I work for a nice family. I hope they aren't regular readers of my blog because I am going to quote one of them (from memory, so not very well, but I feel like it's an important thing to think about).
"You try to figure out tricks to keep social interactions going, when you have a child who is often unresponsive. Someone asks them a question and the person is waiting and waiting, and so then finally you say okay, and you say something to keep the interaction going. But over time, the time before you answer keeps getting and shorter, and your child is getting phased out of the interaction."
Showing posts with label facilitated communication. Show all posts
Showing posts with label facilitated communication. Show all posts
21 February, 2013
12 May, 2010
Chill out about facilitated communication, okay?
People get so excited about kicking facilitated communication in the face as much as possible. My psych book has a sidebar in the DD section called "The Bogus Form of Treatment Called Facilitated Communication" which gleefully announces the poor results of FC studies and says how awful it is that Autism is a World ("which purports to show that FC works") was nominated for an Academy Award.
I really don't know how to react to this.
I don't agree with a lot of what Sue Rubin says but, you know, she's a person. Autism is a World is a movie about Sue Rubin, a person. Referring to it as a movie about FC completely erases her.
FC is easy to fake and frequently has been faked. It shouldn't ever be assumed to be working without evidence that that particular person is really typing. However, I feel like there is a way of reacting against FC which is not about FC at all. (In fact, it is even leveled against AAC users who are not communicating in a situation where someone could be physically influencing what they say. The immediate assumption is that they are being influenced, whether there is evidence of that or not.)
In the Amazon comments for Autism is a World people are basically saying stuff like: look at Sue Rubin. How could she possibly have those thoughts? This was also said, of course, about one of the first people to benefit from FC, Anne McDonald, who has CP and grew up in an institution thanks to a diagnosis of severe intellectual disability. It is pretty inarguable that Sue Rubin and Anne McDonald are really typing when they type. Which definitely doesn't mean that most people who someone is doing FC with are really typing. But does this mean that it's bad to do FC with someone, especially if you are doing it to attempt to teach them how to type independently later? I don't think it's bad at all as long as you don't assume that the person is expressing all their own thoughts.
But my psych book bemoans the fact that some people who work with nonverbal individuals still use FC as a treatment! Oh no! Because...every treatment is proven to work all the time? Stuff like music and outdoor activities are probably not proven to consistently "work" for severely disabled people, but...you know, I feel like they're a good idea. Because they might be helpful in some way.
Sometimes I just feel like there's this element of, "Aha! I told you that people who look like that don't have anything to say!" And that makes me feel very scared.
I really don't know how to react to this.
I don't agree with a lot of what Sue Rubin says but, you know, she's a person. Autism is a World is a movie about Sue Rubin, a person. Referring to it as a movie about FC completely erases her.
FC is easy to fake and frequently has been faked. It shouldn't ever be assumed to be working without evidence that that particular person is really typing. However, I feel like there is a way of reacting against FC which is not about FC at all. (In fact, it is even leveled against AAC users who are not communicating in a situation where someone could be physically influencing what they say. The immediate assumption is that they are being influenced, whether there is evidence of that or not.)
In the Amazon comments for Autism is a World people are basically saying stuff like: look at Sue Rubin. How could she possibly have those thoughts? This was also said, of course, about one of the first people to benefit from FC, Anne McDonald, who has CP and grew up in an institution thanks to a diagnosis of severe intellectual disability. It is pretty inarguable that Sue Rubin and Anne McDonald are really typing when they type. Which definitely doesn't mean that most people who someone is doing FC with are really typing. But does this mean that it's bad to do FC with someone, especially if you are doing it to attempt to teach them how to type independently later? I don't think it's bad at all as long as you don't assume that the person is expressing all their own thoughts.
But my psych book bemoans the fact that some people who work with nonverbal individuals still use FC as a treatment! Oh no! Because...every treatment is proven to work all the time? Stuff like music and outdoor activities are probably not proven to consistently "work" for severely disabled people, but...you know, I feel like they're a good idea. Because they might be helpful in some way.
Sometimes I just feel like there's this element of, "Aha! I told you that people who look like that don't have anything to say!" And that makes me feel very scared.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
