AIBU to ask why ADHD and autism are dismissed as disabilities?

It is true.Under both UK law (e.g., the Equality Act) and global medical guidelines, autism is recognized as a disability. To get a diagnosis it needs to have a substantial and long term negative effect on day to day life.

And the massive in between who still need support?

ADHD / ASD can be under diagnosed but over-PIP’d. If your ASD leaves you non-verbal, incontinent, need permanent carers etc then yes, PIP’s needed. If like my child you go through clothes a lot quicker because sensory issues (keeps changing their mind about what is and isn’t acceptable) and diet is extremely limited, suck it up. Life can be hard. You don’t need to be compensated to the last penny for any form of hardship. I’d far, far prefer more of my taxes went to help the former in my example and not the latter. Benefits money is limited. We need to prioritise.

Yes I know I read somewhere that life expectancy for people with Down syndrome has risen a lot so it would make sense that the same was true for other disabilities. Also I always had the impression that many people with PMLD had conditions caused by very premature birth and things like hypoxic brain injuries at birth which babies are more likely to survive now due to advances in neonatal care?

Anyone terminal, with less than a certain time to live (as consultant diagnosed) is entitled to fast track PIP/DLA/other benefits (depending on age).

Rightly

. https://www.gov.uk/government/news/fast-tracked-access-to-benefits-for-people-with-terminal-illness-expanded

Thank you, it was, but I've often thought of it, and other incidents like it and realised just how vulnerable these types of children are. We are seeing more and more of them, particularly in special schools where this profile and also PMLD is rising. I often wonder if a lot of these children are simply surviving childhood in a way they probably wouldn't have done a generation ago.

@StartingFreshFor2026 That must have been terrifying! 💐

@Sweepyed yes, this link shows just how much childhood deaths by accidents have fallen since 1980, I would bet it went down massively from 1960 to 1980 too:
https://www.gosh.nhs.uk/press-releases/overall-child-deaths-due-injuries-are-down-uk/

My children are cognitively disabled in addition to their autism and extremely impulsive ADHD. In 1960 it would have only taken one bad judgment from a parent or institutional carer to be exhausted and think "I'll let one of the older, more able kids watch them for a moment while I make a cup of tea", and they'd have been out a window, onto a road. At least where I live now, there's a lot of judgment if parents aren't constantly supervising neurotypical kids let alone severely disabled ones. I know parents who follow their (relatively lower risk, but severely disabled) children around their safe houses constantly. I can't imagine institutions back in the 60s had 1:1 or 2:1 staffing like some of these children get in their special schools today.

Another thing I've noticed is that my kids appear to have no basic survival instincts either?? I don't know if that is a thing. Like, one went off the ridge into the deep end of a pool once and lucky I was right there because he didn't even try to swim. It spooked me a bit because I'd have thought all animals had some kind of instinct. He clamped his arms to his sides immediately just went under without moving!

@StartingFreshFor2026 yes ive been thinking that re accidents that adhd children would have had previously so fewer would have survived to reproduce.
My dc were hectic like that.

i do think it is why its important for older - under 40 women and under 55 men to be referred for asd and adhd assessments to at least understand if they have these to make decisions on number of kids.

For eg if dp sister had been diagnosed adhd we may have reconsidered dc2 when dc1 was sooo difficult a baby and toddler. However adhd people are obviously more likely to make decisions the rest of us may consider unwise. (As other relative has adhd with dc1 awaiting diagnosis of asd and adhd and has still chosen to have dc2. And possibly the benefits , bigger house etc. But their dc1 isnt actually that tricky (compared to either of mine..)
i wouldnt have dc3 if i were paid 1mil. Mainly because of crap nhs birth/care for kids but also issues at school. I would say i have ptsd from dealing with nhs for the kids.

i think its a lot more common now for people to not really know what other peoples kids are like. Or what normal is.

Having lots of (nd) kids is harder than working which is why lots are choosing to have fewer or no kids.

That's just not true. It's not how the definition of disability works in the UK. Under the Equality Act, someone is only classed as having a protected disability if their condition has a substantial and long term negative effect on their day to day life. Autism is not an automatic disability just because someone has the diagnosis. The law looks at how the condition actually impacts that specific person in real life which varies a lot from person to person. Autistic people will generally have some degree of differences in social communication and sensory processing, but they do not always cause a substantial disadvantage.
So having an autism diagnosis does not automatically mean someone hits the legal threshold for disability. There are only a few conditions which work differently where the law grants automatic protection from the moment of diagnosis, such as MS, cancer, and HIV. For everything else, including autism, the impact on daily life must be looked at on an individual basis. Autism has a very wide variance in severity and impact just like most other conditions do.

I think if there is a legitimate reason you are allowed to positively discriminate otherwise wouldn't disability benefits technically be discrimination (because they are discriminating against non-disabled people). Applying blanket rules which prohibit people with certain disabilities applying probably would be discrimination that wasn't allowed though.

As a side note, I thought people with a terminal illness were automatically eligible for certain benefits and got them expedited? I'm sure it says this on children's DLA forms.

I am childless for much the same reason - can barely look after myself. As I've said before, the thought of having kids just makes me want to have a nap.

But this bit:

"I've been unable to cook a meal in this hmo for the past decade due to anxiety and abusive twat of a housemate"

just makes me despair. An entire decade? It's exactly this kind of nonsense that makes it extremely hard for others to sympathise.

My best friend/housemate has free flowing anxiety and I try to support her at all times, but there has to be a limit or she becomes unbearably entitled and I become her unpaid slave/support animal.

Me, too! X

This. Disability or not, people should only have children if they are fully capable of looking after them.

I know that things can happen after actually having children, but the OP seems to have just batted on having children, despite the impact on those children. 🤷‍♀️

That would be discrimination. Why should someone with a non terminal illness be granted pip on the basis of diagnosis but others have to prove needs because their diagnosis isn't ring fenced?

People only see the slightly unusual, slight weird autistic variety. They don't see the more severe who tend to be forgotten
Absolutely! I worked with autistic children in the 90s when 'autism' was a newer diagnosis. These were children severely impacted by it. No way they could have gone to a standard school. These were children who needed 1:1 care 24h a day.

Yet the parents of these children seem much less vocal and expecting sympathy than parents of autistic kids who manage school, activities, friendships, but just find it a bit harder than average Jo.

My previous post was in answer to this.

How?

The sections don’t match up to ADHD traits and you are not privy to the private intimate details of 14 page assessments.

You’re not going to be given a car if you’re anxious and sometimes struggle to leave the house.

Loving the way you think we should believe you know the private details of very lengthy and detailed 14 page forms belonging to other people.

People only see the slightly unusual, slight weird autistic variety. They don't see the more severe who tend to be forgotten.

Its mind blowing that you've had i presume a minimum of 5 children knowing how your autism affects you.

It makes me wonder what my children should be called, 'extreme'?

One of my DC isn't actually as severely impacted as the other, but many Mumsnet posters would not recognise his kind of autism - limited language, very unusual mannerisms, very frequent self injurious behaviour etc etc etc. I understand some people have started calling for a separate 'profound' category, but he wouldn't even fit in that, even though he's closer to profound than the people who can get married and have kids, so what does that make him? A freak? Not really autistic?

People constantly say that you don’t PIP for ADHD yet many of us know people who do get it for that or maybe it’s their anxiety on top? Whatever it is seemingly people see other people who live as well as any of us, can go on holiday, have children etc yet they get higher rate and all that goes with that yet others who are physically disabled don’t, it’s madness. If you’re anxious and sometimes struggle to leave the house you shouldn’t be given a car!

There is a difference between 'significant' and 'severe' impairment. I know it's a bit semantic but I do wish people would stop using the word 'severe' for this kind of thing
Agree 💯. It's an aspect of this generation to dramatise everything with language. Whilst some words are now forbidden and can only be used with **, others have become normalised such as 'severe', 'significant', 'traumatic', 'extensive' etc...making the threshold very narrow.

It’s not eugenics / Nazi to suggest that someone who struggles as much as OP with normal life would have been better off not having at least 5 children.