Can we please stope saying that autism is not an disability?! This is NOT helping

This is what I think whenever I watch autistic influencers on YouTube or TikTok. As they fluently deliver their anecdotes about their partners and children and travelling the world and speaking at public engagements.

Maybe they struggle in ways I can’t see but their lives look pretty good to me.

I’m sorry but if anything autism law and autism politics seems to have been dominated by those who have extreme support needs and significant cognitive impairments.

this is because historically autistic people haven’t been listened to at all it’s the parents of autistic children that have been listened to.

I would far rather have high functioning autistic people represent the interests of low functioning autistic people than low functioning autistic peoples parents.

The more high achieving autistics have always led the conversation in the Autistic community.  It might just be a difference for them but they should stop thinking of themselves and start thinking of their own community.  They also seem to think that everyone with ASD should be in the workplace. So they're embraced by politcians and business because that's what politicians and business want to hear.

I’ve said it before any superpower you can’t turn off is a disability. Because it makes you unable to fit in with a normal pattern of the world.

having Superman‘s x-ray vision is great. But every time you go on a date your date knows you are literally  un  dressing them with your eyes. Superspeed may be really convenient until your carpet catches fire because you can’t walk into the kitchen at anything less than supersonic speed. Superstrength may seem great until you’re terrified you’re going to rip someone’s hand off every time you try to shake their hand.

superior abilities without superior control can be very inconvenient.

Autism is definitely a disability.

"A disability is any condition of the body or mind (impairment) that makes it more difficult for the person with the condition to do certain activities (activity limitation) and interact with the world around them (participation restrictions)."

Certainly by this definition, and personal experience.

This feels like such a complex and personal debate that I really struggle to know what I think. 

I think I'm starting to think of my autism in a more holistic way. In some senses it very much has been a disability - it has made school, college, conventional working life, and friendships completely erratic and challenging. I dropped out of college twice when I really didn't want to but struggled to deal with the intensity of the experience. Before I realised I was probably autistic this just brought me sadness and confusion. I now understand why it happened. I also understand why I found learning to drive impossibly difficult and still can't, find busy pubs, and shopping centres completely intolerable, and find going out socially immensely challenging to the point the prospect can dominate my life for weeks in advance. 

On the other hand, I really value my ability to be on my own, to be able to read and concentrate on subjects in detail. I like what my wife calls my 'filing cabinet memory'. These things I wouldn't want to be without, and they don't feel like a disability, just a difference.

But yes, I see people online saying that being autistic isn't a disability and I wince a little, not for myself but because of what that must say to parents of children whose autism is obvious and profound and who are struggling. It sometimes seems as if they are placing ASD in the same box as something like introversion or high sensitivity, which can be understood purely as difference. 

My not very well thought out contribution. 

On the whole I agree with you but I do struggle with the word “disabled” simply because I was brought up associating it with people with very visible physical disabilities.

I can get around, feed myself, look after my home etc without assistance from others so I would feel uncomfortable comparing my plight to someone who was paralysed for example.

But the fact remains that autism has ruined my life and makes every single day much harder for me than it needs to be. 

I agree with you, people should not try to dictate whether someone should be 'disabled' or not. I also think that a lot of the problem is lack of knowledge, most of these people possibly don't know what the definition of 'disabled' actually is and are therefore misunderstanding the situation, sadly they tend to be overly vocal in their ignorance. I like your term "TikTok autistics"

One thing that I think is sometimes overlooked with regard to accommodating autism, is that sensitivities can include being under sensitive.

My mother enjoyed and needed noise, and as she was up until around 3am every day, there was never any peace at home (in more ways than one).

How do you accommodate people who need noise and those who don't in society, all at once?

https://www.autism.org.uk/advice-and-guidance/topics/sensory-differences/sensory-differences/all-audiences

Obviously this can be applied to all the sensitivities.

completely with you on the dogs, maybe just ban them too (sorry for having an unpopular point of view for all the dog lovers out there!)

Social model of disability has its place. In a world where eye contact is not required my inability to do so is no longer disabling. A wheelchair users ability to do things is greatly increased if society is completely step free. Where everyone uses sign language, being deaf has much less impact. 

However I agree there are aspects of my autism that do not fit this model. For me it is my lack of introception. I can not remember when to eat or drink, whether I need the toilet, if I am too hot or too cold, and my pain response is off. This is disabling whether I'm in my own accessible home, or out and about in public. No manner of public accommodations could fix this. 

So the social model of disability exists, but it is not all encompassing and as someone else has pointed out, the needs of different disabled people quite quickly disadvantage each other. So I'd argue that adaptability is more likely to be the main need of society to accommodate disabilities. 

I suspect that if autistic communication difficulties were catered for, a fully functioning world would still exist. Sensory problems might be more constraining, admittedly.

Martin said:

n a world that banned synthetic fibres, blancmange-like textured food, reliance on non-verbal communication, loud music in social spaces for no good reason, and that allowed written communication for everything, I would not be disabled. If all dogs were too small to pose a threat and were incapable of barking, that would be a bonus.

What we need now is for each of us to write a list, as you have, of what bothers/pains/agonises/disables us then extract all those things from life.

I wonder how much would be left... 

ps.  I like blancmange but not how I pronounce it in my head ie. blank mange.

I think that the 'social theory of disability' has some merit. In a world perfectly designed for me I would not be disadvantaged or disabled in any way. In a world that banned synthetic fibres, blancmange-like textured food, reliance on non-verbal communication, loud music in social spaces for no good reason, and that allowed written communication for everything, I would not be disabled. If all dogs were too small to pose a threat and were incapable of barking, that would be a bonus.

Number said:

those who evangelise

Sadly, nothing has given evangelists a better voice than social media.

i dunno, i see all the bad stuff as not my fault but others fault though.

but as for dogs, im not sure if dogs can read body language or vocal ques. especially the small angry dogs, they dont understand when to feck off and when they are forcing me to have to give them the boot.

I think that those who evangelise for the "it is indefatigably a disability to be autistic" are equal and opposite to those who say "it is indefatigably a superpower to be autistic" in their mistakenness on these matters.

With such a sweeping and diverse range of "consequences" of being autistic, tribal generalisations are doomed to failure.

Goading people into making a binary choice of allegiance, on non-binary matters, is not helpful nor useful.........in my opinion.

I agree with it being a disability.

My life would have been very different I reckon if I weren't autistic.

There are also people who wouldn't be classed as 'high functioning' and those people are pretty disabled by the autism.

There was a trend years ago to use the term 'differently abled' (no idea if it's still in use) and this is taking a positive stance.

I'm happy myself for this to be an individual thing but the trouble is that with the internet, if people actually follow social media, it does have a huge influence and these stances could be quite triggering for those who feel very negatively affected by their autism.

In the end, I think the most important thing is to recognise our autism and how it affects us and make the best life we can for ourselves with it.

If we got rid of the 'disability' classification, accommodations and financial benefits would disappear with it, as would general (including people we are close to) recognition of how it does 'detrimentally' affect us.

For me it's  certainly a disability , as  much as the schizoaffective/schizophrenia diagnosis I also have.  I don't understand, and doubt I ever will , those who seek a diagnosis then when they get it deny that they have a disability.  Perhaps they see it as a fashionable/trendy label to have.