Comments on: Words a Parent Is Not Happy To Hear

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 19:31:32 +0000

@jonathan, thanks for writing about your history. I am aware of what IDEA says; a parent can still ask for what they believe is what a child needs, and otherwise seek to provide it. “Best” is perhaps a more subjective term than it seems.

And, I’m very aware of the use of aversives in ABA and, having had too many ABA consultants talk about “recovery” and “recovery goals,” have plenty of my own questions to ask them. It’s unfortunate that said consultants and professional marketed ABA in terms of recovery.

@Cliff. Some funding is better than none—-it’s hard to see parents end up fighting each other over what dollars there are, rather than the “powers that be” that make the decisions.

By: Kristina Chew, PhD

Kristina Chew, PhD — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 18:20:40 +0000

I think we’re all aware of those realities but if we don’t demand the best, they’re not giving it to you (not in the school districts we’ve been in). Yes, better funding of education and full funding of IDEA!

By: joycemocha

joycemocha — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 17:46:39 +0000

I also have some issues with the statement that “The absolute best treatment is the ONLY treatment there is.”

On the one hand, you shouldn’t settle for junk. On the other hand, the law does not require the “absolute best treatment.”

Let me remind you of the realities of special education teaching and caseloads. While your child (ren) are your sole focus, as a case manager, your child (ren) are only a portion of a caseload. If you demand Cadillac treatment for your child, then what happens to the rest of the children on that teacher’s caseload?

You want the absolutely best treatment out there, then you need to fight for better funding of education generally, and specifically, full funding of IDEIA.

By: Cliff

Cliff — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 01:17:43 +0000

Living in Nevada (more particularly, in Reno, so I saw this as part of the front page, and I know some of those cited through the cluster of articles that were in the paper today), the funding really doesn’t exist. As an advocate during our recent tight legislative session (for various reasons), it was only possible to get funding for a very limited number of individuals, and it’s true that to get proper funding for individuals in the lower double digits it costs several million. We’re still working with what we have (even now), but it is hard to get funding for such things when taxes are taboo and some want to throw everything into education. Actually, this year was the first year there was ANY funding, thanks to largely better mobilized advocacy.

Cliff

By: Regan

Regan — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:54:20 +0000

The point on IDEA is that the student still has the right under FAPE to make “meaningful” progress, and that lack of staff and lack of training is not valid justification for not doing so. I agree that the law does not specify optimal, but it does not imply minimal or none, either.

By: stopautismquackery

stopautismquackery — Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:01:30 +0000

I’m sorry, I missed where in the blog post ABA was referenced?

By: jonathan

jonathan — Mon, 31 Dec 2007 23:32:03 +0000

actually it is miss whipple who is correct legally and you are the one who is presenting inaccurate info in this blog entry. Kristina, are you familiar with special education law, i.e. the Rowley decision made by the U.S. Supreme court? The IDEA only makes the statement “Free and appropriate education” The supreme court ruled in Rowley that appropriate does not mean best. So, legally there is a middle ground. While school districts are not required to give Rolls Royce treatment they are required to avoid jalopy treatment to use an old cliche.

As far as your apparent insinuation that ABA and other treatments constitute “best” i must disagree. There is no scientific evidence that ABA is of any use and, ironically, all of lovaas’ research has involved the use of aversives which you have disparaged in your posts criticizing the judge Rottenberg center. The promise of a coin-flip probability of normalcy is merely an opiate of the parents of autistic children.

I am a 52-year-old with autism who underwent psychoanalysis during the Bettleheim era. I went from being nonverbal shortly before the age of 3, to having fully functional speech before age 5. My psychoanalyst took full credit for my recovery. Based on your argument parents should ask for psychoanalysis in their child’s IEP because it constitutes “best”