Published on 12, July, 2020
In England, under English Law (Mental Health Capacity Act, Vunerable Adults Act, Disability Discrimination Act, Equalities Act, Autism Act, etc), are adults with an ASD considered to be disabled, mentally disabled, vulnerable adults, or similar?
And if so, what are the legal rights of such ASD suffers, what are they entitled to that differ from a non-ASD person, so on and so forth, etc?
(I have Asperger Syndrome and suffer badly from depression, anxiety, paranoia, fear for the future, difficulty coping with change, etc. So I am wondering whether I am considered as having a disablity, a mental disability, and/or considered a vulnerable adult.)
I am Autistic- adhd and have just passed my 2nd year (PgDip) in Autism with SHU.All autistic people are 100% autistic. Like being pregnant, just because one pregnant human may appear more pregnant than another pregnant human doesn’t make you more pregnant - you either are or you’re not.
IMO- as for suffering - it’s not the autism that we suffer but the anxiety triggered by an ever unpredictable and ill accommodating world- that’s not to say no autistic people suffer but don’t all humans, creatures suffer at some point in their life? I can be seen to be coping one day when actually I am drowning it’s just I am so good at masking my struggles due to being conditioned not to share my feelings because they bring discomfort/inconvenience to those around me. Yes I have the intelligence to create those masks but the masks lead to much harm and are so deeply ingrained that my needs go unmet yet the expectations remain.
Then there’s those who appear more autistic because of differences in intellectual, mental and physical abilities who struggle to be heard, seen and respected because their worth is decided by how they present and their ability to contribute to what society expects. Either way we all suffer, but it’s not the fault of the autism but the expectations of society and the infrastructure/environment which includes the people within it.
I prefer to use the term ‘autistic brain’ than ‘autistic person’ - it seems to simplify and reduce thing being personal.
what I’m trying to say is comparing suffering is of no ise, just meeting need on a case by case, unique individual basis is best imo.
NAS81689 said:All autistic people are 100% autistic. Like being pregnant, just because one pregnant human may appear more pregnant than another pregnant human doesn’t make you more pregnant - you either are or you’re not.
That is very debatable. There is mounting evidence that autism as a phenotype, is produced genetically in two distinct ways, though there are people with a mixture of the two. 1) A small number of relatively large genetic variations associated with genes encoding various neurological and neurodevelopmental pathways. These tend to be relatively rare and are often associated with intellectual impairment and intellectual disability. 2) An unusually high concentration of small genetic variations associated with genes encoding various neurological and neurodevelopmental pathways, that are common and found throughout the population in general, a small number of which have been shown to be also associated with higher than average academic attainment.
It is logical to conclude that people who are autistic because of the second type of genetic variation are autistic because they have a higher number of small common genetic variations than average, and that there must be a diagnostic cut off beyond which the accumulation of autism-linked variations results in a person showing enough traits to be deemed to be autistic. So autism, at least when caused by common genetic variations, is not like pregnancy and is more like height. The clinician is deciding who is tall (autistic) and who is of average height or short (allistic) by judging the individual against diagnostic criteria - the criteria are making the equivalent of deciding that any man over 6ft is 'tall'. It follows that people with sub-clinical autistic traits are indeed 'a bit autistic', just like a man who is 5ft 11'' is 'tallish'. This is in no way an argument that people who have been, or that potentially could be, diagnosed as autistic are not often very negatively impacted, or that specialised services and accommodations are not needed.
As a clinically diagnosed autistic former 'genetic engineer', I find the use of the sort of 'pregnant/not pregnant' argument, which comes from a sociological viewpoint, laudably concerned with 'autistic rights and advocacy', too illogical for me to ignore and let pass unchallenged, unfortunately for me and any interlocutors. Mea culpa.
Martin. This is fascinating, but I must confess to not understanding your final paragraph. Forgive my neediness, but could you try and express your last paragraph in a different form of words so that I can hopefully understand your point. Thank you in advance for your time.
Ave atque vale.
Ego tibi gratias ago.
No problem. I am diagnosed with ASC, so I am definitely autistic. I was a research molecular biologist - or in more slang terms a 'genetic engineer' - until I retired. Because I am a geneticist, I know a lot about genetics, because I am autistic I have looked hard at the available information about the genetics of autism. Also, because I am autistic, I cannot let what I believe to be a misleading statement pass without comment. Autistics like things to be factual. I believe that the use of 'you are either pregnant or not pregnant' to support the idea that 'you are either autistic or not autistic' to be wrong. I also believe that people can have autistic traits but not enough, or of enough severity, for them to be diagnosed as autistic. Therefore, people can be 'slightly autistic' or a 'bit autistic'. This is my scientific opinion, backed by genetic research.
I understand that the idea of 'pregnant/not pregnant' being used to support 'autistic/not autistic' comes from a place of sympathy with autistic people. From people supporting autistic rights in society. They are trying to ensure that support and accommodations go to genuinely autistic people who need them, and that this support is not wilfully diluted by minimising the difficulty autistics face by saying 'everyone is a bit autistic'. Though they are doing this for good reasons, they are doing this by stating something that is not scientifically true.
While I sympathise as an autistic person with the aims of the people who claim that there is a strict separation between autistic people and non-autistic people, my scientific background and desire for the truth mean that I have to challenge this when I see it. I have no choice in the matter. Mea culpa is Latin for 'my fault', as formerly used in the Roman Catholic 'act of contrition' in confession.