Does high intelligence necessarily mean high functioning?

I was diagnosed very recently and apparently DSMV doesnt use low and high functioning any more - they say you're either level 1 (needs support), level 2 ( needs substantial support) or level 3( needs very substantial support). That makes more sense to me. 

High functioning never really made sense to me either. In my case would that be describing tne person who (just about) manages to hold down a professional job. Or would that be the person who is then so tired they need to sleep most of the weekend, that is completely bewildered by the local shop changing the till layout, has put up with a loo seat that falls off for more than a year because they cant quite get it together to sort a new one (true story!). The person that cant sleep without their childhood teddy bear at the age of 40 something, or like you, descends into total chaos without someone else to clean the house!

I was diagnosed before the new criteria came in. I've always been puzzled too - I certainly wouldn't describe my autism as 'mild' by any stretch of the imagination but I'm bright so I'm able to work in environments like universities or tech where having high-level skills just about compensates (sometimes) for not having basic employability skills. I kind of jump from log to log, work freelance or part-time if I can, cope somehow. I've thus always seen it as a balance between the severity of the autism and the ability to acquire saleable skills - and so keep a roof over one's own head - however stressful and unstable this process might be. When I was first assessed as a kid, I seem to remember the difference was that HFAs had language delay whilst aspies didn't (I had language delay) but the assessment wasn't completed. When I was formally diagnosed the distinction seemed to be between aspergers (can look after themselves) and autism (can't look after themselves). They told me recently that now I'd be diagnosed as AS without learning difficulties, nothing about a scale marked by numbers. I find it mildly humourous if they've changed the criteria so that everyone is seen as needing support - given than few autism services are ever likely to give 'high functioning' people much support :D  But I gather that needing support is now a diagnostic criterion for AS of any kind.

I was diagnosed before the new criteria came in. I've always been puzzled too - I certainly wouldn't describe my autism as 'mild' by any stretch of the imagination but I'm bright so I'm able to work in environments like universities or tech where having high-level skills just about compensates (sometimes) for not having basic employability skills. I kind of jump from log to log, work freelance or part-time if I can, cope somehow. I've thus always seen it as a balance between the severity of the autism and the ability to acquire saleable skills - and so keep a roof over one's own head - however stressful and unstable this process might be. When I was first assessed as a kid, I seem to remember the difference was that HFAs had language delay whilst aspies didn't (I had language delay) but the assessment wasn't completed. When I was formally diagnosed the distinction seemed to be between aspergers (can look after themselves) and autism (can't look after themselves). They told me recently that now I'd be diagnosed as AS without learning difficulties, nothing about a scale marked by numbers. I find it mildly humourous if they've changed the criteria so that everyone is seen as needing support - given than few autism services are ever likely to give 'high functioning' people much support :D  But I gather that needing support is now a diagnostic criterion for AS of any kind.