This person here talks about how her son, whom she seems to consider to have low-functioning autism, can pass as a high-functioning autistic person, and does so because he works very hard:
http://autismandoughtisms.wordpress.com/2012/03/20/passing-for-a-high-functioning-autistic-a-cause-for-celebration/
Of course, this brought up a debate on the usefulness of functioning levels, and in one of the comments she brought up a link where she defends the use of functioning levels:
http://autismandoughtisms.wordpress.com/2011/04/30/language-and-autism-the-impact-of-penumbra-and-generalized-instances-on-debates-about-the-existence-of-and-functioning-levels-within-asd/
In this post, she mentions how if one has the ability (i.e. the choice) to act in a manner considered high-functioning, then one must be considered high-functioning. I bring this back to where she mentions that her son, by working very hard, can act in a manner considered high-functioning. In that case, because her son is able to act high-functioning, then isn't he by the blogger's own definition high-functioning?
Perhaps if it takes lots of hard work, there is a difference? Perhaps we need to look at baseline measures? Nevertheless, a person, especially if they're young, will have the ability to work at a level much higher than their baseline measures. And since they have the ability, then they would have the choice, right? If what they can work at equals high-functioning, then they are high-functioning, right?
I don't know, and would like the blogger to clarify this apparent contradiction. Either way, I see some similarities with what Amanda Baggs wrote in the article, "Help! I seem to be getting more autistic!"
http://archive.autistics.org/library/more-autistic.html
