• Replies 13 replies
  • Subscribers 79 subscribers
  • Views 4322 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related
Hints and tips
  • To quote someone's message, first select/highlight the relevant text, and then use the Quote button that appears
  • To "mention" someone, type @ followed by the start of the forum name, and choose from the list; that person will get a notification of being mentioned

the 15% in full time emplyment

longman

Reading the news item on the website about the Queen's Speech, with reference to the Full Employment and Welfare Benefits Bill, there is again that reference to only 15% with autism in full time work.

Figures like that usually move up and down a bit over the years, and it has certainly been a figure in circulation for at least ten years.

How was it obtained? Was it a survey of NAS members? Or was it a national survey by an organisation independent of NAS? Was it obtained by the Department of Work and Pensions?

What does it mean, beyond what it says? How was the in-work population defined, given a lot of people on the spectrum, who are in work,  aren't necessarily easily identified to be included.

The context of this is people whom the government perceives can work. Their notion of who has autism and their notion of work is quite critical.

I don't feel this unchanging 15% figure is doing us any good.

Parents
  • Former Member
    Former Member

    I think this is an interesting statistic and it is a sad reflection on society that so many people with this disability are not working. I am, however, more dismayed by the difficulty that people report in getting to the diagnosis. This is one of my main observations from frequenting this forum for the last year. People are put off by the nature of the process and by the hurdles raised by having the condition. Those with the condition are least able to argue for a diagnosis. This is a real Catch-22.

    The difficulty in getting a diagnosis means that many people who are struggling but keeping in work do not have a diagnosis and this is a major reason why the 15% figure (or whatever the number actually is) is so low. More severely affected people often have more obvious traits and issues and in more need of a diagnosis and are therefore more likely to be accepted by the system. This latter group of people are less likely to be in work and a sample of diagnoses in an NHS mental health unit will likely reflect this.

Reply
  • Former Member
    Former Member

    I think this is an interesting statistic and it is a sad reflection on society that so many people with this disability are not working. I am, however, more dismayed by the difficulty that people report in getting to the diagnosis. This is one of my main observations from frequenting this forum for the last year. People are put off by the nature of the process and by the hurdles raised by having the condition. Those with the condition are least able to argue for a diagnosis. This is a real Catch-22.

    The difficulty in getting a diagnosis means that many people who are struggling but keeping in work do not have a diagnosis and this is a major reason why the 15% figure (or whatever the number actually is) is so low. More severely affected people often have more obvious traits and issues and in more need of a diagnosis and are therefore more likely to be accepted by the system. This latter group of people are less likely to be in work and a sample of diagnoses in an NHS mental health unit will likely reflect this.

Children
No Data