Asperger's mischaracterized as a learning disabilty...

Post Reply New Topic

...by my own support group, run by an aspie!

And people wonder why i'm suicidal! Honestly this life business is trying is it not?

Sorry, but to some extent it is a learning disability. Also, even if you had a learning disability, why get so upset about it. It does not necessarily mean that you're less intelligent than other people.

I think that it is a learning disability. I believe that I have a low social IQ. It is just difficult for me to pick up on things like social interactions, proper behavior, and people in general. I also have a very low EQ. I think that you may be thinking about the usual sort of learning disabilities, which are in the areas of language and academics, but there are others. It is only now that people are beginning to realize that these other areas are just as important as the more traditional areas.

I'm not trying to be contentious, but define "learning disability". Technically, under some definitions, autism is not a learning disability. It is a communicative disorder or a developmental disability. But for all practical purposes, it affects my ability to learn. Maybe the person running the support group was speaking in broad generalities.

I was misdiagnosed with ADHD when I was 5 in 1975. From first grade to tenth grade I was in special education classes. There was not a day I did not get called a ret*d by my other classmates. My life was made a living hell for eleven years because I was in special education classes even though I do not have ADHD my psychologist found no evidence of it. 11th and 12th grade was spent in normal classes and suprise suprise the name calling stop. It does not mean you are less intelligent but it does mean other people will think you are. I was beaten up, spit on, set on fire, and made fun of because people thought I was a "ret*d".

At the school where I teach (public school system), most of our Asperger's students (my youngest son included) is mainstreamed right in the regular classroom. There are accommodations for them if needed, but they tend to do very well in the regular classes. But...if a student with Asperger's would need the extra help provided for in the learning disabilities classroom---then I see no harm in that. Being in a learning disabilities classroom is nothing to be upset about. Many students have learning issues.

I guess i just don't want to be associated with the horrible prejudice that there is against the learning disabled. For example, when employment agencies who employ the learning disabled find them job's they're always really low paid bottom of rung jobs that poorly qualified NT'S would have. As far as i'm concerned my ability to learn is not hampered by having Aspergers in any way. I have a high IQ and i'm very well read and knowledgeable in a number of areas. Why should i be comfortable with having a stigma attached to me that is only going to hamper me in life?

Well, there is the argument/theory that autistic social problems are a result of dissimilar brain functioning (and so dissimilar internal experiences), which may not be (as) dysfunctional between similar brains. Sort of like how a blind person isn't learning-impaired w.r.t. reading, but rather has to do it with braille due to a non-standard sensory configuration.

I don't have a problem with people learning social skills, but I think there are problems with seeing lack of social learning as the fundamental difference or the core truth. (Especially since that's the assumption a lot of the professional literature has assumed: i.e. "stimming is purposeless and distracts a child from social interaction.")

It has a big effect in many people lives (mine included), but if it really was that simple you could read a few books, practice a little and then everything would be fine. -- Normal people don't need to learn how to do eye contact, they likely just have an instinct for it and don't find it painfully invasive in the first place. So, learning to 'fake' that isn't fixing anything -- it's an adaptation to function in a less natural way which is beneficial in other ways (whether it's worth it or not being up to the person who is doing it, if they have any choice)).

So, I don't think it is a learning disability.

Also i think a distinction should be made between "learning" and being able to survive in a state or private educational establishment. Because as far as i am concerned, they are two completely separate things.

I have some learning difficulties which significantly impair my motor skills, my organizational/ planning skills, my nonverbal skills, and my ability to control/ regulate attention. I don't have a high IQ myself, but I feel compelled to point out that there are people out there with learning disabilities who have very high IQs as well.

I think we're not all on the same wavelength on this thread, as we're not all working with the same definition of learning disabilities. I noticed that you're in the UK. If my understanding is accurate, in the UK, there is a condition commonly known as "general learning disabilities." My belief is that your "general learning disabilities" is synonomous with what people where I'm from would call ID (intellectual disability), or to use a somewhat outdated term MR (mental retardation). That's very different from LDs (learning disabilities) as defined in the US, where I am. Where I live, learning disabilities are usually diagnosed when an individual with at least average intelligence (and often higher) shows a clinically significant level of difficulty learning skills and concepts in certain areas.

What I'm trying to say (and explaining very poorly ) is that, where I live, learning disabilities entail a clinically significant difficulty with certain types of learning that would not be expected considering a given individual's overall intelligence and general functioning. As learning disabilities are defined here in the US, individuals with LDs do not have any impairment in regard to intelligence or functioning outside the specific area/s affected by the learning disability. Learning disabilities as defined in the US is a difference in the processing of certain types of information, and doesn't affect intelligence at all.

Where I live, in the US, learning disabilities and intellectual disabilities are two very different things, and there is little to no overlap between the two. Confusing the two conditions (as some people *still* do where I live) doesn't do any favors for individuals with either LD or ID as these two conditions are so different from each other, and the supports/ accommodations that would be useful for one of the aforementioned populations would be useless to the other, and vice versa.

It can be confusing at times, as we are posting from all over the world here, and there are some terms that we don't all use the same way. That can lead to misunderstandings. I was trying to clear up some points, though I don't think I succeeded in this endeavor.

Unfortunately, I had a friend of mine staying in my tiny apartment with her husband this weekend, and I am completely drained from all that socialization. Thus, I'm not doing so well with communicating in a way that can be understood by other humans. Thus, my attempt to clear things up probably just muddied the waters further. I still couldn't resist chiming in on this matter. Now, I make my exit.

No, you were totally clear and informative as far as i'm concerned.

So let's define the entire population of autistics to suit your own anxiety. Not too narcissistic or anything, now, are we?

First of all, once you leave public schools and enter the workforce, nobody checks your records to see if you were college prep or special ed. If you go to college, then all that matters is your transcript and your ability to network and do well in job interviews. Also, it is illegal to ask questions about disabilities during a job interview. Since you are so well read and have such a high IQ, you should have no trouble navigating the real world. Hop to it. Show the world what you got. Meanwhile, those of us that found learning difficult, regardless of our native intelligence, will continue rocking in the corner and drooling on ourselves.

I didn't go to college and i have never worked. I left school at 13 since i had a nervous breakdown due to the stresses and strains of having Asperger's and it's comorbid disorders. However this has nothing to do with learning per se and i do not considered myself learning disabled and it is factually inaccurate to label autistic people in such a way. I would argue you were more narcissistic if not outright cowardly in your attempts to shame me out of my sincerly held rational opinions.

My thought is that I could have used a little special treatment. Just being excused from recess once in a while would have made a big difference. I could have used a teacher who did not tell me that I needed to socialize more when I wanted to socialize, but nobody wanted to socialize with me. I could have used someone to teach me a little about basic hygiene, like the right way to deal with a running nose. I could have used someone who simply explained what I was doing that the other students were reacting so badly to.

Your position is not rational. If you wish to talk about the language surrounding disabilities, whether autism as a disability is "learning", "communicative", "developmental" or some other categorization, you need to strip your language of such things as:



This is so emotionally laden that it removes any possible rational discussion from the table.

Also, my "attack" is more Borderline than Narcissistic.


In all seriousness, if you have never worked, then you are disabled. What difference does it make if you are learning disabled, developmentally disabled or whatever? How does battling over such distinctions help you?

Alright dude thats fair enough. Me too probably.