Is everyone on the spectrum "disabled"?

Post Reply New Topic

Different.
Strengths, weaknesses.

I consider myself eerily similar to the infamous Q from Star Trek.

Creativity ... excellent.
Intelligence ... excellent.

Social skills ... in the toilet.

You win some, you lose some.

...

no. It is not an accurate term to use. Such a term takes an inaccurate one dimensional view of human abilities, when in reality human ability is multidimensional. Those who are on the spectrum are by no means necessarily prevented from being a fully realized person or a productive member of society simply for being on the autism spectrum. Though there are challenges with being autistic, there are also benefits, and all people of every sort have some manner of challenge in their life. Furthermore to label those on the autism spectrum buys into a false narrative whereby those who hold power in society cast people like themselves as normal, superior, and fully able, and cast those who differ from them as inferior, disabled, and in need of being made like them.

And whose to say they aren't.
Unfortunately much of the current framing of the discourse on ability is centered on the normal and declares almost anything that deviates from the normal as inferior, while remaining blind to the problems of the normal is like. Taking a more objective look on ability there is much to make the case the neurotypicals are in a certain sense disabled.

Everyone on the spectrum has a condition that others not on the same spectrum do not have, for some a condition, for others a disability, and for others a mix of postives and negatives.

Most therapists would probably say that everyone who is autistic is automatically disabled, though they have a self-interest in saying so and many exaggerate the negatives to assist their touting for clients on the web. Autism Speaks builds its entire propaganda and money-seeking initiatives around the "hopeless disability/they are all disabled" narrative.

Not once have I ever seen those sources ask "what's right about people on the spectrum", their only perspective is "what's wrong with them". The impact of these extreme and negative perspectives seems not a small one. I think for some on the spectrum, it is a leading factor in autistic despair and is psychologically toxic for many.

Autism is a disability, and has neurological consequences, so yes, everyone on the spectrum is disabled, per se. But some are more disabled than others. There are many, who can work around their disability or turn it into a strength.

I only feel disabled by my anxiety and my learning style and by society. Since I am not in school anymore, my learning style is irrelevant now. But I am automatically considered disable by Social Security or otherwise I wouldn't be on it.

Do you think that people who are disabled are not fully realized people and are not productive members of society?

Oh, they are. However, there are many more of them and they work together as a single entity, so we're pretty much screwed unless we can find autistic subcultures in which to live. When we do, though, suddenly many of our "disabilities" merely become differences & some even become traits to be celebrated. Yeah we still have our faults and some things we are really, really bad at doing - but so do NT people. Since they are the standard we are judged against, though, theirs are more easily ignored within mainstream society.

That's not to say that some of our deficient abilities aren't life-hindering, but really so are many of theirs, too - we've just all been taught not to see it that way. There probably is a small portion of humanity that are perfect and perfectly functional, but I have yet to meet them in person.

Depends on how you define being "on the spectrum" and being "disabled". If by being on the spectrum you mean "is diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder" and by disabled you mean "the condition interferes with functioning in some way", than yes, otherwise, probably not.

OP here. I will now share my own thoughts. I am a mild case of Asperger's, though without a doubt on the spectrum and qualitatively different than NTs. I do not feel that "disabled" describes me AT ALL. I have a skewed profile of strengths and weaknesses, but my weaknesses are not disabilities; they are weaknesses. And even if one or more of them were disabilities, I don't think referring to me as a whole as "disabled" would be accurate. For me, "different" is more accurate than "disabled." Obviously what term(s) is most accurate will vary by person.

In my case thier are some things about my autism that is impairing or disabling. But the are a lot of difficulties caused by bieng a small minority ie. disadvantaged or as Dr. Tony Attwood has said Aspies do not suffer from Aspergers but from people.

In order to get an ASD diagnosis it has to be disabling in some way. I for one certainly find it harder to function in every day life because of my conditions and there are a lot of things that are much harder for me then for others so I would indeed consider myself disabled.

The diagnosable part, yes, you have to be. Generally, it means you can't do something a normal person can do [without help and allowances in the best case] in that same situation due to symptoms you have.

I wouldn't call someone with BAP (broader autism phenotype) disabled (nor do they), and this falls on da spectrum.

Last edited by Dillogic on 02 Jun 2016, 2:15 am, edited 1 time in total.

It's a fact for me too, as a clear disability.

BAP does not actually qualify as an ASD. It means that there are symptoms or traits present but not enough to get an ASD diagnosis. If you don't have enough symptoms and traits for a diagnosis, you are not on the Spectrum. And BAP is used to identify existing traits and symptoms in immediate family members of people who are on the Spectrum.

Are there other ways to define these terms?