Classic Autism Queries | Autism PDD

Classic Autism is what my ds is as well. It is not only the most severe, it is also the 'rarest', even though with 'classic' in that title, it sounds the opposite! Most angels with classic autism present with a level of MR, whether it be mild moderate or severe.

Temple Grandin is an extremely rare case which is why she is well known. Also she came from a rich family and had 40 hours intervention as a child per week as well as a full time Nanny. Even with her phd, it is very obvious she has issues.

The one thing across the board that I have heard and read about CA (Classic Autism) is they will NOT marry and they will not have children.

We can all hope that our angels with C.A. can function higher later in life.

If you google Leo Kanner and look up his original studies on children whom were given the label of autistic disorder, or infantile autism (now also known as classic or Kanner's autism) you will see that many of these children spoke, were visibly very intelligent and did connect with their loved ones. That's not to say that they didn't have severe autism, or that someone who has difficulties in areas they had skills in isn't intelligent, or that they don't connect, but just to explain that the true definition of classic autism isn't necessarily what many people believe it to be. bullet39260.2507060185

I fully agree. I hope my post doesn't suggest that mental retardation and classic autism are like ham and eggs. They are not. However, mental retardation can exist alongside classic autism -- or not. It also can exist alongside PDD-NOS. But I've never heard of it occurring with Asperger Syndrome. Just wanted to make it clear that autism can occur in children of normal intelligence as well as children with mental retardation. HOwever, those kids with normal intelligence have a greater chance of leading a more typical life because their raw intellectual ability helps them learn to compensate for their autistic tendencies. However, in my experience, ASD of any type has a greater negative effect on outcome than simple mental retardation does. I've seen many, many mentally retarded adults lead fully independent lives, marry and even have kids. I've seen less of that with adults with any form of autism. Between the two main Developmental Disabiltiies -- autism and mental retardation -- the BIG difference is not the ability to do academic tasks but the lack of ability to relate with the world as it is (i.e., functional skills). Intellectual ability seems to have less of a positive effect on functional skills than adaptive ability does. And, in general, kids with any form of ASD have very poor ADAPTIVE SKILLS, even if they have excellent academic skills. An IQ test does not measure adaptive skills, so it is less predictive of real-life success than an adaptive test, like a Vineland or ABBAS. Classic autism has the most symptoms, but the severity of those symptoms varies and the adaptive abilities of the individuals vary, so those factors are very important -- more so than the actual diagnosis.

tzoya, I wasn't posting in response to your post. I didn't read it before I posted. And I agree with you. Intellegence alone will not allow our children to live on their own. But if other things improve and they are intellegent, they might have a better chance.

My son's dx is classic autism because he has impariment in all 3 categories. Speech/language is a moderate impairment, social a mild to moderate impairment, and stims mild impairment to almost non-existent now (stims present before age 3 but he has grown out of it for the most part).

C's IQ is normal range. On the vineland, which I agree with Tzoya is a better indication of adaptive abilities than IQ, he presents as 1.5 years behind in language and social. His daily living skills and gross motor or at or slighly above age level. I see his social improving on a parallel path with language - as language is improving, social is improving with it. C's language, while delayed, is very functional. He's very verbal and carries on conversations well. He has started to make friends, and is a very independent little guy (toilets, dresses, bathes self, gets drink from refrigerator, can make a peanut butter sandwich, puts self in and out of car seat, plays on t-ball and soccer teams).

We are in the process of getting a private evaluation done now. I suspect that while C's initial dx was classic autism that this may be changed to PDD-NOS. He is doing very well and I feel that he has a great chance at a fairly normal life.

For reference, at age 2 initial eval his vineland showed speech/language as equivalent to a 3 month old and social a 7 month old. He did not start babbling and saying single words until right before age 3. He did not respond to name at age 2. Never pointed. We've come a long way. Every child is different. Don't let a dx of classic autism automatically lower your expectations for your child and paint a grim picture of the future.

Leo Kanner's original subjects are the most classic of classic autistics, by definition. Some of them would be what we'd today consider "high functioning". Despite a dearth of knowledge of the disorder at that time and very different outlook on disability, two of his eleven subjects grew to somewhat typical adult lives. They still needed extra help, of course, but iirc, one had a satisfactory career as a bank teller and the other "success" story worked as a farm hand and both had what Kanner considered to be positive outcomes. The other kids were a mixed bag. The kids who did the worst were the ones that were sent off to institutions. Most of them regressed in the institutional setting.

My own daughters are classically autistic, very similar to Kanner's case studies, right down to the good fine motor coordination (apparently a rarity amongst non-"classic" autistics). They are not as severely affected as most, if not all, of his kids, but they are very much like his case studies. They have autistic disorder (by the ADOS) - not one of the "milder" PDDs, and yet most people do consider them to be "high functioning", in that they have functional language, approximately age appropriate self care skills, normal intelligence, good academic skills (so far), and an interesting splinter skill with drawing which I hope developes into something marketable. We believe they have a shot at a happy, functional, if not altogether "typical" life, but what kind of life they lead will be up to them and, imo, will have more to do with their desire to lead a "normal" life or whether they're content with living outside of what is considered 'typical'. Either way is fine with me as long as they're happy.

fred39260.2854861111

If anyone can give some feedback on classic autism this would b appreciated!

Temple Grandin is classically autistic. She has a PhD and is a millionaire. And a speaker on autism. Google her if you don't know her. Read at her books to hear about her childhood and upbringing (she's nearly 60 now, so this was before there was ANY support). She is a genius. The outlook for classic autism has a lot to do with the native intelligence of the individual, and that is very hard to measure in a child with classic autism. The truth is that any child on the spectrum will do better with intense, appropriate intervention. A lot better. Our children are who they are. That is true for any human being. And the intelligence level of any human being predicts, to some extent, how far that individual will go in life. True, kids with autism have more hurdles. For some reason, girls with autism seem to have a different outcome. Either they manage to overcome a lot of the language and social issues and end up functioning pretty normally or they continue to have severe issues and don't function normally at all. There seem to be more boys in the middle. Temple Grandin is VERY successful. However, she is in no way "normal" in the sense that she is not a person most people would want to spend a lot of their free time with. Which suits her fine since she doesn't feel the emotional need for social interaction, by her own admission. But what a particular individual with autism wants differs from individual to individual. And how close that individual is to a typical person varies, too. When you've seen ONE person with Autism, you've see one person with autism.

classic or severe autism just means they have more severe impairments in the three areas (social, behavioral, speech and language) than others. Doesn't mean they are mentally retarded. But they could be.

The thing I have to remind myself and which I do from time to time is that none of these people that hand out these diagnosis are 'GOD'. They are just doing a job and working with what information they have and at the end of the day each child is an individual. When my boy was first seen by the paediatrician, he commented that it was a hard long road ahead for him and that I'd need all the support I could get. Support to me is the early intervention and whatever else I can lay my hands on! I'm naturally a very independent gal so I this is all new to me, but the boy comes first. They say that autism is a "lifelong diagnosis". He is only 3, and assessments are there to grab that understanding and support.Sharlet has Classic autism, she is in the middle of the spectrum which is still very misunderstood. She is neither high functioning nor low functioning. She doesn't appear to have an intellectual disability. [QUOTE=autumn]

The one thing across the board that I have heard and read about CA (Classic Autism) is they will NOT marry and they will not have children.

We can all hope that our angels with C.A. can function higher later in life.

[/QUOTE]

I'm going to have to respectively disagree with this. My son, who was diagnosed with autism (classic), has mild-moderate symptoms and behaviors in all three categories. He has average intelligence, age appropriate self-help skills (fully potty trained, dresses self, clears dishes off table after meals, can get his own drink of water from the refrigerator, takes a shower and washes himself, etc), we can take him anywhere without fear of melt-downs trantrums, and he'll be going into a mainstream Kindergarten next year without a support aide. This is not a kid who 1) is MR, and 2) has no future. Now, one could argue that his diagnosis is wrong or he's moved up the spectrum given all therapies he's received....and maybe that's true. But the reality is, if I had read the above post last year when he was first diagnosed, I would have been filled with despair. This is not how his diagnosis has played out so far.

I think it's important when discussing these kinds of topics, we make it clear that there is still not a lot know about the outcome of these kids, particularly given the level of therapy many are now receiving at such a young age. Yes, with some kids it's pretty evident even in the early years that they fall into the severe category and most likely will need assistance for their entire life. For others, like my son, the jury's still out.

I have thought it many times and MUST comment that I think Sharlet is GORGEOUS! :)

I know we will all love our children and will be happy with them no matter where they end up in life. But the truth is, most of the "crystal ball" questions that are posted on this board are trying to get at how FUNCTIONAL a person's child will be in his adult life. An adaptive test can show how much functional progress the child is making when you compare the results time after time. And there should definitely be IEP goals based on the results of adaptive tests since functional adaptation to life is one of the STATED GOALS of IDEA. Functional skills are the most predictive of adult "success."

Getting back to the autism designations. The most severe are also the most rare -- Rett Syndrome and Childhood Disintegrative Disorder. I know one person whose daughter had Rett's (she died because that's the ultimate result of Rett's). And no one whose child has CDD. Within the other 3 categories, what I've seen is that when a child becomes an adult, most of the children with classic autism have the poorest functional skills. The category that comes next with the poorest functional skills are those who were ORIGINALLY DIAGNOSED with Asperger Syndrome (not those autism or pdd-nos kids who had their "label" changed to Asperger once they acquired language -- that's not a true dx. It's done by doctors for soclal reasons. According to the DSM-IV, which looks at symptoms that exist before the age of 3, Asperger Syndrome requires no speech delay by age 3). The reason I say this is that so many kids with true Asperger Syndrome have extremely poor functional skills, particularly in the social area. Which means they can be severely handicapped when it comes to functioning in society, which is what being an independent adult requires. Statistics bear out my above statement. The last I heard, the statistic was that 92% of kids with Aspergers were unemployed or underemployed as adults, no matter how high their educational level. The category that I've seen have the best outcomes for is PDD-NOS. But PDD-NOS kids have the most widely varying symptoms from one another, so it's very hard to predict. And many kids with the autism label are not much different (if at all) than PDD-NOS kids.

What I've just said is such a huge generalization that it may not really mean anything, but this is my broad observation over the years. Other "labels" mentioned in Autumn's post are colloquial and mean nothing, either in the educational circles or medical circles. They are the way we parents and some professionals TRY to refine the labels so that they better describe our individual kids. But the 5 DSM-IV dx's are the only labels that are official. Of course to make matters even more confusing, there is only ONE educational label -- Autism -- and it covers all 5 of the DSM-IV medical dx's.

Among the kids I know with any of these labels, those kids who develop completely normal language, who are not withdrawn, who learn to give excellent eye contact and who learn all the social rules -- and obey them -- are the only ones who end up leading fully independent lives. That is not to say that leading a fully independent life guarantees happiness nor does leading a more circumspect life guarantee unhappiness. Now that I've come to the point where I can say with certainty that my 16yo PDD-NOS son will never lead a fully normal life, I've also come to the point where I can see that the life he will lead will be a happy one, satisfying to him. He won't be fully DEpendent, either. But like most individuals with any form of PDD, he will lead a semi-independent life. One that will fulfill him.

Can I say that I'm not disappointed that he won't go to college and won't give me grandchildren? No. I would have been "normal" to expect both. But I am not in mourning over those facts. I'm actually thrilled that I'm beginning to see some signs of my son's potential for independence as an adult. This summer, he's going to have his first job. One day a week, on a volunteer basis, he will be working in the faculty room of a local college, sorting mail. He'll be there with another 16yo and have the services of a job coach. My son will have no trouble whatsoever sorting the mail. What I hope he learns through this job is how to interact with a boss and a co-worker. He's very excited about this. So am I.

tzoya - I just wanted to congradulate your son on his summer job. I was 16 when I got my first job too. It was very exciting! I hope he really enjoys the experience and gets a lot out of it.

Yes I know about Retts and CDD but did nto even put them in there as there are other boards for those. As far as what I wrote I will stand by it with the Genetist Specialists in Denver as well as the DSM IV TR. Excluding the forementioned two which have their own websites and are pretty far removed from the umbrella, autism is rated similarly to below, most ability listed first.

aspergers

high functioning autism

pddnos/pdd

autism mild

autism moderate

autism severe

Sharlets official dx is Moderate-Severe classic autism, and so far her team thinks it likely that she has no intellectual disability (MR)

and perhaps that is why she appears more HFA in some ways than a child with the same dx who does have ID/MR

So I must also disagree with the idea that most children who have Classic autism also have an ID/MR and are the most severe.

It's is looking like even though Sharlet satisfied all the criteria for her dx, she may present more like HFA as she gets older. I don't think this is all that uncommon from what I have read. However I think that may be different in cases where there is an intellectual disability.

Interesting post--my mother sounded devastated over the phone when I
told her dd's dx was "classic autism" and not PDD-NOS (or AS). I then
explained (thanks to my education here!) about how the label doesn't dictate
future nor whether one has it 'easier' or what of their functionality. I try
hard to just focus on dd, where she is today & what she needs, not what her
label tells me where she may be or what she may need, and certainly not
what her future must be.

All these various ASD labels/dx's are rather confusing to us parents (&
grandparents, family, friends), though...that is for sure!!

The high-low debate is an interesting thing to me. I've not seen any such label applied officially to Jason's dx. I've heard "severe" and "evident", but nothing about high or low.

Perhaps that is because he is too young to measure his cognitive abilities with any real confidence right now, and of course, the fact that he is non-verbal doesn't help them to figure it out, either.

My own take is that he is classically autistic, with some severe and some mild impairments, in different categories. A mixed bag, just like most ASD people are, and NT, too, for that matter.

ANYONE who gets an ASD diagnosis should also get a detailed 'this is where your child is at on the spectrumat this time' explanation. Overall, the dx are, in order of most mild to most severe, according to the Genetist Specialists of Denver and the NC autism foundation:

aspergers, high functioning autism, pdd-nos, pdd, autism mild, autism moderate, autism severe

Remember your child can 'move' on this spectrum, up or down, except aspergers.

autumn, thanks. I WONDERED where these seemingly-arbitrary terms came from and why they were being used.

I have no idea how T will be defined ... except I am sure that she is mild.

A medical dx of "autism," colloquially known as "classic autism" is merely a certain number of observed behaviors. The dx does not depend on severity. A PDD-NOS child can have much more severe and problematic behaviors than a "classic autism" child. "Classic autism" or an "autism" dx does not necessarily mean severe behaviors and difficulties.

It's important to know this. Parents get an "autism" dx and freak out, assuming that their child has been pronounced to be on the "low end" of the Spectrum. Even the terms "low" and "high" functioning are misleading and don't reflect a person's capabilities. (Which is a different discussion.)

My son has an "autism" dx. I don't know if he's "low" "high" or "medium rare" because I've never asked. Those terms are not helpful to me. What is helpful to me is staying in touch with other parents who believe in their children's capabilities and are working side by side with their kids (and are in the process of proving those naysaying "projection studies" to be wrong.) Here he is two weeks ago. This is what "classic autism" looks like in our house:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GSDGD2Rfx-Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pp1LHVkocc4

I also read it is the severest form of Autism but I feel like all asd kids are different and with the therapys they have for kids these days I think anything is possible.

Ya know, I am really tired of high-functioning, classic, severe, pdd nonsence. Whether my son will be a sucessful family man with loads of children, a quiet man who lives by himself, or in need of assistance all his life has nothing to do with labels!!! No one can tell me what will happen, but it is my job to make sure he is the best at whatever he is going to be.

I think our time is better spent on getting our kids services and an education, and that in itself is hard enough. The only thing labels do is help you get those things, but I just tell people he is autistic, and that has been enough.

I also think the label is only important to get services. For that my sons
classic autism dx comes in handy. It is not about the lable, it is all about the
treatment and services.

R is Classic too and in his case it means he has impairments in all three areasbut I dont thinks he is low functioning ( as much as that possible to see in a 2 year old ) he is well behaved compared to other typical kids - very emotonal and attached to me and Dad and therapists and very smart in reading social cues -( except for hs peers whome he ignores)

The major concern for me though is what will happen to my boy should I die as noone has his best interests at heart the way I do, not even his dad. We have no family support and I can't see that anyone would have the patience to bother. I know it sounds horrid but in this busy world we inhabit that's the truth.

Assessments at 3 are too early to know much.

gojo, three years old is still very young - way too young to draw any conclusions about your childs ultimate skills and defecits. At just-turning-three, my daughter, Abigail, had an IQ of 59, very little language, and was considered to be profoundly delayed in most areas of funcioning, required a great deal of structure and ritual and had no imaginative play skills. I remember, her communication skills were not just considered 'delayed', but were actually considered 'disabled'. Today, at four years, ten months, she has come a long ways. Academically, she is like a midway kindergartener, sounding out phonetic words and writing simple sentences. Her last IQ test (at just-turning four) showed her to be in the "low normal" range. She draws skillfully and has good, functional language. She plays imaginatively (though still repetetively) and is a very happy child. She will be attending a regular kindergarten class with some supports. Her language is still delayed, though tests at about a four year old level (for social/conversational language, it is probably less than that, but it's a vast improvement over what it was). Most people now consider her to be "high functioning". She is still considered to have 'classic autism', as is her sister (who used to be considered the less affected one, but Abigail has caught up with her in most areas and passed her in some). I have no idea if she will continue to gain skills at the rate that she has for the past 2 years, but if she does, I feel that she will be able to acquire some degree of independence if she chooses and have many options in life.

fred39261.8617361111

3 years is too early to determine. The majority of Developmental Peds and Psychs will tell you that an assessment at age 7 - 8 is more accurate for the future. Extensive testing then can determine much more.

As far as 'classic autism' 'coming out of it' and goign on to independant living, it is not very common - BUT - pdd nos and aspergers and high functioning autism all have a very high and probably chance.

HOWEVER do not give up! EVER! Love your angels, teach them, hold them, pray for them, and never ever ever give up!

I pray every day that my son will be EVERYTHING he is created to be!

[QUOTE=GoJo68]

[/QUOTE]

yes they can - one of the Floortime moms in my area mentioned that she had a completely anticocial at 5 and turned around and became completely social by age 6

I've just had such negative input from the pediatrician and his team telling me that my boy has such poor social skills. I've seen progress since his dx though, and I do appreciate his young age, but being his mother I worry as you'd all appreciate. Fred thanx for the reply and you must be pleased with your daughter's progress?

[QUOTE=MiMom3]

[/QUOTE]

I totally agree with you MiMom! All we can do is get them the right therapies ,so these kids can become independant etc... Labels just help the correct treatment for it.

[QUOTE=KajoliT][QUOTE=GoJo68]

[/QUOTE]

yes they can - one of the Floortime moms in my area mentioned that she had a completely anticocial at 5 and turned around and became completely social by age 6

[/QUOTE]

+1 on that. At 1.5 he was very social - actually "labelled" a "ham". At 2 my son had zero interest in anyone. He didn't respond to his name. He seemed to not even notice my dogs. He's 5 now doing much better on all fronts and is starting to make friends. I would agree with Tzoya in that the real pros we work with only say he is ASD and don't even say if he is high low or whatever. Getting any form of a prognosis is not happening. Maybe I'm wrong here, but I consider him "classic" b/c he has classic signs of autism. For instance when he points (which he didn't do til 4+) he sights down his finger, so the pointing only works from his viewpoint. He had bad eye contact. He memorizes whole words (and license plate numbers) and can spell way beyond his age. He used to line everything up... I guess in summary, I consider the tell tale signs we all know way too well, to be classic, but I don't think classic is or needs to be associated with their level of disability. I consider the label a functional requirement to get his services and nothing more. I do believe he is autistic, but I don't believe that or what any doc says, will determine his outcome, that's up to him