Published on 12, July, 2020
My council had autism on the application form and didn't specify it had to be a certain level in order to be registered disabled with them.
This site refers to autism as a developmental disability:
www.autism.org.uk/.../what-is-autism
This link regarding discrimination throws autism being classed generally (ie unqualified) as a disability into doubt.
I find this rather confusing:
https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/law-and-courts/discrimination/check-if-youre-protected-from-discrimination/what-counts-as-disability/
'The definition is set out in section 6 of the Equality Act 2010. It says you’re disabled if:
Is it a variable thing then according to what you are trying use the disability definition to achieve?
Is this because we are on a spectrum with varying degrees of functionality?
Joe said:Also Autism is listed under A5 here:
It is thanks, but see A4 above, where it is once again qualified:
A4. Whether a person is disabled for the purposes of the Act is generally determined by reference to the effect that an impairment has on that person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities.
I guess I kind of take it that they mean just having an autism diagnosis isn’t seen as a disability, but if the diagnosis means you have an impairment, then it does.
Thanks.
According to that definition then, I probably wouldn't be classed as disabled as I do those things, but they cause me stress.
It's a very grey area I think.
There are however some things I don't do because they would just be too much.
I think it probably comes down the quote above 'the effect that an impairment has on that person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities'.
With regard to my council providing a disabled person's card for discounts, as we are on a spectrum, I assume it was simpler just to allow all autistic people to have one ie not to make a distinction with regard to impairment.
However, perhaps for something more financially valuable, you would need to show proof of:
'the effect that an impairment has on that person’s ability to carry out normal day-to-day activities'.
Perhaps, by showing receipt of a financial benefit from the government?
Maybe then *we are sometimes classed as disabled and sometimes not (for different purposes).
*Also, is the 'we' here those who have been given a level 1 or a 'high functioning' label?
This is really what I meant about it being political. Governments (national and local) are always looking to save money, so defining as many people as possible as "not disabled" becomes an aim, even if this ends up with inconsistencies in other areas.
Thank you.
I think that's true and is why we are unable to obtain a universal 'official' yes...