I believe that the acceptance of neurodiversity will — over a long period of time — phase out the very idea of ASD. In that sense, I see the similarities between the language debate going on here and the debate of "idiot", "moron", etc.

My point was not to make an argument that blindly follows known authority, but to let it be known that research finds that the majority of people prefer (consciously and subconsciously) person-first terminology.

No. It won't. "Neurodiverse" individuals do not self-harm or harm others with their outbursts, elope when stressed, and self-stimulate to the point of injury just to deal with the sensory overload.

Autism doesn't just mean whip-smart, or socially awkward. It can mean a hell-on-earth existence for the individual with the disorder, as well as those that live and care for them. Imagine living in fear that someone saying "happy birthday" to your son would cause him to scream and punch and run out into traffic.

"Neurodiversity" is the wrong cause to champion. Awareness that no label is sufficient because the disorder represents a spectrum - that's what needs to be made forefront of the autism dialog to those who don't understand what it means.

>"Neurodiverse" individuals do not self-harm or harm others with their outbursts, elope when stressed, and self-stimulate to the point of injury just to deal with the sensory overload.

Actually, they may. That's the whole point of the word. Everyone is neurodiverse.

Besides, my only point was that ASD is just as susceptible as any other term to reclassification. Hell, reclassification has already occurred to Asperger syndrome/autism as per DSM-5. This has been a discussion of language, not of the disorder itself. I do agree with your last sentence.