[Erik Minty]

To Mike Goetz –

First of all I'd like to say THANK YOU for providing the link to your ABAOnline application. I took a look at it and I believe there is tremendous potential there for streamlining the data collection process — more ABA per precious dollar!

I tried contacting you through the feedback link from the website, but I don't know if you received it (or if you've just been busy). I'm wondering if you have any plans to, or would be willing to, share your efforts with others. (I also work in the computer industry and have some idea of the number of hours that have clearly gone into your work, so believe me I don't ask this lightly!)

In case you care to reply privately, ewminty@shaw.ca is my regular email address.

Cheers!
Erik

[Erik Minty]

'Scientifical'? *Oops* … perhaps I should start using a spell checker after all.

[:

[Erik Minty]

Just as parents have rightly insisted on accepting only scientifically valid autism treatment, so I believe we as parents should consider scientifical evidence about MMR vaccines, over hype and anecdotal evidence.

My understanding is that MMR vaccines have been studied many times for possible links to autism and I have heard of no credible evidence to support this. The latest study from Japan appears to reinforce the same conclusion.

As a scientist I have a hard time understanding why a parent, no doubt with their child's best interests in mind, might choose to not vaccinate their child when vaccinations have been repeatedly shown to be both safe and effective.

Particularly in light of yet another study that appears to debunk the link to autism, I tend to think it's caused by misinformation.

Or am I missing something?

[Erik Minty]

I'm a little confused, and starting to get a little worried.

My understanding of the SCC decision was that they were simply (or perhaps not so simply!) unwilling to force the government to provide funding.

While this is of course a huge blow to everyone — most especially the excellent people at the centre of it all — nowhere have I heard that the government is removing the current level of funding, or even reducing it in any way. Yet I have seen this statement offered in various forms over the past few days. So I'm starting to wonder if there is more going on that I don't know about.

Is our funding really in jeopardy, or are people simply speculating or expressing the fear that it might be? I had assumed the decision meant there would be no change, at least not immediately.

I'm just trying to understand the facts as there appears to be some amount of confusion. If someone more in the know wouldn't mind clearing this up, I'd really appreciate it!

[Erik Minty]

I'm not a psychologist, but my understanding has always been that you can modify behaviour, but not personality (except perhaps through extreme measures).

Our experience with our child and ABA has been that it is a very powerful technique that teaches him what behaviours will and will not be tolerated. By learning targeted skills, he has gained the ability to communicate with the people around him. He has learned, applied that knowledge, and continues to do so. This has not changed one bit who he is, or invalidated him as a person. He is, and always will be, "autistic".

So I agree with those whose sentiment is that ABA has saved their children, because I have seen this.

And I agree with those whose sentiment is that autistics are every bit as worthy of being allowed to be themselves as anyone else. Because nobody can change that through simple behavioural therapy (perhaps I should add "aversive-free", for those who may think that this is still condoned, as I believe it has largely been discredited).

I love my autistic child, and I wouldn't want to change who he is for the world. And I love what ABA has done for him. From what I've seen, this is how most ABA parents (for lack of a better epithet) feel.

So aren't we all really arguing on the same side here? Or am I missing something completely? I'm not autistic myself so perhaps I speak from ignorance.

[Erik Minty]

We live in Port Coquitlam, and we've never had any problems recruiting people. We've also had a good experience so far with the school system.

[Erik Minty]

Amidst the proliferation of postings in the last few days I've caught several references to fluency-based training. By circumstance I happen to have a vague notion of what that is, but could someone intimitely familiar with this technique please describe it? I certainly would not be able to do it justice.

My understanding was that fluency-based training is a specific ABA-based technique, distinct from mass trials (or is it discrete trials). Is this the case, or is it a different animal altogether?

In either case, it would also be useful to know from one of the many experts amongst us, what the current state of research is on the effectiveness of this method.

As a side note, I'm happy to report a very successful first two weeks of Kindergarten, and very promising levels of support from the school. Due no doubt in no small part to the giant heroes who have paved the way ahead of us (and continue to do so). There is hope after all.

[Erik Minty]

We originally started with only 2 hour shifts, but we now have shifts ranging from 2 to 3 hours.

For us it really depends mostly on trying to coordinate the schedules of five therapists, a consultant, a researcher, two working parents, one grandparent, preschool, and anything else I've forgotten to mention (like vacations). Good management skills for the resume …

Some supervisors or consultants may have specific recommendations for some children, but I can only speculate as this has never been an issue for us. My feeling is 3-hour shifts might be too much for some younger kids, or those just starting a program (see previous post).

[Erik Minty]

Apologies for the minor gaffe in my opening paragraph. I started editing and mistakenly assumed the "Post this message" button would discard the changes I had made below.

All I was trying to say was that there may be specific instances (I don't personally know of any) where this is not well done in practice, but in theory I believe it should be.

Cheers

[Erik Minty]

Jack –

In response to your question about skills regressing, this is a really good question. In theory I don't believe the specific criticism to which you refer is very well-founded. In practice, there are no doubt examples to be found where this is a valid concern, but . In our son's program, our team has been very adept at "fading out" prompts and naturalizing skills so that they become truly learned. Thus those skills and behavioural improvements >>in general<< have not regressed.

On the occasions where he has "regressed" (i.e., started to fall back into old patterns), this was promptly caught and re-inserted back into the program.

Others may disagree, but I have become a firm believer in (as far as it makes sense for the individual child of course) naturalizing skills and fading prompts / reinforcements when they are no longer necessary. (It almost sounds obvious when I go back and re-read it.)

I would further argue (although I am a parent and not a trained ABA consultant) from my own experience, that I believe this to be a critical component of any ABA program.

That having been said, you still need to find a good consultant and hire good therapists. I believe you'd be hard-pressed to find too many parents who have tried ABA and don't believe in it (someone prove me wrong). On the contrary, it WORKS. Of course keep exploring all options, because there will no doubt be other things that you will find beneficial to your daughter, but I don't believe the specific criticism you've heard about ABA is very well-founded.

Best of luck

[Author]

Posts