Why do so many people hate functioning labels?

Post Reply New Topic

Can someone please explain this? Also, why do so many think that a person with low-functioning autism (can't talk at all, is unable to do every day tasks such as dressing and brushing teeth without assistance, has very severe sensory issues, etc.) is similar to a person with mild Asperger's?

Please don't get upset with me, I'm just wondering.

Because someone here called me low functioning once.

Many people find the application of such labels to be "limiting", as if that is the box which the person will eternally be confined to. It also seems to arouse prejudice from others who reduce the person to a label-stereotype. I've also known some people who have had labels stuck on them by a doctor, and they later turned out to be wrong diagnoses.


Because one of the few things that the general public seems to know about Autism is that it comprises a Spectrum. That makes an easy mental picture... a nice big umbrella under which to toss the whole variety of very different conditions. So your average person thinks that LF Autism and Asperger's are just different flavors of the same thing. They don't understand the fine details, because most people don't give a topic that level of scrutiny unless they are personally affected by it somehow.
It's not really their fault, that's just how most brains deal with the world. For instance, I may group together everyone who plays Cricket as being similar, since that is a sport which I know very little about. But I will bet that a cricket player from India and one from Australia are very different indeed.

I hope that's helped clear things up a bit

I like functioning labels myself. It gives me an idea how their autism affects their life. If I were to just say that my son was autistic, it could mean so many things.

BUT, they are not all to consider. A high-functioning PDD-NOS individual may not be able to speak really well. But someone with severe asperger's may be able to speak super well and be super good at math, but could be very verbal. The reverse could also be true.

I think they are a good general label if that's what you are looking for. When I register my son for classes at the local community centre, I say he is autistic, but is high functioning. It gives the registrar information. I also will give detail to that though.

The easy one is:

1) Why do so many think that a person who can't talk, is unable to do everyday tasks such as dressing and brushing teeth without assistance, has very severe sensory issues is similar to a person with mild Asperger's?

And I think the answer to that is, "Who said that?" I don't recall anyone saying such a thing.

The other one is:

2) Why do so many people hate functioning labels?

Because of the assumption that someone labeled as low-functioning is incapable of a long list of things whether or not they are actually capable of some of those things. Also the assumption that someone labeled as high-functioning is capable of a long list of things whether or not they are actually capable of some of those things.

It's not that anyone denies that there's a range of severity, but the idea that it's a smooth spectrum where you can easily categorize someone as high functioning and determine that they are supposed to be capable of all kinds of things, or someone else as low functioning and determine that they are supposed to be incapable of all kinds of things.

These assumptions can be fairly difficult to deal with. Yesterday there was a four-five page thread in which a few posters laid out things that they said that someone diagnosed with AS should be able to do - some of which I find extremely difficult without assistance. Last week, my therapist told me I was too high-functioning to receive certain kinds of assistance that would be a huge help to me. Do I need those services? I don't really know how badly I need them, but I do know that a lot of doors are closed to me, service-wise, because it is assumed that I am capable of a lot of things that I have a lot of difficulty with.

I've also seen people confidently assert that people who would be classified as low-functioning couldn't possibly post on a forum like this - sometimes in the same thread that another poster who would be classified by many as low-functioning - posted in earlier.

I don't really agree with labels as they are often used, although I don't really try to stop people from using them (and I use them myself if they're the best way to say something I can think of). I do agree that severity is important to acknowledge so that people can get necessary services or assistance. I do not think they are meaningless, nor do I think there's no difference between someone diagnosed with mild Asperger's Syndrome and someone diagnosed with severe autism. I just wish that the label didn't always come with specific assumptions about abilities. Does that make sense?

Personally, I too like the labels. When they are applied properly, they give useful information about the person. It's sort of a "heads up" thing to alert you to what you might be dealing with.


(BTW LornaDoone I love your Avatar!)

Someone on here said something like that, last October. They said that people with AS have milder symptoms than people with "LFA", but other than that, they are similar.

And yes, what you wrote makes sense.

Why I hate functioning labels? Bad experience I had and how I got treated just because they are more AS than me and I am less AS than them so I got treated liked how an NT would treat me just because they read between the lines and I failed to.

Ah, I think I misunderstood your question:

A lot of symptoms are similar, if not as severe. Some symptoms might be as severe, or even more severe, even if many are much less severe.

I,m a Dutch Russian French Indian, aries/taurus cusp born in the year of the rabbit, kalpha/pitta bodytype, intuitive, feeling, blood B rh positive, number 7 vibration

Labels tell a lot, and are useful in communication

I think some people hate functioning labels because it does seem to limit them and in a way tell them that this is the way they are and they can't be any other way. I'm not sure, really- I think the labels are useful to an extent because they do make the meaning of the label quite different sometimes. I guess labels don't really matter, anyway, though, as it's the difficulties and qualities that you have that matter, and everyone on the spectrum, wherever they are, will be different, and have different difficulties and qualities.

I guess another part of why some people dislike functioning labels is because some people with severe or lower-functioning autism can improve until the correct diagnosis which currently fits them is something such as Asperger's or HFA.

In another way some people may dismiss people if they are higher functioning.

Who are the people you refer to as "so many" are they NTs or other Aspies or both?

I think part of it is that most of society makes unwarranted assumptions about what "low functioning" means. And the same for "high functioning." I.e. "low-functioning = non-verbal = no thoughts, can't learn anything." And, "high functioning = has no 'real' difficulties, needs no assistance." (It seems like autism could almost be defined as having combinations of skills and deficits that are alien to the most other people in society.)

I saw a movie about a month ago called "Wretches & Jabberers." It's about two autistic guys in their 40's-50's traveling the world to spread the knowledge that autistic people should not be underestimated (and should have their human rights respected).

They were both institutionalized as children, and got out in their 20's. About 10 years after that they got hold of a keyboard and -- to the shock and surprise of various people -- showed that they could communicate, understood what was going around them, and had thoughts and opinions about it. (I'm blending their 2 stories together here to keep this short, so the details may not be perfectly accurate.) But, because they couldn't speak, they were labelled "low functioning" and assumed to be incapable of any of those things.

On the other side, for "HF" people: just because someone can speak and doesn't look like "Rainman" when walking down the sidewalk and not talking to anyone (and maybe they're very good at writing computer code or building an encyclopedic knowledge of 16th century French literature), doesn't necessarily mean that they can drive, keep themselves fed, keep their bills and other things paid, and/or maintain a sanitary living space without help.

So, I think what bugs people (bugs me, anyway) is that the assumptions about what "LF" and "HF" mean, usually include things that aren't correct, and that that can cause headaches to outright harm to people's lives. People not getting what they need.

(Looking back at the OP, I think I might've answered a slightly different question than the one you meant, but I'm gonna send this any for the heck of it.)

Because they aren't accurate. Low functioning by whose standards? Who thinks they have the power to determine that?

Its could be a harmful phrase, low AND high functioning

The aspies who identify as low functioning, could feel low for being that

The aspies who are high or very high functioning, could feel high and mighty

These words need to be changed. Including 'functioning'

DSMV is proposing to use a unidirectional ASD ordinal scale of severe, moderate or mild autism.
HFA and AS would likely fall under mild.