What are your thoughts on the term "High Functioning"?

I've noticed quite a few autistic people on this forum describing themselves as "high functioning." I'm genuinely interested in hearing why people choose to use this label.

Personally, I dislike it and would prefer not to see it being used.

From the outside, based on my qualifications and career, many people would probably describe me as "high functioning." Yet I still struggle with many aspects of daily life and work, and I worry the label makes those difficulties seem less significant or suggests I need little support or reasonable adjustments, which isn't the case.

I'm also not convinced that the Levels 1, 2 and 3 always solve the problem, as our support needs can vary enormously depending on the environment we're in.

I also wonder whether some people use "high functioning" simply to mean they don't have a learning disability. If so, wouldn't it be clearer just to say that?

For those who do use the term, what benefit do you feel it provides—for yourself or when explaining your autism to other people? I'm genuinely interested in hearing different perspectives.

NAS - any thoughts on running a poll on this ?

Parents
  • NAS - any thoughts on running a poll on this ?

    The NAS has already looked into use of the term "high functioning", and found it to be inaccurate and considered offensive.

    Their related guide explains why "high functioning" is not preferred:

    "Based on based on our language research on the preferences of autistic people, their families and professionals, as well as the feedback and insight we get from our supporters and wider work:

    AVOID saying:

    - high/low functioning autistic person

    - mild/severe autism

    Explainer: functioning and severity labels are inaccurate and considered offensive; they fail to capture how a person’s needs may vary (they may excel at certain things while finding others very challenging) and fluctuate (according to the situation), and because they locate all challenges innately within the person’s ability rather than due to a societal or situational failure to meet the person’s access needs. "

    That’s from this guide, which also covers many other forms of language and terminology around autism:

    NAS - How to talk and write about autism

    I'm also not convinced that the Levels 1, 2 and 3 always solve the problem

    It's worth mentioning that those levels are only included in diagnoses that have been carried out in accordance with the latest DSM classification manual, which is mainly used in the USA, but also in some other countries.

    Some Right to Choose providers in the UK do use the DSM. But the NHS in England, for example, uses the ICD classification. The ICD-11, published by the World Health Organisation, is the latest version. This, or the ICD-10 (the transition from 10 to 11 is still either pending or in progress in many places) is used by lots of countries around the world. 

  • It's interesting,  I realised that I use some of the not preferred language. I don't like the "functioning" word too. One thing- it's nor used by professionals, other thing, functioning is more associated with devices. But I guess I know what it means- someone, who may function relatively independently on daily basis. So as it was written there- autistic person with low support needs

Reply
  • It's interesting,  I realised that I use some of the not preferred language. I don't like the "functioning" word too. One thing- it's nor used by professionals, other thing, functioning is more associated with devices. But I guess I know what it means- someone, who may function relatively independently on daily basis. So as it was written there- autistic person with low support needs

Children
No Data