What are your controversial opinions regarding the autism spectrum?

[LearnedCoward]

I did not mean they are covered

Yes you did. You literally did. You said:

Your disability benefits should cover the cost.

You didn't say he'd be able to afford them on benefits, you said his benefits should cover the cost.

I'll bet they do not baulk at the idea of pulling out a fortune for the latest tv

Even if this were remotely true and not an obvious strawman, intra canal hearing aids cost way more than any TV.

A member of the general public, faced with a salesperson wearing a hearing aid, will not know whether they should speak up or shout

Really? What planet are they from where they have no idea how to act around someone who wears a hearing aid? Wherever it is, they should probably go back there and never come out again, because the world is too strange and confusing for them.

And in case you're one of those people, you never raise your voice or shout at a deaf or hard of hearing person. You talk normally, if a bit more clearly, and if they're totally deaf you make sure they can read your lips.

And I can't believe I'm actually saying this, but many people who wear hearing aids can hear just fine with the hearing aids in. Y'know, because the hearing aids work.

In fact they should be fined for wasting the time of others when they could be looking for work in more suitable areas.

You don't like disabled people on benefits, you don't like them looking for work, so what should we do?

 

[Mary Lyn]

Yes you did. You literally did. You said:

UK v US misiunderstanding. I meant pay the cost. You do not get expensive hearing aids paid by the gov here.

Even if this were remotely true and not an obvious strawman, intra canal hearing aids cost way more than any TV.

I doubt that is true for every type.

Really? What planet are they from where they have no idea how to act around someone who wears a hearing aid?

I remember reading that it is common.

You don't like disabled people on benefits, you don't like them looking for work, so what should we do?

I am disabled. I would not apply for unsuitable work.

 

[Tom]

While NTs come from Apes, evolutionarily speaking, ASD people occurred when dolphins mated with breadfruit.

 

[Mary Anne]

Controversial opinion number one: it doesn't exist. The 'spectrum' that is. You either have autism or Asperger's Syndrome, or you do not.
Controversial opinion number two: Asperger's Syndrome is NOT a form of autism! I've known people with what is described as being autism, even the so-called mild versions of it, and I can safely say that I do NOT have what they have. I did not have any speech delays when I was young, am not mentally challenged, do not have catastrophic meltdowns, and do not 'stim'. Sure, there are some similarities between the two conditions, but the differences mean that I should not be lumped in with people who have autism. That's just a mistake, a rather stupid one at that.

Curious then as to how you view yourself now that aspergers has been completely absorbed into the “autism spectrum” in the 2 world’s diagnostic manuals? The DSM-5 and the ICD-10.

 

[Mary Anne]

My opinion that is controversial, among mostly NTs at least, is that we should be called "autistic" and not "person with autism". I really hate it. When someone has cancer, people say they have cancer because it is an actual disease, which autism is not. They don't say "person with cancerism".

We who work in the social and mental health services - at least in the USA- are required to use “person first language.” We MUST describe clients as “people having autism,” and will be sharply remanded if we called them “an autistic person.” And yes, we say “person with cancer.” Because we as humans are so much MORE than our illness, disabilities, or neurodiversities. Hence, you are a person first, with autism second. Other examples are a “person suffering from blindness” (not “a blind person”), or a person who suffers with schizophrenia (not “a schizophrenic”).

 

[Mr Allen]

I did not mean they are covered - they have to be bought but someone on disability benefits should be able to afford them. I'll bet they do not baulk at the idea of pulling out a fortune for the latest tv. I say this as someone who was recently on disability benefits in the UK.

Afraid you are being unrealistic. A member of the general public, faced with a salesperson wearing a hearing aid, will not know whether they should speak up or shout and they will certainly not want their requests to be broadcast around the shop floor.

It is all about profit and sales, and the retail shop floor is not a place where anyone with communication problems, obvious disabilities and social dysfunction belongs.

In fact they should be fined for wasting the time of others when they could be looking for work in more suitable areas.

Discriminate much? Meh, I've worked on the "shop floor" of nearly every Charity shop in Sheffield since about May 1995 so just over 23 years.

 

[Mary Lyn]

@Mr Allen

They are not retail shop floors, big difference.

 

[Mr Allen]

@Mr Allen

They are not retail shop floors, big difference.

Meh, they are retail shops, they have floors, what's the difference? Oh yeah, the workers (apart from upper management) work for free!

 

[Mary Lyn]

@Mr Allen
They are about raising money for charities and are not about competition. Just because they take someone on as a voluntary worker does not mean that the volunteer will autimatically be able to find work in commercial retail.

 

[GrownupGirl]

We who work in the social and mental health services - at least in the USA- are required to use “person first language.” We MUST describe clients as “people having autism,” and will be sharply remanded if we called them “an autistic person.” And yes, we say “person with cancer.” Because we as humans are so much MORE than our illness, disabilities, or neurodiversities. Hence, you are a person first, with autism second. Other examples are a “person suffering from blindness” (not “a blind person”), or a person who suffers with schizophrenia (not “a schizophrenic”).

Just because you are told to use first-person language for autistic people doesn't mean it's right. If any of these people used first person language on me I would tell them not to.

 

[Tesseract]

Curious then as to how you view yourself now that aspergers has been completely absorbed into the “autism spectrum” in the 2 world’s diagnostic manuals? The DSM-5 and the ICD-10.

I don't have autism. That's just a fact, and I don't care what some silly 'diagnostic manual' has to say about it.

 

[NothingToSeeHere]

• Person first language annoys me, autism isn't something I 'have' like I 'have' a mental illness, it's a fundamental part of who I am. I suspect that person first language was invented by the sort of "autism mums" who like to pretend that they can "hate autism but love their child" as if they're two separate entities.
• ASD isn't really a spectrum, it's a bunch of different 'disorders' all stuck under the same label because it makes diagnoses easier.

 

[NothingToSeeHere]

We who work in the social and mental health services - at least in the USA- are required to use “person first language.” We MUST describe clients as “people having autism,” and will be sharply remanded if we called them “an autistic person.” And yes, we say “person with cancer.” Because we as humans are so much MORE than our illness, disabilities, or neurodiversities. Hence, you are a person first, with autism second. Other examples are a “person suffering from blindness” (not “a blind person”), or a person who suffers with schizophrenia (not “a schizophrenic”).

My blind cousin would not hesitate to correct you if you called her a "person suffering from blindness", because (and I quote) "I'm not suffering, I'm just blind. It's not a disease!"

 

[LearnedCoward]

My blind cousin would not hesitate to correct you if you called her a "person suffering from blindness", because (and I quote) "I'm not suffering, I'm just blind. It's not a disease!"

I agree. "Person suffering from blindness" sounds condescending, because you're assuming someone is suffering simply because they can't see. "Person with blindness" tortures language about as much as calling a person with cancer "cancerous", so I just go on a case by case basis.

I alternately say I have autism, or I'm autistic. I dislike being called a "person with autism" or (gah!) a "person suffering from autism". It's just my personal preference. Likewise, if someone wants to be called a person with blindness, or a person with left-handedness, or a person with homosexuality, or cancerous, I will respect their wishes no matter how weird it sounds to me.

 

[BrokenBoy]

"Autism is neither a gift or blessing, it is an awful, horrible curse."

- Me

 

[Tesseract]

ASD isn't really a spectrum, it's a bunch of different 'disorders' all stuck under the same label because it makes diagnoses easier.

Exactly. If something like this truly were a so-called spectrum, then anyone who had any of the 'symptoms' could say, "Hey, I've got it too, because I also tend to interpret language literally. Plus, I can't read body language". I actually know someone like that. I've told her, "No, you don't have it", because her "people skills" are far beyond what I could ever hope to achieve.

 

[Tesseract]

"Autism is neither a gift or blessing, it is an awful, horrible curse." - Me

Me too. If this is a gift, then is there some way that I can pass it on to someone else? I'm sure they would be grateful (not).

 

[BrokenBoy]

Me too. If this is a gift, then is there some way that I can pass it on to someone else? I'm sure they would be grateful (not).

Glad to finally meet someone who agrees!

 

[Alison_K]

Controversial opinion number two: Asperger's Syndrome is NOT a form of autism! I've known people with what is described as being autism, even the so-called mild versions of it, and I can safely say that I do NOT have what they have. I did not have any speech delays when I was young, am not mentally challenged, do not have catastrophic meltdowns, and do not 'stim'. Sure, there are some similarities between the two conditions, but the differences mean that I should not be lumped in with people who have autism. That's just a mistake, a rather stupid one at that.

I agree.
I'm new here and reading this thread is very interesting. I'm a bit scared to write in case I offend someone because there seems to be lots of people getting offended by the language others use.
I have been identified Aspergers but i don't see how on earth that could mean i am autistic. I'm not autistic. Unless I don't fully understand what autistic means.
I have anxiety, especially in social situations, I get obsessed with stuff etc, but I'm not THAT different from a neurotypical person, i don't think.
I'm still trying to work it all out

 

[DCA]

I agree.
I'm new here and reading this thread is very interesting. I'm a bit scared to write in case I offend someone because there seems to be lots of people getting offended by the language others use.
I have been identified Aspergers but i don't see how on earth that could mean i am autistic. I'm not autistic. Unless I don't fully understand what autistic means.
I have anxiety, especially in social situations, I get obsessed with stuff etc, but I'm not THAT different from a neurotypical person, i don't think.
I'm still trying to work it all out

I think the biggest take-away I've learned from this forum is that anyone & everyone who is on the spectrum is different, both in how they present their symptoms & how much those symptoms impact them. I think based on your description you are probably very high functioning & don't require much -- if any -- additional support.