[Stephen Paperman]

In my mind, Shannon, it's real simple-people like the moonbats (great phrase), as well-intentioned as they are, are a grave and clear threat to our children. If enough decision makers can be convinced to espouse this lunacy, then our children will be even less likely to be able to get proper treatment for their medical conditions. Don't forget that the "culture not disease" stupidity is very attractive to government bean counters. "Acceptance" is much cheaper than "treatment."

So yes, feel free to discuss how this kind of delusional behavior is a threat to all children with autism who are struggling to find the money for the only treatment that alleviates their condition. Just don't promote it here and you'll be fine.

[Stephen Paperman]

Having read the press release issued by ACT-BC and been frankly appalled by its implications, I have done some research and spoken to some friends who are employed in certain government offices, as well as some former colleagues of mine. The inescapable conclusion I have been able to reach is that whomever wrote this press release has his or her head shoved so far up the government rectum they can count the fillings in Linda Reid's mouth. I will not bother to address each and every piece of unmitigated bovine feces which are contained in this epic waste of paper, but certain lines are just too blatant to ignore:

"Now it is time for FEAT to turn a new page and make an effort to work with other parent-based organizations to push for strong federal legislation to protect the interests of all children with disabilities."

It should be noted that FEAT is the only organization in British Columbia which has ever pushed for strong federal legislation to protect the medical needs of children with autism. Other disabilities have their own societies and advocacy groups and they are not relevent to this debate.

"Now is the opportunity to reform itself (ASBC) by recruiting a board that truly reflects the diversity of perspectives from around the province and employing an Executive Director who does not also hold a position on the board, in the interests of transparency and good governance."

I am informed that Ms. Pugh and Ms. Shumann are both former employees of ASBC. I have been shown records of their involvement in an attempt to overthrow the democratically elected board of ASBC using the worst kind of scare tactics. Their attempt failed. I am also informed that there was some kind of investigation involving Ms. Pugh shortly before her resignation from her employment at ASBC, involving complaints from staff members, though I don't have much detail about that at present. I am also informed that Ms. Shumann quit her position at ASBC with no notice whatsoever, with no attempt at an orderly transition by training a replacement or any other reasonable exit strategy. Make of that what you wish.

"• The allegation that the Ministry financially rewarded people who “supported the government’s failed attempt to defeat families in the B. C. Supreme Court” is false. In fact, no one on ACT’s volunteer Board or Advisory Council receives any financial benefit at all from the contract, and no one employed by ACT supported the government’s appeal of the Auton case in any way."

From what I can see of the official records I have been shown, ACT-BC has two employees, Ms. Pugh and Ms. Shumann. So it could perhaps be said that no one on the board of ACT is receiving benefit from the service provider list contract. A closer look at their board and advisory board reveals a large number of names of people who are either service providers themselves, employees of service providers or who otherwise receive government funding all related to the government's pitiful excuse for autism services. I suggest anyone who is interested might want to examine these names and trace their connections themselves. It is an illuminating list. To say the list, there is a clear and obvious conflict of interest in the group running the service providers list being run by service providers and government employees.

"Clair Schuman, ACT’s Executive Director, was a parent representative on a committee of the Canadian Association for Community Living who was intervenors at the Supreme Court of Canada in support of the families not the government. We are concerned that in the files provided to us by ASBC supporting documentation to verify credentials for many of the Service Providers on the list is lacking. Extremely serious is that ASBC did not follow-up with those service providers who have not provided a criminal record check, in the interests of protecting our children. Receiving those checks is a priority for ACT."

I am told that the service providers list in its current form was the responsibilty of Ms. Schumann herself when she was employed at ASBC. Interesting.

"In the past 19 months, ACT has provided over 15,000 hours of training to parents and professionals on a wide-range of autism related issues."

This is perhaps the most interesting situation to me. For 19 months, ACT-BC apparently was a private company operated by Deborah Pugh. I can locate no corporate records or registered company, so I can only assume it was a private proprietorship. Suddenly, about a month ago, an application was made to register ACT-BC as a society, and it was so registered a week later. Strangely, after running this private business for 19 months which promoted a variety of service providers, the business transmogrifies into a "society" in which Deborah Pugh and Clair Shumann are paid employees, but not board members. Also strangely this business which supplied income to a variety of service providers now finds itself controlling which service providers can avail themselves of government funds.

Indeed, this whole situation reeks. As we used to say in Ottawa on the staff of Frank magazine, we have some prime candidates for the award of Government Fartcatcher of the Year. I will leave it to you to place the names on the award.

I will post further information as I receive it.

S.P.

[Stephen Paperman]

Well, people, it would appear that it is business as usual in government in the wake of the Supreme Court decision. Now that they no longer have to worry about looking bad in front of judges, the MCFD is swiftly returning to their old practise of rewarding friends and cronies and to hell with conflict of interest or any semblance of credentials.

I have just learned from a friend who works in government (yes, we do have a few of those) that MCFD has decided to remove its contract to maintain the Service Providers List from the Autism Society of B.C. and hand it over to that bunch known as ACT-BC. It is perhaps interesting that this development occurs shortly after A.S.B.C. sent out a questionnaire to the service providers asking them to supply things like their credentials and backgrounds.

I would not even mention the name of this group, but I do so that you can go take a look at their website for yourselves, and see just exactly who makes up their Board, Staff and Advisory group.

http://www.actbc.ca/

I am aghast to see the names of many I would not consider 'friends of those with autism'. However I am hardly surprised. It appears to me that MCFD is implementing payback time. If you stood with us during that brief time when the Auton decisions forced the government to treat our children with at least a small amount of respect, you will be punished. If you gave aid and support to the Ministry's war against our children, you will be rewarded, now that the Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom has declared open season on our children.

There have been times in the past when the A.S. of B.C. were in bed with government. In the past few years, thanks to some newer board members, they woke up and started saying "no" to government "requests." Since the Autism Society will no longer be a lap dog for government, they've had to look elsewhere. Oh, I'm quite sure they will have all their tracks covered and be quite able to explain how it's totally reasonable to hand out contracts the way they're doing…just as they defended the logic of handing a U.B.C. staff member a contract to evaluate a program she designed.

If there is any good news in this information that I can see, it is that A.S.B.C. can now finally and legitimately claim they are not in any way beholden to government, and they can continue to stand up for the right things for those with autism without worrying about government retaliation. As far as I can tell, this is the last retaliation the government can make against them-I might even join A.S.B.C. now.

I know we are all busy signing petitions, writing letters to M.P.'s, M.L.A.'s and others, but I think this is another 'smoking gun' that needs to be highlighted in letters, e-mails, faxes and calls to all our elected provincial government representatives. Let them have it, folks.

S.P.

[Stephen Paperman]

I could be wrong, but I seem to recall Linda Reid having once been an employee of one of the useless government contractors-Gateway or Laurel Group, can't remember which. If true, it explains much about the Honorable Minister for the Protection of Autism Contractors. Of course I could be wrong.

By the way, Premier Campbell-and I know you're out there-it could be argued that a person who doesn't understand the fact that Lovaas Autism Treatment and ABA Autism Treatment are one and the same, and who in fact insists they are two completely different things in a letter to a Canadian national newspaper, may indeed not be the most adequate Member of the Legislative Post to have a ministerial position dealing with autism. In fact, it could easily be argued that for reasons of ignorance, misinformation, a clear and present bias against people affected by autism, and previous personal connections with autism service providers with the most to lose from the funding of proper, science-based autism treatment, that perhaps the best course of action might be to ask said minister to turn in her portfolio.

S.P.

[Stephen Paperman]

Erik:

Just so you understand…The SCC ruling gives the government carte blanche to do whatever they want to our children. Before the Auton case began, they provided absolutely ZERO dollars and ZERO cents to pay for proper science-based treatment. When they talk about 3 million per year before Auton, they're talking about 3 million dollars into the pockets of government "buddies" like the bunch who run the bogus EIBI program and assorted other "servicesm," the same ones discredited by Marion Allan in the original ruling. And the SCC did not disagree with anything in Marion's ruling per se, only the part that said the government was obligated to make up for their bad behavior.

So the bottom line is, had the Supreme Court gone the other way, and supported the various learned justices below, then the government would now likely be obligated to fund ALL of a child's medical treatment for autism, just as they fund ALL of a person's cancer treatment or facial reconstruction surgery or burn treatment or anything else. Hell, they even pay for 100% of breast reduction surgery, but only reluctantly did they even begin to pay for 33 percent of proper treatment for autism for children under 6, and barely 10 percent of proper treatment for those over six.

So now they can do whatever they like. They can cancel treatment funding outright. They can divert all funding to the same old service providers at the government trough for decades who are nothing more than babysitting services…or worse. Or, as is more likely, they can dither, and consult, and make soothing noises in public, especially right now while the media spotlight is shining fiercely upon them, and then wait for a more politically correct moment to make sweeping changes. For example, a cynic might say they probably won't do much of anything to cut off children with autism until after the May election. Then after that, we may find all funding being diverted to some batch of subcontracting hacks under some wonderful "community living model", and then you'll have to go begging to them to get funding.

The biggest problem right now is we just don't know what they'll do and when. But past experience teaches us that the government does nothing positive for our children without being dragged into it kicking and screaming. And unfortunately, the Supreme Court of Canada just took away the rope we used to drag them to it.

Best,

S.P.

[Stephen Paperman]

Monika…if my pitiful little thoughts are of any use, you're more than welcome to them. And it does my heart good to see so many people out there in the fighting mood. Right now I'm so angry I could spit. I have now lived long enough to see our kids shat upon by two political parties, three governments, and the Supreme Court of Canada. It seems only the honorable justices of the BC Supreme Court and Court of Appeals have any true sense of what Canada and the Canada Health Act are all about. It will likely take me another few weeks before my feelings are sufficiently calmed for me to be an acceptable presence to my friends and family, let alone anyone else.

To all of you who have posted this week and shared your letters to the editor and forwarded the cause of petitions to Ottawa, thank you from the bottom of my heart.

S.P.

[Stephen Paperman]

Well, David, after all, resources are indeed scarce. I seem to remember that resources for treating cancer were so scarce in the Interior that Minister Sindi Hawkins had to be airlifted into Vancouver by helicopter or jet or something so she could get her tender loving care at a hospital down here. I remember reading all her stories in the Province about the wonderful care she got — no expense spared. I guess having someone drive her down from the Okanogan for her chemo was just too darn difficult, and what the heck, an air ambulance ride only costs about the same amount of dough as a year's worth of ABA treatment. Yup, resources are scarce. If you're the parent of a child with autism, resources are scarce. If you're a government minister, or the friend of a government minister, then resources are strangely abundant.

Lest we all forget, may I remind the honorable members that when they wanted to build three boats for 300 gazillion dollars, there was no trouble finding the cash. And when they decided to sell them three years later for $19.95 each, no one worried about all the losses.

Or let's talk about how when you're a friend of government, and have been so kind to give testimony in court for them, there's no problem getting millions of dollars in contracts to provide "services" to children with autism, even though you have no expertise in autism to speak of.

Or how if you're a friend to government who helps them design phoney programs to help get out of delivering any legitimate treatment, then you get a couple of million dollars MORE to "evaluate" the program you designed. Oh, and it never hurts to be a university professor with a big fat mouth and a pinguis puga…Keeps you from falling over while you're sticking your big fat face into the trough of taxpayer dollars. Oh, but I'm sorry, resources are SCARCE.

Sure resources are scarce. After you're done lining the pockets of your friends, there just isn't any money left for suffering children.

Resources. Yeah, sure.

[Stephen Paperman]

By the way, in my small treatise on the perils of weeding out the service provider chaff, I forgot one of the most prime evildoers in the BC spectrum. Technically these are not service providers, but you will certainly run into their name when your child hits school age. I am speaking of POPARD, also known as the Provincial Outreach Program for Autism and Related Disorders. Despite their high fallutin' multisyllabic name, this group has about as much credibility in autism treatment as a used car lot. Unfortunately, this is also the group who snorts buckets of tax dollars in their capacity as the main "resource" for the BC school districts, who "contract" them to "consult" and "advise" them on how to deal with children with autism in the school system. In other words, the school districts take your tax dollars and shunt them directly into the gaping maw of this organization, who run workshops and directly misinform teachers across the province.

If you follow the new court case in which a family is suing the Abbotsford School District — probably the most prominent enemy of school age children in the province — you will hear the name of POPARD spoken and written about. Beware them and their invidious influences on your school. Your safest course is to make it very clear to your school principal that this group is completely unwelcome, and try to keep them from any form of interference in your child's life.

[Stephen Paperman]

People who have heard me warning about the government-sponsored autism industry have asked me how they can separate the real article from the imposters on the government's service providers list. It frankly makes me a little nervous to be treated like an expert on this subject, since mostly I have read and researched the same as anyone, and these are my opinions only – you owe it to your child to do your own due diligence and never accept what anyone says without corroboration. Still, I don't want to hide behind that valid statement as a way of dodging the question, so here are my opinions, gathered over the years (unfortunately yes, years) in my own need to separate the fool's gold from the real article.

There seem to be two ways to obtain decent training to become a bona fide consultant in Lovaas ABA. The first is the obvious one – training at UCLA itself, or at a Lovaas replication site, or having trained under a Lovaas protocol expert who gained his or her own credentials under Lovaas or a replication site. The second is to have taken a university psychology department program in ABA and then to have trained extensively with children with autism. For example, Rutgers University has a program which is very Lovaas in nature, and there are a few others elsewhere in the U.S. Unfortunately, to my knowledge, there is no university program in Canada that graduates people qualified to be Lovaas protocol ABA consultants. For example, a degree from the Special Education department at UBC under noted BC government "friends" is useless. You should understand that "special ed" departments, as a general rule, do not give anyone expertise in treatment programs. The one exception I know to this is the Masters program at Columbia University in behavioral disorders and ABA. But even those graduates still need experience in home-based Lovaas treatment programs to gain their necessary expertise.

To use the medical analogy, it is not enough to have gotten your M.D. from a decent medical school. You must intern at a respected hospital and toil under the supervision of recognized experts before you can obtain valid credentials as an expert in a medical specialty. Fortunately for those who need a heart valve replacement, the doctors are careful about the training of their cardiologists. Unfortunately for those with autism, the government will put any of their "friends" on the providers list, regardless of their true abilities.

I warn people off against the Laurel Group, Gateway, CBI, Giant Steps, and LEAP for the simple reason that ALL of them were discredited in court as being nothing more than babysitting services not worthy of the term "treatment." Read the Auton decision yourself – you can download it from the BC courts web sites. The problem now, however, is that in the interim since Auton was decided, many of these inept groups have changed their names to escape public notice. LEAP transmogrified into the Delta EIBI program. People who worked at one or more of the discredited groups hung out their own shingles as "experts" and promptly jumped on the list. Many on the government list aren't even ABA practitioners at all – they are speech pathologists or occupational therapists who fit the government's loosy goosy "all friends welcome" definition, so on they went.

The so-called EIBI programs are perfect examples of the government continuing to let their friends get fat on taxpayers' money while our children suffer. If you want to take your own independent funding and hire a legitimate Lovaas ABA consultant, and IF your child is under six years old, then the government will condescend to partially follow the Auton ruling and will begrudgingly provide you with $20,000 per year for your child, about one-third of the amount necessary for a proper 40-hour per week program and a flagrant violation of the Auton and Anderson court orders. On the other hand, the government "friends" at the EIBI program get handed $60,000 per year per child for TWENTY hours per week of "therapy," none of which is legitimate Lovaas autism treatment. I'll save you the math – the government gives their discredited, unacceptable "buddies" SIX times the amount of funding per child as they will give to legitimate therapy (three times the funds for one half the therapy time). If they at least spent that money on true, scientifically proven treatment, it wouldn't be so bad. But their friends have no expertise in scientifically proven treatment, so it will be a very cold day in Victoria when that happens.

Let's talk a little about BCBA certification – or "board certified behavior analyst." You should understand that ABA is a huge field, and only a small part of it has to do with autism. Having a BCBA does not make you qualified to do Lovaas, unless you also have experience in proper home-based treatment programs. Many of the most talented and experienced Lovaas consultants have not yet gotten this certification, because they're too busy helping our children to take the time to go back to studying and sitting exams. So a BCBA is nice, but it's not the only requirement, and a non-certified but experienced and well trained Lovaas consultant is better than a BCBA whose credentials are based on animal studies.

Any bonafide behavior consultant should be THRILLED to hand you their C.V. and resume, as well as providing you with a couple of families to call for references. If they won't, or give you some nonsense about confidentiality, run to the nearest exit. Of course they can't simply hand you names and phone numbers, but they can ask their families for permission to let you call. And their C.V. is never "confidential," unless they have something to hide – like a lack of experience.

If you ever hear the word "eclectic" come out of someone's mouth, forget any thought of hiring the person who spoke it. An "eclectic" is a good person to hire to paint your living room. You want proven science-based Lovaas ABA treatment for your child, not some artistic collage of unproven, discredited and often dangerous "alternative" treatments.

Last words – when in doubt, phone FEAT. Generally that's where the most up to date information can be found on consultants specifically and ABA in general.

[Stephen Paperman]

I apologize in advance — this one is going to be a little long.

Jenny's points are well made and I agree with them except one — you should NEVER give up the responsibility of choosing your own consultant and arranging their services. The government has proved itself especially inept at lining up reputable service providers — the vast majority of them are amateurs and imposters who have ingratiated themselves with the bureaucrats and gained access thereby to your tax dollars. I have scanned the service provider list that A.S. of B.C. manages for them, and it's full of people I wouldn't hire to walk my collie, let alone handle my child's therapy program.

It should also be noted that the government's antipathy to our children and ourselves knows no bounds, and this new "offer" of direct payment to service providers is nothing less than a direct attack on the individual funding option. If these MCFD mandarins can talk enough people into going over to "direct payment," then they can justify canceling the individualized funding. From there it's a short hop skip and jump to removing legitimate consultants from the list — "Well, they're from the US, and we want to support our local experts, so we're going to send your child to POPARD."

We must be ever vigilant to the machinations of Victoria, until such time as they recognize our children's rights to equal access to the medical system, publicly and with hard firm policy to back it up. There are a couple of very simple ways the government can demonstrate their good intentions:

1. State publicly that they were wrong in Auton, that our children deserve completely equal access to the health insurance program, and then henceforth, medically necessary Lovaas-ABA treatment will be fully funded for all children who need it, as determined by their own medical practitioners.

2. Move autism from the welfare ministry to the health ministry where it has always belonged, and give Care Card billing privileges to all bona fide Lovaas ABA consultants, as they do to all other bona fide medical practitioners.

If I ever see a day when these simple steps are taken, I may believe someone in government has my child's interests at heart. Until that day, I will remain suspicious, vigilant, and diligent in recording every move they make. Like they used to say on TV, whatever they say or do can and will be held against them.

[Author]

Posts