We can definitely blame writers, reporters and journalists for contributing to the myth that autism necessarily includes intellectual impairment.
I keep coming across articles in which the way autism is mentioned implies that it’s synonymous with or causes an intellectual disability.
These writers and editors are ignorant. Even before my diagnosis of Autism Spectrum Disorder, I was self-educated enough to know that autism and what was formerly known as mental retardation were NOT one and the same, nor linked in any causative manner.
These days, an abnormally low IQ is referred to as any of the following: intellectual disability, intellectual challenge, developmental delay and special needs.
I have a big problem with “developmental delay,” as this is ambiguous and implies that the deficit is temporary, that the individual will eventually catch up.
“Special needs” is also problematic due to its ambiguity, though it fits a lot better when referring to a group of people who have various disabilities.
But back to this continuing myth that, in general, autistic people have below-normal intelligence.
The headline below is an example of how misleading wording can lead to misunderstandings.
The words “AND OTHER” are the nail in the coffin.
Why couldn’t the writer or editor omit “OTHER”? This would’ve changed the meaning.
When readers see “and other,” many will tend to think that the initial noun is related to the subsequent nouns.
And in this case, it could be inferred that autism is a form of intellectual disability.
In fact, even just the mere omission of “other” could still leave some readers wondering if autism is a form of intellectual impairment.
How about “autism plus intellectual disabilities”? The word “plus” would very much help prevent any possible misunderstanding.
Check out the ignorance reflected in the article screenshot below.
The choice of words here is rocket fuel for sustaining the myth that autism is a type of intellectual impairment.
Check out the image below that accompanied an article about autism and employment.
This is a blunder by the editor (usually it’s the editor who selects stock images).
The woman being depicted in this photo clearly has Down syndrome, a genetic form of intellectual disability.
But the article for which this photo is for is about autism, not Down syndrome.
Though a person with autism can also have DS, or, to put another way, someone with DS could also be autistic — this is totally beside the point.
The two conditions are NOT related, so why did the editor choose a picture of someone with a genetic form of intellectual disability?
Autism doesn’t have a “look,” as far as anatomical development, facial structure or body frame.
Therefore, the editor should’ve used a stock image of an average or typical looking adult in a workplace scenario.
Images of Down Syndrome for Articles About Autism
I’ve spotted this blunder several times now. Below is another example (scroll past the boy).
Why would the editor go with a picture of a girl with Down syndrome when the article is about a boy with autism?
Well, someone might argue that the image of the woman embracing the girl with DS is meant to convey love and acceptance, rather than a neurodevelopmental condition.
But a savvy editor or writer realizes that using a picture of Down syndrome for an article about autism has a good chance of being misleading and creating the belief that Down syndrome is a form of autism.
I’m going to be blunt: Many people are just plain stupid enough to let a picture skewer their understanding.
When I was an editor for a print fitness magazine, my job included making sure that the graphic designer used the correct images — that they perfectly aligned with the article topic or a section of narrative.
Every so often I caught an error. I wanted to make sure that there was absolutely no chance whatsoever that a photo might give the wrong impression to a reader.
This level of scrutiny should be practiced also by editors of online articles about ASD.
And if it’s up to the writer to choose the graphics, then the writer should take a little time to make sure that the depiction is accurate and has no potential to mislead readers.
Fueling the Myth that Autism is a Form of Intellectual Impairment
“I think that unfortunately, this is mostly related to continued misunderstanding and poor knowledge of what autism is,” says Cassie Roybal, a late-diagnosed AuDHD licensed professional counselor and founder of EmpowHERed Divergence Therapy.
“I also think it’s an issue of visibility. For a lot of people, the only examples of autism they have seen are people with profound autism, which are those with autism and co-occurring intellectual disabilities.
“Therefore, people can get a false understanding that having intellectual disability is a part of autism, rather than a co-occurring condition that can happen alongside it.
“And historically, the autism that did get detected and diagnosed was in the people who did have co-occurring ID.
“Public perception is often lagging years, if not decades, behind what research says and what autistic people know.
“We don’t have good statistics to say for certain, but best estimates now say that about 50% of autistic people have co-occurring ID, which would mean that 50% of them do not.
“I hope in the coming years that the media and general public knowledge will get better at understanding this — but only time will tell.”
- Autism is NOT a form of intellectual disability.
- Down syndrome is NOT a form of autism.
- Many Autists have high IQs.
Cassie Roybal is a late-diagnosed AuDHD therapist (LPC) and founder of 
