Can you identify this article?

[Guest guest]

Dinah Murray is looking to ID this article, anyone know who wrote it or where?

-jypsy

On autistic levels of functioning

We can all agree that to properly fight for our rights as autistic

people, that we have to put forward our own perspective on what

autism is and what it means to be autistic, one that challenges the

notions put forward by the medical establishment. If we instead

accept the medical ideas behind autism then we will end up agreeing,

to a greater or lesser extent, to our continued marginalisation. One

of the most important issues here is about levels of functioning -

low-functioning versus high-functioning, and the related issue of

Aspergers Syndrome versus 'classic' autism. Exploring this topic

shows why it is so important to challenge conventional views of autism.

Conventional thought sees Aspergers Syndrome and 'classic' autism as

related but different things. People with Aspergers are seen as

having many autistic traits, but not the global learning and

communication that people with 'classic' autism have (or rather

supposedly have). In fact, Aspergers is frequently seen as implying

high intelligence. Therefore, conventional thought sees the

possibility that people with Aspergers could in most cases quite

easily become part of society, and indeed may due to their

intelligence and strong interests be particularly useful to society

and develop useful specialist skills. On the other hand, people with

'classic' autism, whether deemed 'high-functioning' or

'low-functioning', are widely seen as being much more disabled, and

having much less potential for independence or contributing to the world.

We'll leave aside the fact that all this stuff about measuring people

in terms of how much they are able to 'contribute' as opposed to 'be

a burden' is in itself deeply prejudiced. Instead, let's concentrate

on the point that these divisions are actually artificial stereotypes

- labels placed on people by the medical establishment to divide

people up into those deemed 'less' or 'more' disabled. In accepting

these, we are going to accept the argument put forward by, for

example, Treating Autism and their allies, who argue that

'high-functioning' autistics and Aspies are not really that disabled

and are therefore not 'really' autistic, as opposed to their

'low-functioning' children, who will need treatment in order to have

a decent life.

In fact, there is no clear division between Aspergers and autism, and

equally no clear division between high and low functioning. Autistics

can be very high-functioning, or very low-functioning, it's true, but

they can be simultaneously high and low functioning in different

ways. There are cases of severely autistic people who have ended up,

for instance, working for a university department ( Baggs now

at MIT on a p/t basis, Dawson on a regular and fully

contributing (but unpaid?) basis, or on the governing board of

organisations (Larry Bisonette at AutCom) demonstrating that the

severity of the autism is not a barrier to being able to participate.

Both individuals, incidentally, are firmly pro-neurodiversity in

their outlook. Undoubtedly, autistic people have differing needs,

with some being unable to talk and look after themselves, and others

having no such difficulties. However, there is no point at which

autism becomes too severe to be included in our movement.

Finally, another issue should also be considered. Of those labelled

'low-functioning' and whose ability to deal with the world appears to

be genuinely compromised, how much of this is due to autism and how

much to the way society reacts to it? If the reaction of society to a

severely autistic person is to write them off and decide they have no

capacity to develop, or worse, to pathologise whatever abilities they

do have, it's very likely the end result will be a psychologically

wrecked human being. We have all seen the pictures of the Romanian

orphanages where unwanted children were dumped by their parents -

some of these children showed clear signs of being deeply disabled,

yet in many cases were only suffering from neglect. In our society,

autistics frequently suffer depression, self-loathing, mental

illness, behaviour problems e.g. aggression, and so on. These are not

part of the autism itself, but the result of society's oppressive and

discriminatory practices towards people on the spectrum. Prof. Rita

Jordan, in a paper published on the AWARES website, argues that

autistics should be said to have an Autistic Spectrum Condition,

irrespective of severity, until they come into contact with a hostile

society, at which point it becomes an Autistic Spectrum Disorder. I

think this may be a much better, more 'liberationist' model to adopt

than that of low and high functioning.

________________________________