They are two different conditions that appear similar. But they are not the same.
Because they are the same underlying condition, only presented at different levels of impediment.
Diagnosis works the same, treatment is the same, it’s mostly the amount of support needed that differs.
And always worth remembering that Hans Asperger was a massive Nazi and part of the reason he originally made the distinction was to separate those children in his care who could be sent to work camps from those who were to be sent straight to be euthanised.
Where can I find more information about that being the reasoning for the diagnosis difference?
On the “massive nazi” claims: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5907291/
On why autism research professionals find his name association “vexing” https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5907469/
Thank you!
See, for example, this (and in particular the book it references if you really want to dig into the weeds).
Thank you!
Can we stop fucking up terminology please? Asperger was not a Nazi. A nazi is a member of the NSDAP and Asperger never was a member. He was, however, absolutely an opportunist.
We have to finally stop to view people’s doings in other times from our point of view. Asperger was most certainly not a hero but he did save a bunch of children who were deemed socially unacceptable by giving them a diagnosis and humane treatment. What do you think would have been their future without him?
A nazi is a member of the NSDAP
Sorry, nobody understands that word in such narrow terms. A nazi is someone who promotes Nazi objectives and Nazi ideology. If the claims on his Wikipedia page are fair, then Asberger was absolutely and enthusiastically a nazi.
He absolutely was a nationalist and he was a proponent of eugenics which, at the time, was quite common. In that regard you might want to look up Alexander Bell for example.
Even Herwig Czech says in his paper (that has been linked in this thread) that he was not a member of the Nazi party but an opportunist. There is a difference and it is an important one.
For the same reason that we don’t use the concept of race between humans, because it’s a spectrum with no distinct delimitation point.
You will find people of all shades of colors, all types of hairs, etc. just like you will find autistic people with different sensitivities, different creativity, different interests, different needs, and you can fill the whole spectrum, you won’t get a gap between “autistic” and “asperger”.
they were basically the same. the only real distinction in the actual diagnostic criteria was about speech delay. if you took longer than usual to speak as a kid, it had to be autism, but if you spoke at a usual age, then flip a coin i guess. it was found that which diagnosis you might get would depend mostly on the doctor’s personal preferences, or outside social factors, like which diagnosis wouls get better access to support under local laws, rather than any objective metric.
The book Neurotribes by Steve Silberman can be read as a very detailed answer to this question
Removed by mod
