What is the Prevalence of Self-harming and Suicidal Behaviour in Under 18s with ASD, With or Without an Intellectual Disability?

Payne et al. (2020) looked at every paper they could find on self-harm and suicide in autistic youth under 18. They also included kids who had both autism and intellectual disability.

The team used a systematic review design. They pooled results to see how common these behaviors are compared to typical peers.

Rates of self-harm and suicidal acts were higher than in the general population, but the numbers jumped around a lot from study to study.

No single clear prevalence emerged; the review simply confirmed the risk is elevated.

Anthony et al. (2020) asked the next logical question: what tools do we use to catch this risk? They found none are designed for autistic youth, while five exist for typical kids. Together the two 2020 reviews paint a full picture: risk is up, yet our screens are missing.

Arwert et al. (2020) dug deeper into the same pool of kids. They showed suicide talk and self-harm have different warning signs—age, repetitive behaviors, IQ, and daily-living skills matter in distinct ways. Their work extends K et al. by telling you what to watch, not just that danger looms.

Early et al. (2012) had earlier reported that half of people with autism plus intellectual disability showed self-injury. K et al. confirm the broad trend with tighter methods, acting as a 2020 update to that older survey snapshot.

You now know autistic clients under 18 are more likely to self-harm or think about suicide, but the signs differ. Add quick probes for irritability, adaptive skills, and repetitive behaviors to your intake. Until autism-specific tools arrive, borrow items from the five general tools J et al. list, and pair them with the predictor list from G et al. to catch who needs help first.