There is limited large-scale research into the lived experiences of female adults who have an autism spectrum disorder with no co-occurring intellectual disability. Drawing on the findings of an Australia-wide survey, this report presents self-report data from n = 82 women with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder in the areas of health, education, employment, social and community activities. Where relevant, comparisons are provided with the male subset of the same study population; however, in the majority of analyses, no discernible gender differences emerged. The findings highlight the diverse and complex challenges faced by women with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder, including high levels of mental health disorder, unmet support needs in education settings and the workplace, and social exclusion and isolation.

More boys than girls are diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder; however, there are conflicting findings about whether they differ in their presentation. This study involved a survey of parents of school-aged children on the autism spectrum (171 parents of girls and 163 parents of boys) that was distributed via social media. The surveys provided insights regarding the characteristics of boys and girls (as perceived by parents) as well as some demographic information. There were very few differences reported regarding communication and social strengths and difficulties of boys and girls with autism. No differences were reported in the number of boys and girls on the autism spectrum with special interests or repetitive behaviours; however, significant differences were found in the types of special interests with boys and girls showing generally interests along traditional gender lines. Qualitative analysis of open comments indicated that some parents of girls on the autism spectrum described their daughter as trying to hide or mask her difficulties more but no parents of boys on the spectrum described this phenomenon.

Background: The Secret Agent Society (SAS) Program, an intervention to enhance social–emotional skills, was provided by schools for children with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The program was assessed to determine if it improved social skills at school and home, and whether improvements were maintained. Methods: Eighty-four students participated. Key outcomes were parent and teacher ratings of emotion regulation, social skills, and direct child social problem-solving measures. The standard school curriculum served as the control condition. Phase 1 was a two-group waitlist-control comparison of SAS versus the standard curriculum. Phase 2 was a follow up of all participants before and after the intervention and at 12-months post-intervention. Results: Parent and child measures improved after the intervention but not in the waitlist condition. Improvements in parent, child, and teacher measures were apparent at 12 months. Conclusions: The SAS Program warrants further research as a potential program for schools that serve children with ASD.

The inclusion of students with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) is increasing, but there have been no longitudinal studies of included students in Australia. Interview data reported in this study concern primary school children with ASD enrolled in mainstream classes in South Australia and New South Wales, Australia. In order to examine perceived facilitators and barriers to inclusion, parents, teachers, and principals were asked to comment on the facilitators and barriers to inclusion relevant to each child. Data are reported about 60 students, comprising a total of 305 parent interviews, 208 teacher interviews, and 227 principal interviews collected at 6-monthly intervals over 3.5 years. The most commonly mentioned facilitator was teacher practices. The most commonly mentioned barrier was intrinsic student factors. Other factors not directly controllable by school staff, such as resource limitations, were also commonly identified by principals and teachers. Parents were more likely to mention school- or teacher-related barriers. Many of the current findings were consistent with previous studies but some differences were noted, including limited reporting of sensory issues and bullying as barriers. There was little change in the pattern of facilitators and barriers identified by respondents over time. A number of implications for practice and directions for future research are discussed.