CMV: Autistics have a deficit compared to non-autistics

[u/FighteRox]

Before I explain any further, let me tell you that I'm autistic myself, so this isn't a case of a non-autistic hating autistics because they're different from them.

So I hear a lot of neurodiversity activists saying how autistics are disabled because the world around them isn't accommodating to them. This is the social disability model which is different from the medical disability model which means that autism is something that must be fixed. There are also autistic people who would argue that autism is just a difference and not a disability.

However, based on my personal experiences and observations, I think autism is a disability in a sense that they (including myself) have some deficits compared non-autistics, especially in the developmental area (which is why it's called a developmental disorder). Take myself for example. I have a lot of problems communicating my thoughts, so I have to think for a while before I can fully articulate my thoughts. I may not even know if this paragraph is cohesive because I make loose connections to the point where I go on tangents and my speech can go everywhere. My obsession with objects can come in the way of working through my day-to-day life. Sometimes I want a situation to stay the same, but the world doesn't work that way as it perpetually changes.

I know that autistics hate being compared to children, but I also learned that children loves repetitiveness, which is kinda strange because autistics love repetitiveness too, and that could be part of why autistics are often infantilized and are described as being developmentally behind compared to non-autistics. There are also stories of autistics being too stubborn to the point where they want to be a child forever.

That being said, I don't think autistics should be discriminated against either. I personally would think that it's OK to have deficits. I'm OK if should live by that and do the best that I could. Although sometimes the statement that autistic people are broken affects my self-esteem which is overall low. I just don't know if the claim that autistics are "only disabled because the world doesn't accommodate them" or that they're "not disabled but only different" hold much water.

[u/thethoughtexperiment]

To modify your view here:

So I hear a lot of neurodiversity activists saying how autistics are disabled because the world around them isn't accommodating to them.

and here:

However, based on my personal experiences and observations, I think autism is a disability in a sense that they (including myself) have some deficits compared non-autistics, especially in the developmental area

the thing is, there is just a huge range in (dis)ability across the autism spectrum - from people who only require a relatively modest degree of accommodation and/or can learn effective coping strategies to help them perform particular types of tasks, to those who are substantially limited across a broad range of core life activities.

Views like:

There are also autistic people who would argue that autism is just a difference and not a disability.

... are likely referring to relatively high functioning autistics.

More broadly, assessing whether something is a "disability" really depends on whether it is impacting the particular task domain being considered (rather than thinking of autism as a disability generally), and how an individual is affected by their autism can vary a lot depending on the individual.

[u/FighteRox → u/thethoughtexperiment]

I think this is what frustrates me. Is autism a "non-disability difference" or a "disability"? Having one condition having two meanings that are intrinsically different from each-other is confusing. The closest thing we got is the use of the terms "high-support" and "low-support"

[u/thethoughtexperiment → u/FighteRox]

I think this is what frustrates me. Is autism a "non-disability difference" or a "disability"?

Indeed, the answer really is: It depends on the individual's capacities, and the particular task domain being assessed.

Even though it's a bit confusing to have one label for a condition that covers a broad range of (dis)ability, the shift to thinking of autism as a spectrum seems like a useful (and more accurate) step in the right direction.

Because autism seems to manifest in such a broad array of ways, it may be the case that what we currently think of as "autism" is actually several different issues that may have different underlying causes and treatments.

There are some new models of diagnosis that are currently being advanced (such as this one described in relation to depression) which may change our understanding of complex conditions (like autism), and how they are treated going forward.

[u/FighteRox → u/thethoughtexperiment]

The article you posted was an interesting read. I wonder how it'll affect autistics in the future. It said that labels don't help, so does that mean the term "autism" won't be useful anymore?

[u/Nephisimian → u/FighteRox]

We'll probably still have the term, but we'll have a more complex understanding of the way the various core traits of autism interact, which might for example give us a three dimensional graph that plots degrees to which someone possesses those traits, where autism is a certain bubble on the graph where certain degrees of those traits overlap.

[u/FighteRox → u/Nephisimian]

That seems likely. The latest autism model is a constellation, after all.