How will Neurodiversity helped people with Severe Autism?

Post Reply New Topic

Go on.

ABA is geared towards lower functioning autism. FC is geared towards lowering functioning autism. Need I go on? Give a single example of an autism therapy geared towards higher functioning autism. CBT doesn't count as it's primarily geared towards neurotypicals, not people on the spectrum.

Do you know how effective ABA is actually meant to be. The answer is not very; for many people that undertake this therapy what happens is that they cannot reach a state where they can function well. As for the idea that it is not geared towards High Functioning Autism, that simply isn't true such a large portion consists of teaching social skills and understanding other perspectives.

As for CBT it has become a standard therapy for people on the autism spectrum and it has helped give families with High Functioning Autistic children better therapies. Where families Low Functioning Autistic children do not benefit from those therapies.

I don't see how it helps anybody except the most mild

I would be in agreement.

Yes, ABA isn't very effective, that's exactly why it ISN'T geared towards people with higher functioning autism. The only reason ABA is used is because the means that are actually effective are too hard to do for lower functioning autism. And you think people with lower functioning autism aren't taught social skills? Like, I've actually worked in this field, ABA is specifically geared for lower functioning autism. CBT is not nearly as widespread as you seem to think it is, ABA is much more prevalent. I'm guessing most the people subjected to it are also to some extend considered lower functioning.

The latest statistics from several studies in different countries highlight that autists suffer from depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation at rates that are up to 10 to 20 times higher than in the typical population. Elevated rates of depression, anxiety, and suicide also apply to those with milder forms of ASD, as these co-morbid conditions in many cases are a reflection of experiences made in the social environment rather than a reflection of ASD specific neurology.

Roughly 90% of social interactions of the neurotypical population (autists and others) involve big differences in perspectives and a very high risk of misunderstanding. 
Aspies and others on the autism spectrum often require support from others in order to avoid autistic burnout. In contrast only 10% of neurotypical interactions involve big differences in perspectives and a very high risk of misunderstanding. 
Society is enabling interactions on neurotypical terms and it is disabling interactions on neurodivergent terms. 
Society is largely unaware that many cultural practices disable those with invisible neurological and cognitive differences.

Society recognises that many cultural practices and technologies disable those who are visibly different (the blind, the deaf, and those whose bodies are smaller, larger, or less mobile than the typical norm). As a result most societies provide dedicated accommodations in terms of modifications of the built environment, communication tools and media that are accessible to the blind and the deaf, etc.

The neurodiversity movement is requesting society to recognise:

1. The existence of neurological and cognitive differences, whether immediately visible or not, and corresponding needs for accommodations.

2. The value of neurodivergent creativity to society. Genes associated with autism and other neurological differences have always been part of the human gene pool, and society benefits from the results on a daily basis.

All autists, no matter where they sit on the spectrum, will benefit from the following:

1. Suspension of the assumption of consistent cultural conformance with unwritten rules when interacting with the neurodivergent 10% of the population. The required changes in cultural norms and expectations are very similar to the changes in cultural norms with respect to the LGBT community that have occurred over the last few decades and which are still an ongoing process. In order to make comparable progress with respect to the autistic spectrum we need a movement with a long term vision (over decades) that takes ownership of the definition of autism. The potential benefits of true cultural acceptance of neurodiversity are huge, in particular in terms of the economic opportunities available to autists. The number of autists who perceive themselves as being disabled has the potential to drop significantly as a result.

2. Ensuring that access to a safe and quiet non-social environment is available to all autists at all times. I'd consider the required changes the equivalent to wheel chair friendly adaptations of the built environment.

The above does not preclude the recognition that autists with pronounced sensory issues, communication challenges, and co-morbidities may wish for further assistance and research into tools and techniques to improve autistic lives.

It's also worth nothing that lower functioning autism actually has a higher employment rate than high functioning autism, and that's because there is more accommodations. So-called low functioning autism really typically isn't as severe as most people think it is, while so-called high functioning is typically much more severe than most people think it is.

I feel a little skeptical of that. Do you have evidence?

The severity of autistic traits and co-morbidities (sensory overload, stimming, sleep difficulties, anxiety, etc.) needs to be distinguished from the severity of challenges encountered in the social environment (being able to secure employment, keep a job, receiving accommodations, etc.).

There is significant variability in autistic traits and co-morbidities, and there is significant variability in the severity of challenges encountered in the social environment.

The more visually obvious the autistic behaviour, the more likely it will be understood as a disability. The more invisible autistic traits become through effective masking, the more likely they will be not acknowledged at all, and any socially "inappropriate" behaviour will be perceived as intentionally rude / ignorant / incompatible with expected behaviour "on the job".

I know of several closet Aspies who are not visibly impaired, but who are significantly and systematically disadvantaged in the workplace. Being able to pass as neurotypical is not necessarily an advantage, it can work against you in a really perverse way. The more you try, the less you will be forgiven for even the slightest crack in the mask. Those who don't recognise this destructive spiral end up in autistic burnout.

As the same time I have also seen a visually obvious autist being discriminated against in the worst possible way. Being obviously disabled is no guarantee for acceptance and essential accommodations.

https://www.transcendautism.com/are-adu ... dividuals/

If you want statistics, people with ID are far more likely to employed than people with autism, it's like a 10% versus a 33% employment rate, and low functioning autism is by definition the combination of ID and autism. I know that isn't quite enough to substantiate my claims, but I can't find my original source. It's worth noting that a large proportion of autistic employment is in sheltered workshops, which mostly cater to lower-functioning autism.

I didn't see any statistics their that backed up your claims there.

This talk https://youtu.be/Ri4F-6npa0w "Neurodiversity, Autism, Dr. Temple Grandin, David Finch, Phil Mckinney" covers the workplace environment in the software industry.

If you listen carefully you'll note that the employer is not interested in offering any accommodations. The expectation is that autistic employees come equipped with a near perfect mask, and their utility is seen as being a highly effective cog in the big corporate machine. The expectation is that the autistic cog does exactly what he/she is being told, irrespective of whether this contributes tangible value the company and to society, or only contributes to the personal career objective of a corporate manager.

I have worked in the technology sector for nearly 30 years, and for the last 15 years as a small business owner. I could not have continued to operate in employee mode as outlined above. My body and mind deteriorates in an autism unfriendly environment. These observations by W Edwards Deming hit the mark https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=67B1DZlDTF4

Luckily I discovered that for autists there are much better choices than being an employee. However society is organised such that these choices are out of reach for the majority of autists. Hardly anyone encourages young autists to explore and follow their passions, to ignore what their neurotypical peers are up to, and to create their own path in this world. No one warns autists about the downside of traditional employment. The opposite is the case.

Instead of limited accommodations at school with the ultimate objective of incrementally forcing young autists into the straight jacket of neurotypical roles in society, where are accommodations that encourage and support autists in developing unique businesses, products, and services?

Society has no confidence in the capability of autistic minds to contribute something useful to society without being "managed", and without being told what to produce. This form of oppression is subtle, but it is very real, and it affects people across the autistic spectrum.

The statistics are in the post. You can go find the sources for the statistics using google, as they aren't that hard to find.

I haven't found the statistics could you send a link.

I am still skeptical of them. If you are adult with low functioning autism you can't do basics like communicate with your co workers something which is essential for allot of work.

I think it would help people with more severe autism to be seen more as human individuals, than say shells of the person they 'could have' been. Which could help them receive more individualized approaches to treatment and care...mostly they are people to.

For instance I've heard of some instances where a person with severe autism who was automatically thought to have an intellectual disability as well....learned to type rather than speak and based on they're typed words it can be seen they aren't intellectually disabled. I think its kind of important to determine if someone is intellectually disabled or not as that would effect the sort of support they'd need...but seems much of the time it is just assumed if the person is more severely effected by autism.