Anonymous wrote:I don't consider anyone if they can do following things:

1.Can live Independently(earn money,able to live single if needed )
2.Able to marry and keep the relationships and have kids
3.Be Happy ,healthy and can live long life

If HFA person does all the above things , I don't treat him disabled. Even if NT can't do above things , I'll call him disabled(can NT can do all above things?)

There are many HFA people leading good lives like Bill Gates and how many NT people are not doing odd Jobs with minimum wages.

It doesn't matter if you are HFA or NT.All it matters is if you are successful or Not! Of course Luck plays a major role here!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So true! Like the comic of the fish who is being tested and scored (among bears and) on its ability to climb a tree.

Anonymous wrote:

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 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.

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

To qualify for special education, the student has to have a disability that is severe enough. Having a diagnosis of HFA or dysgraphia, or dyslexia is not enough.

It's not that it has to be "severe" -- it's that it has to require special education to access the curriculum. The definition of "disability" is fairly objective and an HFA diagnosis would meet it. The question is whether the child needs special education to learn.

Anonymous wrote: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 wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

To qualify for special education, the student has to have a disability that is severe enough. Having a diagnosis of HFA or dysgraphia, or dyslexia is not enough.

Anonymous wrote:

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 wrote: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.