[georgestephanis]

Yes hi, "aspergers" is an unfortunate nomenclature and many autistic folks (myself included) strongly resent it. It was named after a Nazi doctor (Hans Asperger) and used to classify autistic folks into "useful" and "non-useful" people -- as Nazis and Eugenicists are known to do. When you think of it, if you could refer to folks on the spectrum as such, without referencing the outdated nomenclature (the DSM-5 replaced it for diagnostics, now everything falls under the Autism Spectrum, rather than viewing the "higher functioning" folks as having a distinct diagnosis)

Thanks!

[wavegeek]

> Nazi doctor

Asperger was never a member of the Nazi party.

I invite everyone here who has stood up against a murderous totalitarian dictatorship at the likely cost of their life to tell us how Asperger should have done better.

> now everything falls under the Autism Spectrum

This is only true in the US. And people who were previously diagnosed as Aspergers retain that diagnosis, even in the US.

[m_fayer]

I want to strongly second this. Asperger was a complicated person with a complicated story in a brutal context, but ultimately a sympathetic and insightful man. His story is told in "Neurotribes" which is a thorough history of autism, and highly recommended.

[overboard2]

Yes hi, why is the category of those with Asperger's syndrome not useful for the further understanding and communication of information.

[georgestephanis]

What information do you feel can be communicated and understood with that moniker that is not served by Autism Spectrum? And why do you feel those distinctions (if any) merit a wholly distinct diagnosis?

[mwigdahl]

I'll bite.

"Autism Spectrum" is a deliberately vague term that has been created and stretched to bring a variety of minor social and emotional functional differences under the general label of "autism". As far as I can tell, in the US the major purpose of this has been to divert special education funding from severely impaired children to less-impaired children from higher socioeconomic strata, and it has been very effective in doing so.

So to directly answer your questions, "Asperger's" (or whatever substitute term you find acceptable -- I'm perfectly fine with a substitute) is very useful to distinguish people with minor social and emotional functional differences -- those people who are, for example, able to hold down a tech job and post about autistic politics to Hacker News -- from highly impaired people such as my daughter who will never hold a job and whose verbal skills are at a three year old level.

These distinctions are vitally important to ensure that appropriate funding goes to these highly impaired children rather than being siphoned away to children of well-connected or politically savvy parents who are fully capable of succeeding in the mainstream educational system without aid.

[guerrilla]

> I'm perfectly fine with a substitute) is very useful to distinguish people with minor social and emotional functional differences -- those people who are, for example, able to hold down a tech job and post about autistic politics to Hacker News -- from highly impaired people such as my daughter who will never hold a job and whose verbal skills are at a three year old level.

There are plenty of people who the diagnosis of Asperger's who will never hold down a job. I'd hardly consider it "minor" even if it is relative to your daughter.

[psyc]

Will one of you please just get to the damn point, and explain to us garbage Nazi-lovers exactly what language you'd like us to use to distinguish different levels of impairment/functioning, given that we want to discuss different levels of impairment/functioning? Or do you just not want it discussed at all? The lot of you successfully derailed this sub-thread and prevented that discussion from happening. But thank god you set us all straight on problematic etymology! Close one!

I am autistic, btw. An Autist. An Aspie. High-functioning. So's my brother. So's my father. None of us give a toss about these terms, but the subject of our traits and our getting on in society remains of interest.

[guerrilla]

I'm with you on that. That person above complaining about "Asperger's" doesn't speak for me. In the end, it's always going to be up to the individual and any sort of generalizing is going to fail unless you go about bullying people into it.

[jiggunjer]

I hear the phrase "high-functioning" more than "aspies". I think the distinction is useful in social contexts: just knowing Bob's son has autism is not enough info when writing party invitations or considering transferring Bob overseas.