than intelligence


In my experience Aspies who are stigmatised by the label are really just trying to distance themselves from autistic people lower down the proverbial spectrum. It's how they think NTs see them.

I'd consider myself average-functioning. Mentally I'm extremely intelligent but socially I'm stuck in my early teens.

I hope with devices defining severity/functioning by how well we speak will become obsolete.

Me too. But the medical world doesn't think about it that way. They think about it in a black and white manner.

To quote the wise words of the Butt hole surfers

"you never know how you look through other people's eyes"

There is clearly a consistent view in the various posts that an IQ of 70 is an approximate delineation between low - and high-functioning autism and for me that is surprising new information. My internal perception has been of a delineation of high-functioning autism as been associated with very much higher IQs (than 70).

My IQ does not help my executive functioning. I have been told I'm so clever I'm stupid (or too theoretical, overly complicated and impractical etc). It took me quite some time to internalise these statements. I have concluded that the people who say this are being derogatory with a token begrudging compliment with regards to my intelligence. They clearly think my observed stupidity overwhelms any underlying intelligence. It also suggests to me that there may be an inverse relationship between intrinsic intelligence and executive function. If that is the case, the supposed low functioning people are often the most intelligent.