Asperger's isn't autism?

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sW-FzHSv ... re=related

One of the comments reads: "Aspergers is NOT a light autism, it is something completely different, something that is definitely real and demands awareness and support, but is alas unique to the issue of Autism.

"BTW: I suspect that High-Functioning Autism - Severe Aspergers is simply AS + coincidental factors, like diet or brain damage." and another reads:

This video really resonates because these are things I have suspected for months now.

I am an Asperger and since 2007 I have been intenssively studying it, concluding there no such thing as an "Autism Spectrum", I think Autism and Aspergers completely different, sharing only vaguely analogous traits in white matter and the limbic and R-complex. And it seems to me that one is genetic (Aspergers) whilst the other seems to appear inexplicably with no genetic basis in the family tree (autism)."


I personaly have a diagnosis of Asperger's Syndrome but I did not speak until I was like four or walk until I was about two. All my other milestones were delayed as well and I didn't know how to hold a conversation until my late teens (perhaps I still do not know how). Some people can't seem to acknolege that autism IS a spectrum. Some have it harsher and some have it milder although for me AS was no walk in the park. One phycatrist say my diagnosis of AS/autism needs to be changed because I am supposedly oh so high functing. To him, I am no longer autistic but bi polar (he was obviously an idot who didn't know Jack s**t), yet it's clearly on my records that I didn't speak until age four and didn't walk until around age two. But someone call Autism Speaks becuase I am aparently cured. Anyway are AS and autism two diffrent things?

The problem is these people seem to be oblivious to the history of autism. The people that were first identified as autistic were high-functioning, and high-functioning is the majority. If anything, the lower-functioning people have something else than autism.

(Not that I do think they're separate.)

I also don't think these types of people really understand autistic behaviour. They see a kid head-banging and somehow see it differently than a more "mild" stim of the same sensory-seeking behaviour, like touching everything in a room.

I think aspergers is just an arbitrarily defined subset of autistics that don't have language problems or mental retardation.

The one part I agree with, at least from what's presented on the forum as I haven't watched the video, is that AS is indeed not a "light" or "mild" form of autism. Regardless of our linguistic ability and supposedly higher functioning, those of us identified with Asperger's syndrome (or, as in my case, dealing with lack of access to evaluation services) can experience tremendous difficulty integrating with other people and organizing our lives along socially acceptable norms. The apparent severity of a person's autism can vary in all sorts of ways, and some people may not be obviously disabled, or may have skills that make up for a lack of social cognition, but it is still wrong to describe any person's disability as "mild." A highly intelligent person who suffers from depression or anxiety attacks, who cannot relate to other's emotions, or who cannot maintain eye contact and normal facial expression is not mildly disabled, and the coupling of autism with higher intelligence may lead to increased risk of depression, bipolar-like symptoms, and even suicide.

Asperger's syndrome is the same the thing as autism. It is a real disability, regardless of a person's intelligence or "level of functioning."

that youtuber who did the video; i dislike alot.

That video should be taken off, and the person who made the video, needs to do their research.

AS is by definition a form of Autism. Unless you are prepared to take on the entire psychiatric community, it is what it is, because that's how it was defined. You are free to think whatever you wish though. Nobody can stop you.

It seems a standard case of, "autism is what my child has, and everybody else who has it 'better' (defined as I define it) is a fake."

Part of that video says "autism is increasingly ignored, because the spectrum has expanded and absorbed children and teens who AREN'T truly autistic."

Is "severe autism" really being increasingly ignored? If so, how? Reduced funding, fewer TV ads depicting "severe" autism? In what way is this person's son being injured by a wider spectrum of autistic people being recognized?

Just a quick note. I didn't even click the video link the first time I answered. I did this time, and turns out I've seen it. I've actually spoken to the woman. She does NOT believe mild Autism or Asperger's is fake. She does believe a lot of people are claiming to have it who probably don't. That's about it, and it is only those who really don't have it she's addressing.

I know! I know! How can anyone tell for anyone else? Had that conversation already here a few times. I don't even WANT to go there anymore. Of course nobody can. Just saying that's where she's coming from. She doesn't mean to say all mild Autism or Asperger's is not the real thing.

AS and autism are two names for the same thing, with AS excluding a specific subset of it. Autism has a very wide range of effects, of course; but it's still the same entity.

There are many conditions (most, in fact) that have a wide range like this. Autism is only one of many. All kinds of conditions, including the physical and mental, have wide ranges like this. For example, cerebral palsy can be anything from mild weakness in one limb to complete lack of controllable movement. Diabetes can be something you easily handle with a sensible diet, or it can be something that requires an insulin pump and frequent hospitalizations when blood sugar gets out of control. A concussion could mean a couple of days of headaches, or it could mean death. Chicken pox could be so mild as to be mistaken for a cold and two mosquito bites, or it could kill you. The point is: Just because some autistics are more disabled than others doesn't mean that they have different things.

Plus:
AS and autism are indistinguishable in individuals with a 70+ IQ and communicative speech. There are quite a few PDD-NOS cases that would be diagnosed Asperger's, if it weren't that the IQ is too low. (IQ is an arbitrary cutoff line that doesn't make much sense, in my mind.)
Reliability for a psychologist determining whether someone's on the autism spectrum is quite good. Reliability for determining which particular ASD it is... is not much better than chance. (Except for with Rett syndrome which has a genetic test.)

Is it John Best posing as someone else?

Here's a quote of one of her comments:



Sounds to me like she is saying that "'severe' is the only real kind of autism."

There are plenty of studies by researchers who differentiate between Asperger's syndrome and autism, who wish to keep them as separate entities whatever the revised DSM uses, particularly in the UK, Australia and Japan. Tony Attwood strongly supports a separate diagnosis on grounds of community identity, while Simon Baron-Cohen supports a separate underlying condition.

There seem to be enough differences in treatment and support needs to justify a different diagnosis.

Facebook campaign: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=3 ... 688&ref=ts
NYT editorial: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/healt ... ml?_r=2&em
Baron-Cohen NYT comment: http://www.autismresearchcentre.com/arc ... es.com.pdf

Many people believe that AS and Autism are different.

Well, what about autistics that are so severely affected that they never learned to speak or take care of themselves? How can you say its not genetic?

If anything, I might be tempted to say the opposite: autism is genetic but Asperger isn't.

Not that I believe the above statement either, but it seems more believable than the reverse.

But then again, in their original work Asperger talked about genetics and Kanner talked about refrigirator mothers. Personally, I find it quite paradoxical it came out this way.

Interesting point. A few months ago I had a discussion with people at one of the other threads ( http://wrongplanet.net/forums/viewtopic ... 4&start=15 ) where others were saying Kanner was focusing on the most severe cases and I was trying to point out that he described his patients as high functioning by saying they have "high intellectual potential". So I am glad you agree with me here!

One interesting thing though: even though both Kanner and Asperger described high functioning patients, at the time of Rainmann people were apparently focused on low functioning cases -- as evident from the way Rainmann was described as high functioning. And then, of course, in modern times we are again focused on high functioning cases. So could it be some kind of cycle: start with high functioning cases (Kanner and Asperger) then go to low functioning cases (Rainmann) then go back to high functioning cases (DSM 4) and then slightly shift lower (DSM 5)?