Eleanor was, in fact, much easier to identify. She was born two weeks before my grandson (my stepdaughter’s son) and, at around 18 months, HE was talking like a big dog and she was not. That was probably our first big clue. She made eye contact, but there was no co-play. At 18 months, she was diagnosed with “global developmental delay” by ECI (which I only was able to find out about by a friend of mine who was a school psychologist). After 8 months of weekly in-home therapy, she went into our Pre-School Program for Children with Disabilities. Her progress has been incredible. She’ll continue in the PPCD-K program this next year, and, probably, go back to our home campus the year after, into the Developmental Program. When I think of what she has accomplished in the last three years….how she crept out from behind the couch at 18 months to now be in a classroom with four others like her, calling them by name, participating, playing, interacting…..I think she’s the poster child for Early Intervention. Well, let me re-phrase that….she’s OUR poster child. What works for Ely doesn’t necessarily work for other kids with autism. They are each unto their own. Bless ‘em for that.

Early identification may help parents get started researching sooner. It may help in getting them over the shock of having a child with a disability, so they can move on to accepting the child and helping the child sooner. As infants, shouldn’t you be paying attention to the cues of the child, disabled or not? Shouldn’t you be introducing communication systems?

Would we have been able to recognize autism in Joey any sooner? Probably not. He was hitting milestones, he was happy, he made eye contact, he smiled and giggled with us. The signs of his autism were all outside the radar; they were oddities in behavior, eccentricities of preference. Joey did not cry much, unless he was very, very upset an in serious need- we still jump when either of our guys cry, even though Andy cried a lot. Joey threw his toys or spun them unstead of playing with them, but untilwe had Andy, we had no idea that very young child just naturally played with toys.

Early ID just to have an early ID isn’t very useful. It becomes the same problem we have with genetic and prenatal testing- why is it being done? What will this information actually be useful for?

I get excited though, thinking of diagnosing infants. What I mean is, I had the fortune of being a part of the infant brain research (no, they did not use my brain, but I was able to hear first hand from the researchers) in the early nineties revealing the importance of birth to three early interventions. At the time I trained under Greenspan and my favorite ped. Dr. T Berry Brazelton for some months in DC, as well as working with Dr. Alice Honig from Syracuse. I was an Early Intervention Specialist with the Early Head Start Programs which targets at-risk (I hate those words in describing families) children birth to three.

I just think to my own experience being a mother of an autistic child and the supports I did have through family and education, and then I think of the population I served, and how challenging it may be for a teen mom with no supports and little understanding of child development. That if there was an ADOS or something that doctors could use for even earlier detection, that some of those children who would typically be at risk for delays anyway, would have an earlier chance to learn modes of communication and other aides (ABA, Floortime, Speech, OT, PT, etc..) that would make their journey in life easier.

I completely agree with you on the idea of knowing ahead of time to make the best plans for our children as we prepared to birth them, to prepare ourselves on being and doing the best for them and who they are, and all on their own time and readiness. I love your view and the love that flows when you talk of Charlie. I am excited to hear of any mainstreaming possibilities you may have with him. The world needs a Charlie in every classroom, gym, orchestra or track team.