I’m loving your blog. Wanted your readers to know about the petition they can sign to take some action toward a tax break for our families. http://www.PetitionOnline.com/txbrk456/petition.html is the link or I just posted it on my blog. I learned about it from John Michael Carley at GRASP.

This type of study is done on every demographic imaginable- from single moms heading families, to welfare recipients, to “yuppies”, to other disability groups, to children living in upper-end neighbourhoods and families dealing with cancer.

They are done for various reasons- by governments so that they can decide how to fund social programs and create a tax structure to best serve the needs of society (or not, depending on who your government might be). By special interest groups so that they can prove that their members are being discriminated against or that they need more funding, or by researchers who may be studying the special needs of discrete populations, and maybe the stresses that help make things “better” or “worse” for that population, or by companies or marketing departments doing research to find out the needs and desires of their consumers. I’m sure that there are a lot more reasons for studies than I’m quoting here, but just google “financial demographic research” and you’ll realize how wide-spread this type of study is.

If anything, it’s more “bigoted” that they haven’t done more research on the financial costs to special needs families before.

The Cost of Eldercare (unpublished)
http://www.elderweb.com/home/node/891

Fast, J.E., Williamson, D.L., & Keating, N.C. (1999). The Hidden Costs of Informal Elder Care. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 20, 301-326.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h3824833t6175h43/
————————
Adding the 5-11K to the 12-13K for children with autism seems to be a parsimonious figure as a total. There probably is waste, but I would be willing to bet that it is more in the nature of partial implementation or faulty implementation (which costs the same or more as competent service) or the typical waste that happens in anything rather than assuming that it is primarily due to quack treatments. Professional 1:1 of any kind is expensive and as Niksmom pointed out, so are standard prescription medicines, which may not always be fully covered under insurance or HMO.

I’m talking a little out of my hat until I fully read the report to see what and how they surveyed.

(1) They don’t indicate to what extent the expenses are wasteful, like expenses on “just in case” quack treatments. I’d venture a guess a large portion is.

(2) It seems bigotted to me to make these sorts of estimates. Would it make sense, for example, to publish an estimate of the extra expenses of families who decide to take care of elderly relatives at home?

When I had to go back to work 2 years ago due to my divorce, I was lucky to find a local teaching job. It seems like the best option schedule-wise for both of my kids. I know the earning potential is rather low compared to some other careers, but I feel the time it will afford me with my kids (not to mention daycare costs which I can minimize because of my teaching schedule) make it more than worth it.

I know what you mean about those conference registration fees—-and the costs are always more due to the efforts that one has to make to keep everyone on the home front happy! Thanks so much.

@Niksmom,

I’ve never felt there was a choice—we always choose what our children need, yes? And honestly the payback is so great (I know that’s a cliché but it _is_ the truth).