Explain to me why you offence is caused by saying things like 'mildly autistic' etc.

[Purpleturtle45]

If ASD is a spectrum why do people commonly disagree that you can be mildly autistic or severely autistic etc.

My daughter is diagnosed with ASD, however you wouldn't really know unless you knew her well. She goes to mainstream school and copes well with everyday life most of the time so to me I would say she is mildly autistic but I often see people getting ripped to shreds on here for using that term.

Genuinely wondering how 'spectrum' can literally be in the title of the condition but people disagree there can be different severities.

I find it interesting that everyone knew what was meant when there was still the Asperger’s diagnosis as a subsection of autism but now it’s been removed (mainly due to Asperger’s Nazi associations) we can no longer differentiate incase some people feel their experience is invalidated.

I volunteer at an activity where children are dropped off. We recently had 3 new children starting who's parents all stated that they had autism but no other details as to this on their health information form.
On the first night it turned out that 1 was non verbal and required constant supervision. We have had to put various protocols in place for this child like making sure there is no access to choke hazards and doors are secured at all times and we now have 1 volunteer who is assigned to constantly supervise that child every week. Meanwhile the other 2 have so far never needed any additional support or accommodations to the rest of the group so far. If descriptors such as mild or profound autism had been able to be used we would have had a much better idea of the likely abilities of the children coming and could have prepared a bit better.

If descriptors such as mild or profound autism had been able to be used we would have had a much better idea of the likely abilities of the children coming and could have prepared a bit better.

They’d help @Thetreeisdownnow, but what you really need too is to be told what specific supports an individual child needs.

My DC has the Asperger’s type of autism. He’s older now but at activities like you describe he would also have needed lots of support due to high anxiety (though this could vary). He’d absolutely have been a flight risk and would have needed constant supervision as a result. (He still does!) Fluent speech usually but mute due to stress in certain situations.

What I’m trying to say is that having ‘Asperger’s’ or similar on a form will only get you so far.

if you can, I’d amend your health information form to allow more detailed information about support needs to be included. (And then be sure to read it 😉 You’d be surprised by how many of these forms are collected and never read! Sorry, but bitter experience and not just regarding my autistic child!)

People like Einstein, Mozart, Bill Gates and Elon Musk are autistic. Not just a bit, but totally. You see it at first glance, there is no hiding it. It shapes all aspects of their lives

Curious how you, or anyone else alive can possibly see anything at first glance about Mozart, being that he's been dead and in the ground for the past 235 years. 😛

"The criteria were widened, to include milder presentations."

Exactly 💯

Mildly presenting is not the same as being mildly affected.

I think comparing autism to cancer is a misleading analogy. Cancer is a disease that progresses in stages and can change over time with treatment. People can move up or down in stages depending on how their body responds. Autism doesn’t work like that at all. It’s a neurodevelopmental condition, not an illness with stages of progression or recovery. You don’t “move along” the autism spectrum in the same way you move through cancer stages.

using cancer as a comparison doesn’t just stretch the analogy, it actually risks reinforcing the wrong idea that autism is a disease that progresses or can be cured, which isn’t accurate.

It works because like autism cancer is not one condition - it is a whole number of different conditions with a specific feature in common.

By that logic, you could compare the autism spectrum to almost any disease, which shows why bringing cancer into it doesn’t actually add anything useful to the argument. Cancer isn’t uniquely comparable to autism, its just being used as a dramatic example, and that ends up confusing the issue rather than clarifying it.

No not to any disease - the point is cancer is not a single disease but a whole range of different diseases with a feature in common. So too are there a range of different conditions that have one symptom on common - autism.

If it helps I think it more like 'rash'. i think autism describes a set of symptoms not a cause. One day I suspect we will find different causes that result in autism and even find out which causes have better or worse outcomes.

I think we at the stage of noticing measles, chicken pox, scarlet fever and allergies and all cause a rash but not knowing any more than thst other than thinking that rash looks worse.

I know these are all different diseases and the rashes present different but to me thats what autism looks like all different things that lead to all different social communication, interaction needs plus restricted repetitive behaviour.

Cancer progresses and spreads though. The various sorts of autism are not diseases like the different sorts of cancer.

I agree with pp about the dangers of using the word ‘mild’ especially if politicians use it.

I do think ‘Asperger’s Syndrome’ was taken perfectly seriously however as requiring special accomodations, and think it is a pity it has become a cancelled word.
The current extreme of presenting all autism as being the same will unfortunately eventually lead to extreme reactions dismissing this.

That is why it is only an analogy

A very weak analogy which has potential to frustrate cancer victims.

I think we should bring back Asperger's syndrome, and just rename it to avoid the association with Hans Asperger. It seems like it would benefit everyone.

I absolutely agree with this. It would be much easier for everyone.

Widening the diagnostic criteria has helped a huge number of girls and women to finally have their difficulties recognised and understood better. Before now, many were misdiagnosed with GAD and eating disorders, which never really got to the bottom of why they were struggling so badly with their mental health - to the point where, undiagnosed, they're actually around 20 times more likely than their neurotypical peers to either attempt to or succeed in taking their own lives. Like many other aspects of healthcare, the female presentation was largely overlooked. Women and girls tend to internalise until they break.

Caring for a 'high functioning' (sorry) child in burnout is every bit as heartbreakingly debilitating as caring for a 'severely autistic' child. What differs is that the former is generally transient in nature requiring a lengthy period of recovery following nervous system collapse, whereas the latter is ever-present with no respite. The former is now a recognised presentation that enables better management/ support if diagnosed early enough.

As the parent of an adult child with what you would call 'mild' autism I'd say that it is only 'mild' to the observer.
I'm sick of those dealing with different presentations of autism frankly belittling how difficult life is for my adult child.
I'd counter argue that it is easier with 'severe' autism because the expectations of the individual to behave 'normally' are so much less.

What an ignorant comment.

It is ignorant, that is exactly the point.

There seems to be continual argument about severe and mild autism with the underlying implication that those with mild autism are not 'deserving' of the diagnosis.

Perhaps I am battle weary from fighting for my child throughout childhood. He isn't a bit 'quirky'. He has/had severe problems but would present 'mildly' to a lot of people. It completely undermines what we all went through as a family - especially him.

It's also ignorant to suggest that those of us who talk have it mildly

I am glad my DC hasn’t more severe problems even though I agree with pp that sometimes (often?) people underestimate the difficulties associated with the Asperger's type of autism. DC is unlikely to ever be able to live independently even though his speech and iq are not affected. He has gone through some horrific periods and every day is difficult for him.

You can be grateful and heartbroken at the same time I’ve found.

I'm sorry, but I don't agree. I have mild/high functioning/ whatever you want to call it autism. I've had difficulties, including having to be home educated because I couldn't handle secondary school. But my difficulties are nothing compared to those of severely autistic people and their families. My best friend has a severely autistic child, and I wouldn't dream of pretending that my issues are anywhere near as serious as hers. She's in a few support groups and Facebook groups for autism, and she's had plenty of people who are autistic (or whose children are) but are able to do things like work, live independently, marry, have children, claim that they have things just as hard as her daughter.
My friend’s daughter will never be able to do any of those things. She'll need someone to look after her, 24 hours a day, every single day for the rest of her life. She cannot speak, do even basic self care, toilet herself.
Mild doesn't mean no issues, it means mild in comparison with severe. Distinguishing between severities isn't about insulting those of us with lower support needs. We need to do it to ensure that people who literally cannot survive without 24 hour care aren't ignored. Not everything is about us, and that's ok!

Being able to talk does mean you are more mildly affected than someone who can't talk. I think as others have said we really need to bring back Aspergers or something similar. Or some other way of distinguishing.