Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

spectrumnews.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 139 posts

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#21

Post by TrinaryWorksToo »

scardine wrote: post #18
matkinz wrote: post #3

Disclosing a mental illness at work sounds like the worst idea you could ever have. I think it's better not to say anything and, if you wrong someone because of your illness, maybe tell that person in private and apologise. Unfortunately doing that makes it sound like an excuse. I'm not saying I have a better solution. Some people simply aren't apt for the real world. That's sad but it's the truth.

Many things classified today as autism spectrum disorders are hardly incapacitating so I would not call it a mental illness.

It can be more than you think. Be careful saying that.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#22

Post by petercooper »

collyw wrote: post #9
petercooper wrote: post #2

It was disheartening to be outwardly liked and praised but to never receive a real promotion. I've noticed this as a common unfortunate side effect of disclosing anything that has a stigma attached and explains why the upper echelons of most pursuits (politics, business, sport) still tend to be quite homogenous. While a small but ever increasing spotlight is being shone on issues faced by various minorities in the wo…

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

I don't think women are equally represented in the upper echelons of politics or business. For example, only 29% of FTSE 100 board members are women - https://www.gov.uk/government/news/record-number-of-women-on... - so that makes them a minority in that context, no?

It's a bit like how people of certain races may be considered "minorities" in our society, yet there could be billions of people of that race elsewhere in the world.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#23

Post by bb611 »

dmm wrote: post #15
collyw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

Women make up 51% of the US population so clearly men are a minority. Ha! But really they probably mean a minority in a specific career or environment. For example, ~6% of truck drivers are female but only ~18% of primary and secondary teachers are male.

Men are 42% of teachers at the high school level: https://www.aaeteachers.org/index.php/blog/757-the-teacher-g...

School administrators are overwhelming male: http://aasa.org/SchoolAdministratorArticle.aspx?id=14492

I'm male, and taught K-5 special education for 2.5 years in my first job out of college. Few men join the profession, and many of them leave for better paying jobs, but I think a huge part of it is society's willingness to make raising children women's work. This is the "oh Daddy is babysitting!" phenomenon happening at the professional level.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#24

Post by loriverkutya »

scardine wrote: post #18
matkinz wrote: post #3

Disclosing a mental illness at work sounds like the worst idea you could ever have. I think it's better not to say anything and, if you wrong someone because of your illness, maybe tell that person in private and apologise. Unfortunately doing that makes it sound like an excuse. I'm not saying I have a better solution. Some people simply aren't apt for the real world. That's sad but it's the truth.

Many things classified today as autism spectrum disorders are hardly incapacitating so I would not call it a mental illness.

Can you name one thing which is classified as autism spectrum and not incapaciting pls?

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#25

Post by loriverkutya »

matkinz wrote: post #3

Disclosing a mental illness at work sounds like the worst idea you could ever have. I think it's better not to say anything and, if you wrong someone because of your illness, maybe tell that person in private and apologise. Unfortunately doing that makes it sound like an excuse. I'm not saying I have a better solution. Some people simply aren't apt for the real world. That's sad but it's the truth.

Autism is not a mental illness, it is currently classified as disability. There is a quiet big difference between the two.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#26

Post by chapium »

dmm wrote: post #15
collyw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

Women make up 51% of the US population so clearly men are a minority. Ha! But really they probably mean a minority in a specific career or environment. For example, ~6% of truck drivers are female but only ~18% of primary and secondary teachers are male.

Majority/minority are not strictly numbers in this context. Its more about opportunities whose limiting factor is age/race/gender etc.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#27

Post by draw_down »

callesgg wrote: post #19

I have found it best to not talk about any psychological pathology with anyone that does not understand it(no one really understands but some people understand that they don't understand). You can mention the symptoms, but don't label it, as soon as you insert the word autism, schizophrenia, depression people will apply their own preconceived deeply flawed interpretations of the problem.

Yeah, I just can’t imagine ever doing this. It seems like a terrible idea.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#28

Post by will_brown »

collyw wrote: post #9
petercooper wrote: post #2

It was disheartening to be outwardly liked and praised but to never receive a real promotion. I've noticed this as a common unfortunate side effect of disclosing anything that has a stigma attached and explains why the upper echelons of most pursuits (politics, business, sport) still tend to be quite homogenous. While a small but ever increasing spotlight is being shone on issues faced by various minorities in the wo…

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

Under the law...one gender, while not a minority, is a protected class.

Protected classes are qualified for special treatment in law and policy, particularly in the context of employment law.

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#29

Post by astura »

collyw wrote: post #9
petercooper wrote: post #2

It was disheartening to be outwardly liked and praised but to never receive a real promotion. I've noticed this as a common unfortunate side effect of disclosing anything that has a stigma attached and explains why the upper echelons of most pursuits (politics, business, sport) still tend to be quite homogenous. While a small but ever increasing spotlight is being shone on issues faced by various minorities in the wo…

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

The statistical definition of "minority" isn't the same as the sociological definition of "minority." It's not a numerical measurement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minority_group

>"a group of people who, because of their physical or cultural characteristics, are singled out from the others in the society in which they live for differential and unequal treatment, and who therefore regard themselves as objects of collective discrimination"

Re: Disclosure of autism at work holds risks and benefits

#30

Post by astura »

will_brown wrote: post #28
collyw wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>minorities in the workplace (particularly by race and gender) We have a minority gender? (Or is that a can of worms I shoudln't have opened?)

Under the law...one gender, while not a minority , is a protected class. Protected classes are qualified for special treatment in law and policy, particularly in the context of employment law.

False, all genders (including male) are protected classes.

"We didn't hire you because we think women make better caregivers" is just as illegal as "We didn't hire you because we think men make better middle managers."

http://www1.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/5-2-18.cfm

>The Children's Home, Inc., a Tampa nonprofit child care organization also known as the Children's Home Network, will pay $18,000 and provide training for its human resources and management employees to settle a sex discrimination lawsuit brought by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the agency announced today. The EEOC's lawsuit charged that The Children's Home violated federal law when it refused to consider a male employee, Luis Vasquez, for a position in its maternity home program based on his sex. The suit further alleged that, Vasquez, after voicing his concerns about the company's refusal to consider him because he is a male, was prevented from applying to any other positions with the organization.

https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/newsroom/release/7-30-18b.cfm

>BALTIMORE - Park School of Baltimore Inc., a private school in Pikesville, Md., violated federal law when it refused to renew the employment contract of a male softball coach because it preferred female leadership, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) charged in a lawsuit it announced today.

Post reply on HN