HFA a disability?

[Anonymous]

I have seen a few threads recently (both on the SN board and general parenting) where parents refer to their kids w HFA as having a "disability". My kid has been diagnosed with HFA and ADHD and I don't consider this to be a disability. It has never occurred to me to refer to my child as disabled. I may be wrong, but in the grand scheme of things SN related (or in the grand scheme of life in general) the way I view it is that we are just dealing with a few challenges that we have the support lined up to help us deal with. IMHO this isn't a disability. Am I alone here?

[Anonymous]

We view it as a disability. While it is entirely possible DS will overcome his challenges and go on to a successful career, autism affects all aspects of our lives. He is not as abled as other kids who are NT. He's not able to eat the same foods, he's not able to process emotions as well, he's not able to build and maintain friendships as well, and he's not as able to employ flexibility as well. He is very intelligent, so able to use that to compensate for some areas of his disability. We also support his dietary requirements, provide extra emotional support, extra parental supervision, and instruction in social skills and flexible thinking to help compensate for his disability. He is not disabled in the same way that a child with epilepsy is disabled just as they are not disabled in the same way as someone who needs to use a wheelchair, but that doesn't mean that he doesn't have a disability.

[Anonymous]

To qualify for special education, you must have a disability.

So call your child's ADHD and HFA whatever you wish, but if you want the school system or your insurance company to provide you services, they are going to use the label.

[Anonymous]

We're in the process of having my younger DD's ADHD recognized as a learning disability. It's not automatically seen as such. What was helpful for us was that there are lists of basic life functions (like eating, sleeping, and learning) that the law uses.

As a PP said, if your child can't eat the same foods because of textural issues or certain colors, that can be considered disabling because a basic life function (eating) is affected. If your child must have a weighted blanket to sleep, if your child gets upset by noise in the cafeteria at lunch time. Really almost any thing that is part of regular life.

[Anonymous]

https://adata.org/faq/what-definition-disability-under-ada

[Anonymous]

This is a huge philosophical debate, OP. Read Neurotribes.

[Anonymous]

Of course it's a "disability" under the law. Beyond that, your child will face unfair prejudice due to his condition. So even if you don't want to call it a "disability" and just want to call it a neurological difference, it doesn't really matter. The reason people use the rhetoric of "disability" is so that people who ARE different can be treated fairly and get support.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like your child is very mildly affected if all you think he needs is "a few supports." The people who view their children as disabled are likely dealing with more difficult situations and intense needs that make integration into society more difficult. Hence, "disabled."

My child is likely ADHD with social communications issues (label TBD) but he's able to have friends, learn, go to a mainstream classroom without question, go to college and get a job. So I wouldn't call him "disabled" because although he has "needs," he's mildly affected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your child is very mildly affected if all you think he needs is "a few supports." The people who view their children as disabled are likely dealing with more difficult situations and intense needs that make integration into society more difficult. Hence, "disabled."

My child is likely ADHD with social communications issues (label TBD) but he's able to have friends, learn, go to a mainstream classroom without question, go to college and get a job. So I wouldn't call him "disabled" because although he has "needs," he's mildly affected.

But if you need a 504 plan or IEP for even minor supports like extended time, you will have to use that term.

These days, even kids with DS, CP, and other major conditions have friends, are in mainstream classes, go to college, get married, and have jobs. I can think of a dozen adults I know with conditions ranging from spina bifida to dwarfism to TBI who are disabled but have immensely normal and rich lives.

[Anonymous]

My feelings about this are complicated. There is no doubt that our HFA son is significantly impaired in his ability to do some things that typical people do more easily--particularly emotional regulation, navigating social situations, and physical coordination. But there are three features that make this kind of a unique "disability."

First, his difficulties are on a continuous spectrum with normal human variation that is not classified as a disability. He just has a somewhat harder time with some things that are hard for lots of people. He's not that different from how most kids were, just at a younger age than he is. That's why they call it a developmental disability, or delay.

Second, there are often (and definitely in his case) some compensating advantages -- most noticeably greatly enhanced memory (and all that goes with that, such as easy and precocious reading and an insanely good sense of direction), but also a very precise logical mind, a sincerity and lack of social posturing that is very endearing to those who know him well, great pitch and a lovely singing voice, etc..

Third, the worst parts of the supposed impairment are socially constructed and much more about other peoples' prejudices than about his actual abilities. Typical people aggressively shun those who act differently or seem weird, generally for no good reason. They interpret reduced eye contact as a sign of shiftiness or dishonesty. They are impatient with someone older than a small child who has difficulty controlling his emotions. They engage in elaborate and subtle exercises in primate dominance dynamics to bolster their own perceived status and put others down, and write off as clueless anyone who doesn't understand the stupid games they are playing. Why are these things my son's "disability" as opposed to deficiencies that typical people have in understanding and basic decency? The same sorts of problems infect expectations about academic performance. Neurotypical people are naturally good at seeing what we call "the big picture," and conveying concepts with metaphors and figurative or poetic language. Autistic people tend to be more literal, and see trees more than the forest. Textbook writers and test designers and teachers putting together assignments tend to value and emphasize the things that neurotypical people do well, while devaluing the things that autistic people do well. Sometimes I feel like my son has been entered in the Consumer Reports annual survey of minivans, when he's a sports car. Minivans are great. So are sports cars. Judging a sports car by minivan standards is just stupid. But our society does a lot of that.

Is my son disabled? In his ability to successfully navigate the ridiculous and arbitrary minefields that we typicals construct for each other, for no particularly good reason, yeah he is. But he is also the most honest and sincere person I have ever met, an absolute delight to know and love, and in some areas extremely smart--like deep into the 99th percentile smart. So you can decide what kind of arbitrary, made up word you want to use to describe that. As the linguists say, the word is not the thing, the word is not the thing, hi ho the derry-o, the word is not the thing.

[Anonymous]

You could logically argue that profound dyslexia isn't a disability. After all, humans used to exist with the vast majority of people completely illiterate. Universal literacy is really a very modern invention. But reading has been defined as a basic life function, so there you go. Primate social hierarchy and negotiation has been around much, much longer and is much more integral to the human condition. I get what you're saying that the word is not the thing, but this is still the world we live in. There are still general expectations of how people should function in this world and society and HFA still means a general impairment in areas critical to expected social function.

Having areas of strength does not negate a disability. Going to college, getting married, and having a successful career are also not the antithesis of disability. Again, drawing on the example of dyslexia, there are many, many individuals who are dyslexic, even profoundly dyslexic, who are enormously successful. They still need to use accommodations and devices to compensate for their disability. They still sometimes have big problems because of their disability. And whether it's because of their disability or their life experience of overcoming their disability, many of these individuals share a unique set of strengths that make them exceptional entrepreneurs, businessmen, scientists, ...

People with disabilities, whether visible or invisible, are not any less valuable and frequently not any less capable in a general sense than more abled individuals. Individuals with disabilities make extraordinary contributions to the world but being awesome doesn't erase having a disability, nor should it because it's not an either/or.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your child is very mildly affected if all you think he needs is "a few supports." The people who view their children as disabled are likely dealing with more difficult situations and intense needs that make integration into society more difficult. Hence, "disabled."

My child is likely ADHD with social communications issues (label TBD) but he's able to have friends, learn, go to a mainstream classroom without question, go to college and get a job. So I wouldn't call him "disabled" because although he has "needs," he's mildly affected.

But if you need a 504 plan or IEP for even minor supports like extended time, you will have to use that term.

These days, even kids with DS, CP, and other major conditions have friends, are in mainstream classes, go to college, get married, and have jobs. I can think of a dozen adults I know with conditions ranging from spina bifida to dwarfism to TBI who are disabled but have immensely normal and rich lives.

Yes, I have no problem with calling him "disabled" for legal purposes. My point is that he is mildly affected, but I know that kids with the same labels could be much more severely affected and more in line with the colloquial use of "disabled." (Also being disabled in no way means you can't have "normal and rich lives." It means that you're different, seen as different, and need accommodations to be able to live that normal life. My belief is that my child won't need accommodations eventually.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My feelings about this are complicated. There is no doubt that our HFA son is significantly impaired in his ability to do some things that typical people do more easily--particularly emotional regulation, navigating social situations, and physical coordination. But there are three features that make this kind of a unique "disability."

First, his difficulties are on a continuous spectrum with normal human variation that is not classified as a disability. He just has a somewhat harder time with some things that are hard for lots of people. He's not that different from how most kids were, just at a younger age than he is. That's why they call it a developmental disability, or delay.

Second, there are often (and definitely in his case) some compensating advantages -- most noticeably greatly enhanced memory (and all that goes with that, such as easy and precocious reading and an insanely good sense of direction), but also a very precise logical mind, a sincerity and lack of social posturing that is very endearing to those who know him well, great pitch and a lovely singing voice, etc..

Third, the worst parts of the supposed impairment are socially constructed and much more about other peoples' prejudices than about his actual abilities. Typical people aggressively shun those who act differently or seem weird, generally for no good reason. They interpret reduced eye contact as a sign of shiftiness or dishonesty. They are impatient with someone older than a small child who has difficulty controlling his emotions. They engage in elaborate and subtle exercises in primate dominance dynamics to bolster their own perceived status and put others down, and write off as clueless anyone who doesn't understand the stupid games they are playing. Why are these things my son's "disability" as opposed to deficiencies that typical people have in understanding and basic decency? The same sorts of problems infect expectations about academic performance. Neurotypical people are naturally good at seeing what we call "the big picture," and conveying concepts with metaphors and figurative or poetic language. Autistic people tend to be more literal, and see trees more than the forest. Textbook writers and test designers and teachers putting together assignments tend to value and emphasize the things that neurotypical people do well, while devaluing the things that autistic people do well. Sometimes I feel like my son has been entered in the Consumer Reports annual survey of minivans, when he's a sports car. Minivans are great. So are sports cars. Judging a sports car by minivan standards is just stupid. But our society does a lot of that.

Is my son disabled? In his ability to successfully navigate the ridiculous and arbitrary minefields that we typicals construct for each other, for no particularly good reason, yeah he is. But he is also the most honest and sincere person I have ever met, an absolute delight to know and love, and in some areas extremely smart--like deep into the 99th percentile smart. So you can decide what kind of arbitrary, made up word you want to use to describe that. As the linguists say, the word is not the thing, the word is not the thing, hi ho the derry-o, the word is not the thing.

Great post. Thanks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like your child is very mildly affected if all you think he needs is "a few supports." The people who view their children as disabled are likely dealing with more difficult situations and intense needs that make integration into society more difficult. Hence, "disabled."

My child is likely ADHD with social communications issues (label TBD) but he's able to have friends, learn, go to a mainstream classroom without question, go to college and get a job. So I wouldn't call him "disabled" because although he has "needs," he's mildly affected.

But if you need a 504 plan or IEP for even minor supports like extended time, you will have to use that term.

These days, even kids with DS, CP, and other major conditions have friends, are in mainstream classes, go to college, get married, and have jobs. I can think of a dozen adults I know with conditions ranging from spina bifida to dwarfism to TBI who are disabled but have immensely normal and rich lives.

Yes, I have no problem with calling him "disabled" for legal purposes. My point is that he is mildly affected, but I know that kids with the same labels could be much more severely affected and more in line with the colloquial use of "disabled." (Also being disabled in no way means you can't have "normal and rich lives." It means that you're different, seen as different, and need accommodations to be able to live that normal life. My belief is that my child won't need accommodations eventually.)

If he wouldn't need any accomodations at all, then maybe at that point he would no longer be disabled. Disabilities can be temporary too. Like a broken, you are disabled and need accomodations while you are on crutches, but once the leg is healed you are no longer disabled.

[Anonymous]

The smartest kid I ever worked with (IQ scores in the 160s) has HFA and he was profoundly disabled by it-he went from General ed to self contained to an ED center and private special ed placement after that.