These are the first three in series of short videos of a lecutre by Julie Matthews that address the value of special diets in the management of Autism.
These are the first three in series of short videos of a lecutre by Julie Matthews that address the value of special diets in the management of Autism.
"These groundbreaking family-focused films detail the emotional reality of dealing with an autism diagnosis; how it affects the family unit and the unique challenges that families from diverse cultural backgrounds face. The goal of these videos is to increase awareness, in order to help children from underserved families to become better armed to obtain equal services."
This is where the story gets interesting, and where it became an international controversy. Enter Linda Wouters – a speech therapist who uses facilitated communication (FC). She claimed that after months of training she could communicate with Houbens by sensing the subtle movements of his right hand, which he could use to direct her across a computer screen keyboard.
FC, unfortunately, is pure pseudoscience. It was introduced in the late 1980s as a wonderful new method for communicating with children with cognitive disorders, on the assumption that they were more verbally than mentally impaired. Many therapists were convinced, and many parents were overjoyed as their previously non-communicative children starting writing poetry expressing their love for their parents. (And there was also a dark side as some children, through FC, started reporting physical and sexual abuse by parents and caretakers.)
When people got around to actually testing FC scientifically it turned out, rather unequivocally, that all the communication was being done subconsciously by the facilitator – a phenomenon called the ideomotor effect. They were not just supporting the hand of their client, they were directing it. Well-designed studies showed that the facilitator was always doing all the communication. FC then shrank to a fringe phenomenon – but its adherents would not give up, and FC continues to this day (even sometimes in courtroom testimony), hoodwinking the unawares and having to be debunked all over again and again.
Regarding Rom Houben video showing Wouters performing FC with Houben clearly showed that he could not be doing the communication. In one video Houben was not even looking at the keyboard, and may not have even been awake. But in every video Wouters was moving his hand across the keyboard at unbelievable speeds – not even a neurologically intact person could direct another to keystrokes with such speed an accuracy by just moving one finger.
Laureys has now carried out those tests, and his results hold that it wasn’t Houben doing the writing after all. The tests determined that he doesn’t have enough strength and muscle control in his right arm to operate the keyboard. In her effort to help the patient express himself, it would seem that the speech therapist had unwittingly assumed control…
In the more recent test, Houben was shown or told a series of 15 objects and words, without a speech therapist being present. Afterward, he was supposed to type the correct word — but he didn’t succeed a single time.
It is truly a scandal that FC is still around. Like homeopathy, therapeutic touch, and many similar medical pseudosciences – their persistence is not a failure of science, which has adequately shown them to be nothing but illusions, but rather of collective rationality.
It is truly a scandal that FC is still around. Like homeopathy, therapeutic touch, and many similar medical pseudosciences - their persistence is not a failure of science, which has adequately shown them to be nothing but illusions, but rather of collective rationality.
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."
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]