Tag Archives | terminology

Autistic – Noun or Adjective? Which is offensive?

By on July 12, 2013 in Autism

So I wrote my last post and titled it: “AutCraft – The not so little Minecraft project for autistics and their families” and went about my day. Until this happened:

autistic-nounorajdective1

autistic-nounorajdective2Now, I’m sure you’ve all heard the “person first language” thing, where some people insist that you use “person with autism” rather than “autistic.” I’ve written about it before in articles such as The last word on “person first language” where I explain why I use the terminology that I use.

This however, is entirely new to me. Now, in this seemingly middle ground area, it’s ok to use as an adjective but not as a noun. The woman that tweeted above, uses “mom to autistic son” in her bio and yet uses “ouch” and “awful” in her tweets to me because I referred to people as “autistics” in my post title.

I am an understanding person though so I’m not going to dismiss hers or anyone else’s concerns. I do however feel that we should work this out so that we have a better mutual understanding of each other.

Now, in conversations, I’ve referred to myself as a Canadian, a baldy, a male, a genius, an idiot, an autistic, an introvert, a bore, a supporter, a nerd and a whole bunch of other things. These can all be used as adjectives.

What I need now is a list of terms that you use when referring to yourself.

Then I’ll pick and choose the ones that I think should offend me and we can then come to some sort of agreement where you can no longer refer to yourself that way and I can no longer refer to myself that way and we can finally go back to being happy people.

Because the last thing I’d ever want is to offend YOU by referring to ME.

 

 

Comments { 7 }

Low Functioning Autism vs High Functioning Autism in 2012

By on January 10, 2012 in Autism

There is a great deal of confusion surrounding the terminology simply because of how vague it really is… what exactly is “low functioning” or “high functioning”? Is it to be measured the same as the wattage of a light bulb or the complex calculable abilities of a computer?

For many people, as it pertains to Autism, it can simply be the difference between speaking and not speaking.. for others it can be a difference in perceived IQ levels.

Personally, I’ve always thought of the terms as indicators as to the level of one’s ability to be independent. Can they shelter, feed and provide for themself? Can they maintain a job? Can they “function” in the world on their own?

Whether or not that means using a device to speak for them, high or low IQ levels… what ever. It doesn’t matter… so long as they can live independently, they are “high functioning”. If they can not, they are “low functioning”. I don’t maintain that this is the correct way to think of these terms but simply that it’s how I think of them when I hear them or use them myself.

The reality is though that whether or not you agree with this form of terminology or not, you’re going to have to get used it. As of 2012, the discussion is no longer what it means or how to use it but whether you are using it pre DSM-5 or post DSM-5.

dsm-5Pre DSM-5

Up until the DSM-5, the Autism Spectrum Disorder has always been a list of common disorders such as Autistic Disorder, PDD-NOS and Aspergers Syndrome, which was added in the DSM-IV (IV is the roman numeral for 4).

That means that there really is no low or high level… there’s simply a different disorder to fall into. If you could live independently but struggled socially, you had Aspergers. If you had more severe impairments which left you dependent on others for life, you had classic Autistic Disorder. Others that fell somewhere in the middle would often be PDD-NOS (Pervasive Developmental Disorder – Not Otherwise Specified)

That’s a very general description, it’s far more complicated than that but does give you a good idea.

This is where “low functioning” and “high functioning” terms often become a point of contention among experts, autistics, parents and everyone else.

As we progress further and further, we have become increasingly aware that many people that are unable to speak are actually able to communicate quite well once given the means too.. such as an iPad or “voice box” which can modulate text into speech.

We’ve also come to discover that just because an autistic may score low on a conventional IQ test, they may actually still be very smart. In fact, they could be brilliant. It’s just that the IQ test as well as the communication before, during and after was not done in a manner that was understood by the individual.

So labeling a person as “low functioning” because they could not speak or scored low on an IQ test was very much an inaccurate and inappropriate use of the term.

Post DSM-5

The DSM-5 will be wiping out many of the individual disorders within the spectrum and replacing them with levels… 3 levels. These 3 levels will essentially make up exactly what we will come to know as “low functioning” and “high functioning” and then.. one level somewhere in the middle.

They break down like this:

  1. ‘Requiring support’
  2. ‘Requiring substantial support’
  3. ‘Requiring very substantial support’

If you don’t believe me, you can look it up here: http://www.dsm5.org/ProposedRevisions/Pages/proposedrevision.aspx?rid=94#

While this will once again open the terminology into very vague misinterpretations, especially for those that have never even heard of, much less read, the DSM… it will also attempt to very much define exactly what “low” and “high” functioning is supposed to mean.

Which means that most people won’t know what these levels mean but if someone does use the terminology incorrectly, you’ll now have something to point them to.

Conclusion

I understand the frustration when you read or hear someone using terms like this incorrectly.. or at all really. But at this point, we’ll all have to get used to it.

It’s coming, one way or another. The only difference being that it’s a little more defined. And now there will be three instead of just two.

So the next time you see someone using these terms, check for their accuracy against the actual DSM-5 records… if you can’t stop people from using them, you might as well try to get them to use them correctly.

Comments { 14 }

The last word on “person first language”

By on July 12, 2011 in Autism

I am writing this for one reason: far too many people tell me what to say, so instead of explaining to everyone, I’ll just give you this link. Please read.

The idea

The idea behind “person first language” is that you put the person first, for example: person with autism. This emphasizes the person and not the disorder. Fine. Or so I thought.

But then I heard from several (and by several, I mean a LOT) of “people with autism” who specifically told me that they prefer the term “autistic” because autism is very much a part of who they are and how they perceive the world. They accept it, they embrace it and they want to be known as such. Fine. Or so I thought.

Not every “autistic” feels that way. Some actually do prefer “person with autism” because they hate how much autism has made their life suck (their words, not mine, really). Fine?

For some education systems, the teachers are actually told to use “person first language” because that’s what some parents insist on and it’s best that the education system not aggravate the parents. Fine.

So which did you tell me to do?

Here’s the thing. If I have dozens, even hundreds of “autistics” tell me to call them “autistics” because it’s what they want and then I have dozens, even hundreds of parents tell me to use “person with autism” because it’s what they want…. who do I side with?

Nobody.

I don’t take sides. First of all, it’s just ridiculous anyway. Seriously, is this what we spend our time on? Is this really a reason to get mad at each other? Can something this childish really begin to divide a community?

Well, no. The truth is, there’s a third group of people. They’re the “I don’t care” group. I love this group.

For most “autistics”, which are “people with autism”… they don’t care. Actually, they’d prefer you call them by their name. They’re more likely to respond. Further more, person, people, person of humanitarian decent…  you know, what ever. It really doesn’t much matter.

For most parents of “autistic” children, which are “children with autism”… they don’t care. Again, using their name is generally the best option. But those parents really don’t mind how you refer to their children so long as you do it politely, nicely and with respect. They are their children after all.

I fall into the “I don’t care” group myself but in a way, I do care. I mean, if someone tells me they prefer one or the other, I’ll do my best to use that one method with that one person. I respect their wishes. But if that person is in a group of people, all of whom have various wishes or don’t care…. well, be ready for a mixed bag of terminology.

Don’t tell me how to speak, I don’t tell you how to dress

dont tell me what to doQuite frankly, I find it rude to tell me how I am to refer to my own child. Who are you anyway?

When my son comes to that point, if he does, and he tells me he prefers one way or another… you can bet your life I’ll stick to that one term…. with him. I’ll still use another term with another person if it’s what that person prefers.

In the mean time, until he tells me, or others tell me which they prefer, I’ll use the term that best fits the sentence. Because “the journey of my autistic child” sounds far better than “the journey of my child of which has autism”. That can’t be right.

Anyway, if you’re reading this because you’ve told me what to say, please visit the closest Walmart, buy some overalls, cowboy boots, pink shirt with the ruffles and the biggest hat you can find and wear that. Because I feel it’s only fair that you do something for me too.

It’s not that I don’t value your wishes, it’s not that I don’t understand exactly where you’re coming from. I do. And if the entire world said in one unanimous voice that it should be one way… then I would abide by that.

But it’s not that simple. I don’t make one group of people mad for the sake of making another group happy. There’s far better things to focus on that can benefit all people than this.

Thanks for reading.

Comments { 19 }