parents leaving their offices with an autism spectrum diagnosis for their child will have a clear plan of action for getting their child the help they need, where and when they need it.
Researchers will develop a better understanding of autistic subgroups, so that it will become possible to recommend appropriate treatments and therapies based on individuals' symptoms, challenges and strengths.
Less time, money, energy and angst will go into confrontation, and more time, money, energy and love will go into autism-related volunteerism, mentoring, program development, and other positive activities.
Less time, money, energy and angst will go into confrontation, and more time, money, energy and love will go into autism-related volunteerism, mentoring, program development, and other positive activities.
The
American Psychological Association has issued a
position paper on FC, stating that
"Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that facilitated communication is not a
scientifically valid technique for individuals with autism or mental retardation" and
describing FC as "a controversial and unproved communicative procedure with no
scientifically demonstrated support for its efficacy."
Here is the video about Facilitated Communication (FC). If you have something to do with FC, I think you should watch it.
Parents are grateful to discover that
their child is not hopelessly retarded but is either normal or above normal in
intelligence. FC allows their children to demonstrate their intelligence; it provides them
with a vehicle heretofore denied them.
Facilitated Communication therapy began in Australia with Rosemary Crossley. The center
for FC in the United States is Syracuse University, which houses the Facilitated Communication Institute (FCI)
in their School of Education.
A very damaging, detailed criticism was
presented on PBS's "Frontline", October 19, 1993. The program was repeated
December 17, 1996, and added that since the first showing, Syracuse University has claimed
to have done three studies which verify the reality and effectiveness of FC, while thirty
other studies done elsewhere have concluded just the opposite.
Furthermore, FC clients
routinely use a flat board or keyboard, over which the facilitator holds their pointing
finger. Even the most expert typist could not routinely hit correct letters without some
reference as a starting point.
Facilitators routinely look at
the keyboard; clients do not. The messages' basic coherence indicates that they most
probably are produced by someone who is looking at the keyboard.
Anyone familiar with Helen Keller,
Stephen Hawking or Christy Brown knows that blindness, deafness, cerebral palsy, multiple
sclerosis, amyotrophic
lateral sclerosis (ALS), or physical or neurological disorders, do not necessarily
affect the intellect. There is no necessary connection between a physical handicap and a
mental handicap. We also know that such people often require an assistant to facilitate
their communication. But what facilitators do to help the likes of a Hawking or a Brown is
a far cry from what those in the facilitated communication business are doing.
But
the vast majority of FC clients apparently are mentally retarded or autistic. Their facilitators appear to be reporting their own thoughts, not their
patient's thoughts. Interestingly, the facilitators are genuinely shocked when they
discover that they are not really communicating their patient's thoughts. Their reaction
is similar to that of dowsers and others with "special
powers" who, when tested under controlled conditions, find they don't have any
special powers at all.
It is interesting that the parents and other loved ones who have been bonding
with the patient for years are unable to be facilitators with their own children.
And when the kind strangers and their patients are put to the
test, they generally fail. We are told that is because the conditions made them nervous.
These ad hoc excuses sound familiar; they sound like the
complaints of parapsychologists.
Skeptics think the evidence is in and FC is a delusion for the most part. It is also a dangerous
delusion. Critics have noted a similarity between FC therapy and
repressed memory therapy: patients are accusing their parents and others of having
sexually abused them. Facilitators are taught that something like 13% of their clients
have been sexually abused. This information may unconsciously influence their work.
You find here a very about Important Video about Facilitated Communication (FC).
The American Psychological Association has issued a position paper on FC, stating that "Studies have repeatedly demonstrated that facilitated communication is not a scientifically valid technique for individuals with autism or mental retardation" and describing FC as "a controversial and unproved communicative procedure with no scientifically demonstrated support for its efficacy."
Google had a booth at the Autism Society of America conference last month so they could show off their free software program SketchUp. SketchUp was originally developed for users to create, modify and share 3D models. Turns out SketchUp helps folks with autism develop some skills, too.
overview of research on technology with people with autism, why technology is effective & how to incorporate it into any treatment program
Series: "M.I.N.D. Institute Lecture Series on Neurodevelopmental Disorders" [1/2007]
Google had a booth at the Autism Society of America conference last month so they could show off their free software program SketchUp. SketchUp was originally developed for users to create, modify and share 3D models. Turns out SketchUp helps folks with autism develop some skills, too.
The study, published online today in the journal Pediatrics, examined an intervention called the Early Start Denver Model, which combines applied behavioral analysis (ABA) teaching methods with developmental 'relationship-based' approaches.
The five-year study took place at the University of Washington (UW) in Seattle and was led by Dawson, then a professor of psychology and director of the university's Autism Center, in partnership with Rogers. It involved therapy for 48 diverse, 18- to 30-month-old children with autism and no other health problems.
At the conclusion of the study, the IQs of the children in the intervention group had improved by an average of approximately 18 points, compared to a little more than four points in the comparison group. The intervention group also had a nearly 18-point improvement in receptive language (listening and understanding) compared to approximately 10 points in the comparison group. Seven of the children in the intervention group had enough improvement in overall skills to warrant a change in diagnosis from autism to the milder condition known as 'pervasive developmental disorder not otherwise specified,' or PDD-NOS. Only one child in the community-based intervention group had an improved diagnosis.
In this study, the intervention was provided in a toddler's natural environment (their home) and delivered by trained therapists and parents who received instruction and training as part of the model.
Parents are taught strategies for capturing their children's attention and promoting communication. By using these strategies throughout the day, the children were offered many opportunities to learn to interact with others.
A novel early intervention program for very young children with autism - some as young as 18 months - is effective for improving IQ, language ability, and social interaction, a comprehensive new study has found.
"Teachers at the school have found that the ECHOES program has greatly helped the children improve their social and communication skills. In fact teachers were surprised at the extent to which the children engaged with the technology."
Quite a few children who are diagnosed with autism at a very young age are no longer diagnosable with autism by the time they’re school-aged.
Whatever the reasons, many children who are diagnosed with autism as toddlers will not be diagnosable by the time they're in fifth grade.
Early intervention (diagnosis and treatment prior to age three) is very helpful indeed, but there is no “window of opportunity” that slams shut at a certain age. Thus, even children who are diagnosed later or receive less early intervention may do quite well in the long run.
Early intervention does, however, provide a now-or-never opportunity to allow non-verbal children to develop some kind of useful tool for communication (picture cards, signs, or even spelling boards).
There is no official “cure” for autism. In fact, researchers like Dr. Susan Levy at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia argue that even when a young child is no longer diagnosable on the autism spectrum, he is probably still autistic.
Late talking is not an indication of a poor prognosis.
Children with autism may or may not be visual thinkers. Thus, school programs designed with visual thinking in mind may or may not be appropriate for any individual child with autism.
After many years of research, we still don’t know which treatments are most effective for which children -- or whether one treatment is more effective than another. Behavioral interventions are the best-researched treatments for autism, but even top scientists acknowledge that developmental interventions may or may not be equally useful for any given child. Meanwhile, only two drugs -- Risperdal and Abilify -- have been approved for use with children on the autism spectrum, and neither addresses “core” issues of autism (social/communication deficits).