CH4 Dispatches

[smallworld]

There's a piece in yesterday's Guardian about this week's programme. I'd hung off mentioning it, hoping that someone who could do links would bring this up

I cannot take in that any professional would really believe that dyslexia is "no more than an emotional construct"

I know that 'Dispatches' is infamous for it's 'latest theory' type programmes, but this one takes the biscuit.

Can someone help me out with a link ?

the piece is titled 'Anger as experts claim dyslexia is a myth'

I hope this programme is the object of ridicule

wac

[Lucas]

Apart from the physical neurological evidence, it is pretty much proven that a Dyslexic person can KNOW a written langauge(meaning they are not someone who just can't read) and the problem is solely with symbol recognition.

 

Like how a blind person can know Braille by touch but would not recognise it if they were given sight and were then shown a load of dots but not allowed to feel them.

 

Blind people can be Dyslexic, but as they have the visual symbol component removed it's hard to recognise it's there unless there's a proper expert on it.

[Tylers-mum]

Here you go waccoe. HTH's.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1561810,00.html

 

My son's half sister has dyslexia and so do many people I know. it is NOT a myth, it's reality!!

[Ian Jordan]

Is dyslexia the group name for a number of disparate conditions which may give similar symptoms?

 

There is no doubt that people have various difficulties with words - but it is clear that symptoms vary wildly and that causation may be very different for similar symptoms e.g. those that see letters reversed will have an entirely different problem from those that see the letters correctly and decode them as reversed or who write them as reversed! The simplistic idea that dyslexia is a specific condition is unfotunate (the poor understanding of the disparate nature often staggers me, the training in recognition shown by professionals is often staggeringly poor) and if we consider the term dyslexia as a name for a group of conditions then it is fine - to suggest it is one condition is obviously wrong.

 

Dyslexia covers input problems (visual / auditory), coding and memory difficulties, and output effects. Many causes can give superficially similar symptoms, dyslexia is often not a condition - it is a symptom! - and usually one of many in a given person.

The educational effects of dyslexia are symptoms that can be treated with varying degrees of success depending on cause, educational remediation should be the LAST stop for those with problems, it is often like teaching a child with a broken leg to hop, rather than addressing causation!

sadly few children get apprpriate intervention

[call me jaded]

Dyslexics suffer an illness, apparently (from Yahoo news)

 

Teacher sparks row on existence of dyslexiaFriday September 2, 04:08 PM� � LONDON (Reuters) - A professor sparked a row on Friday by saying that dyslexia -- an illness which afflicts millions of people worldwide -- was overdiagnosed.

 

Julian Elliott, professor of education at Durham University in northern England, described dyslexia as a "construct" that had no scientific basis but had gained wide currency.

 

"It is hardly surprising that the widespread, yet wholly erroneous,

belief that dyslexics are intellectually bright but poor readers would create an impassioned demand to be accorded a dyslexic label," he wrote in the Times Educational Supplement.

 

The article, to publicise a documentary on the emotive issue to be aired next week, said there was no proof there was any teaching method more appropriate to children diagnosed as dyslexic than those simply classified as slow readers.

 

Elliott declined to discuss the article or its implications when contacted by Reuters.

 

Dyslexia has a very broad definition -- ranging from reading to writing and learning and covering both literacy and numeracy.

 

Experts say four percent of people suffer from a severe form of the condition, with another six percent suffering to a lesser extent -- making it quite hard to pinpoint at times.

 

But dyslexia specialists rejected Elliot's claims as baseless and potentially damaging.

 

"Dyslexia is an internationally-recognised illness. It affects all races, all religions and, importantly, all ability levels -- not just the intelligent as he suggests," Laura Sercombe of the Dyslexic Institute told Reuters.

 

"For people who come to us seeking help, the first step on the road to recovery is the recognition that they are dyslexic. Somebody like this can actually do a lot of damage to their self confidence. We don't need people like this," she said.

 

Symptoms can include problems with short-term memory, maths, concentration, personal organisation and sequencing. School children diagnosed with dyslexia are given more time in exams.

 

The Dyslexia Institute's website www.dyslexia-inst.org.uk said the condition was biological and tended to run in families.

 

"We have been working with sufferers for the past 30 years. Yet parts of this article seems to suggest the condition does not even exist -- and that is just plain wrong," Sercombe said.

Edited September 4, 2005 by call me jaded

[Zemanski]

When we took Dot to the dyslexia institute for testing we were told that 2/3 of people looking for diagnosis with them are not dyslexic and given her profile, bright but achieving average in reading and writing, she was probably not dyslexic.

 

we came out feeling we had probably wasted almost �300 but decided to go ahead anyway. We were pretty upset.

 

The specialist was very contrite about it when we returned 2 hours later; our worries were totally justified, she is severely dyslexic.

He was stunned by her to be honest and amazed that she was even managing to achieve average, the mismatch between her verbal scores and her writing and phonemic awareness was over 80centiles, in other words her understanding of language is at the very top end of the scale but her understanding of the written word is below the level used to denote a severe learning disability;her verbal ability is compensating for her lack of reading and writing skills and if Dot had nearer average ability on the verbal level it is highly likely she would not even be able to write her name acurately.

 

Dyslexia isn't just about a mismatch in abilities though, like AS it affects the whole child and has a huge impact on their daily life. It has comorbids that go along with the dyslexia too - motor control problems and proprioceptor deficits (as with AS many are dyspraxic), laterality confusion, sequencing difficulties, sometimes even social communication problems ..... - Dot has several comorbids including the dyspraxia. In fact it was the diagnosis of dyspraxia that made us look seriously at dyslexia in the first place.

 

I have a good friend who works for parent partnership. Her diagnosis came late, at school she was considered lazy and slow. She still can't read, follow a map, find her way in a new area, etc., but she is brilliant, funny and very capable. I can't imagine what it was like for her in school, so demoralising, but I can see how hard it is for her just to get by in the adult world. We changed the venue of a meeting once, only just along the road and round a corner. The PP officer had told her on the phone exactly where to go but after half an hour of meeting we got a phone call, she had got to the original venue and tried to follow the directions but because of her laterality confusion and her inability to read the street signs she had ended up over a mile away. Now we always arrange for someone to meet her at a known place for the first journey to somewhere new!

I don't know how she manages to hold all the information she has in her head - she knows the COP backwards - she gets by on paper by using a digital recorder and a voice recognition programme.

 

It makes me so cross when people put down dyslexia as a figment of people's imagination, a 'middle class disease' only there as a sop to parents' pride.

It is not only bright kids who are diagnosed, nor only middle class kids.

 

it is very real to those who have it.

 

 

 

Zemanski

[mrs q]

It is time like these....when there is lots and lots of newspaper articles about dyslexia that i am pleased I am and do not read them.

 

I was diagnosed till I was 16 having had five different english teachers at secondary.

 

I was so angry with my school I look into legal action....but decide against it.

 

Our brains work differently I love reading and read all the time....in fact people are shocked when they find out I have dyslexia.

Edited September 4, 2005 by mrs q

[Lucas]

There is still the importance of distinguishing the difference between a Dyslexic and a person who simply has difficulty reading. One arguement given by those who say Dyslexia does not exist is that the needs of poor readers and those diagnosed as Dyslexic are the same, I disagree: they are indeed provided for the same needs but I don't think they should be.

 

I went to a residential school specialising in special communication needs and it was mostly made up of Dyslexics(which many Autistic adults call 'Autistic Cousins') and it did seem to be recognised in policy that the needs of Dyslexics differ to the needs of slow-readers. In my opinion this was successful. Reading, writing and math were done everyday in the morning to improve their written langauge and number skills, but it was certainly stressed positively that these are areas which broaden oppotunities for anyone, not just Dyslexics and that they were not everything; your life would not be ruined if you did not improve to an acceptable standard by the time it came to leave.

 

Common Dyslexic strengths were highlighted: the two, five and ten times tables are consistently done faster with less mistakes by Dyslexics, many had excellent visual spatial abilities and played the piano in the school hall during free-time and these were discussed and explored in afternoon lessons. The music teacher was often frustrated as the attention of pupils wandered and they misbehaved, she often complained that she couldn't teach them anything. But it was obvious to anyone that if you stuck an instrument in everyones hands and got them to improvise, the result was not exactly terrible. In certain areas they were just simply implicit learners that could not be taught what they already instinctively knew.

 

How I pray for the day when Autistics are given the same view of Autism as the kids at my school were given of Dyslexia.

[karin]

hi all that made my blood boil when hubby read me this article i have thought for years i have been dyslexic i could not read signs but i love to read never learnt to drive as i still could not go from a to b i think ever child should be tested for it at 7 like susan hampshire)who has dyslexia has said on tv numerous times the reason is this my oldest friend has only been diagnosed since he went on to college at school he was told he was lazy his mum told me this today i discover my niece who is nearly 17 has just found out she is dyslexic she also goes to college does it take kids 16/17 years to find out they are dyslexic im sure one of my twins is dyslexic this is how my search started by reading about dyslexia then obviously going on to know they have aspergers although im told they only have traits of it oh well never mind school tomorrow i think i will have someof these keep smilin luv karin xx

[smallworld]

I thought this article would attract some interest, ' Dispatches' is on this thursday at 9pm on CH4.

Thanks for the link Tylers-mum !

wac

[CarerQuie]

Well my daughter is finally having her needs met at College,following assessment of her dyslexic difficulties.She has had quite a lot of help and now realises that she is quite bright and is about to apply to University.xx

[baddad]

Taking what MIGHT be a slightly unpopular view, I've got to say that I think that the very real condition of dyslexia has suffered from similar over-diagnosis as the (again very real) diagnosis of ADHD... I have seen many, many children diagnosed (or often just labelled by parents without the formality of diagnosis!) as ADHD, when, in fact, their problems genuinely could be ascribed more realistically to bad parenting, and I have seen parents of the same type who have offered absolutely no encouragement or support to either their children or the schools trying to educate them, use the term 'dyslexia' as a cop out for either their own culpability or their childrens disinclination to learn which they have actively reinforced.

As always, the problem is one of association, and if (i.e.) the press find ONE person that fits the catergories I've mentioned above then another 100 will be tarred with the same brush by implication, and it is the 100 rather than the one who suffer....

Additionally, we reach situations (as we did a couple of years) where govt directives arise because of 'overdiagnosis' to reduce the number of diagnosis being made. When this happens, it is applied as a LA blanket directive, and the criteria get tightened to the point that even those with very obvious symptoms and support needs are debarred by proxy.

I certainly could not agree with any research that concluded Dyslexia was anything less than a very real and potentialy very disabling condition. On the other hand, I've got to say that the current situation plays into the hands of those who would want to manipulate public opinion, and the ###### minded prejudices that our society seems to need to foster to legitimise it's general lack of compassion and understanding...

RANT RANT...HIGH HORSE...WAFFLE WAFFLE...

L&P

BD

[smallworld]

In a way this ties in to my worry that say, 10 years down the line, are we going to see ASD being dismissed as an 'emotional construct' of us 'refridgerator mothers' (and fathers !) or increasingly put down to 'bad parenting'(that obviously does nothing for any child, asd or otherwise)

Scary thoughts! thanks baddad, I know where you're coming from, I think !!

wac

[call me jaded]

I don't think we'll have to wait for 10 years for this to happen to ASD, I think it's happening already.

 

Is the Prof saying dyslexia dosen't exist? I don't think so. No doubt all will become clear on Thursday, failing that we will have to buy his book to find out.

[Lucas]

It's likely the sole purpose of this publicity seeking is for people to buy this otherwise to be ignored book.

 

Agree with Baddad here, I do come across a lot of parents saying their child is Dyslexic or has ADHD but the simplest test to see if it's likely to be true is to ask "What have you done about it?". If they say to the effect of 'nothing' or 'medication' I know that they likely have little clue of what they're talking about.

 

I may have serious issues with those who overreact or create bogeymen, but at least I know they are not making up a diagnosis to excuse their own shortcomings.

 

Where I do disagree with Baddad is on the "I certainly could not agree with any research that concluded Dyslexia was anything less than a very real and potentialy very disabling condition." , as is the same with Autism; there has never been any research proving that Dyslexia causes specific difficulties. So you have 100% of all Dyslexia research to disagree with. Dyslexia is starting to recieve the same stigma as Autism very gradually and I foresee a future where people will be saying Dyslexia 'causes severe maladaptive behaviours' and 'mental retardation' where there was none before.

 

Then there will be some claiming vaccines caused their child's Dyslexia, etc. It will all mirror the route of Autism and we will be shown harrowing images of what Dyslexia does to children. All this will be said to be because of Dyslexia, with the subsequent treatment and stigma of Dyslexics not being taken in as a factor, just as it is now with Autistics.

 

I went to a school almost entirely made up of what have been described as some of the most 'severe' Dyslexics in England and seen what ever disability they had washed away as the veil of stigma on each pupil was lifted from them and they flourished. You would think Dyslexics would know what Dyslexia is better than anyone else but they don't, not automatically anyway, just like Autistics and Autism. They were told a lot of bad things about Dyslexia which they believed and it was incredibly difficult to remove their own prejudices about themselves as they also believed that because they were Dyslexic, no one else knew Dyslexia as well as them, even though they opted to believe the stigma originated by non-Dyslexics. They very much needed to see other Dyslexics in a 'before and after' context to realise that a lot of the information they are given is misleading.

 

But in Autism, the 'before and after' example is used to 'prove the effectiveness' of interventions, not reveal that the stigma is and always has been wrong.

[baddad]

Hi Lucas,

As ever, you raise some very good and interesting points, and i would certainly agree with you that MANY of the problems dyslexia creates are down to social stigma, ignorance and the negative self image those things contribute to. That's also true of ASD's, particularly at the 'high functioning' end of the spectrum [sorry to use that expression - I know it's not helpful or realistic, because it inherently defines 'functioning' by NT standards that may or may not apply... I trust you'll understand the context i use it in, and that sometimes it's easier to oversimplify for the sake of brevity!], but there's also, in both cases, very real challenges that are not solely created by prejudicial social reponses or the negative impact of those responses...

In the case of Dyslexia, if you remove the stigma and social expectation that a person should read and write fluently, you are still left with the very real problem that a large percentage of work and business communication is reliant on those two skills, and that anyone who doesn't have those skills will be disadvantaged or disabled... Certainly over the last few years technology has helped to overcome some of the problem, and changes in the way things are 'done' could make things even easier, but we've still a way to go before that can be achieved, and it's not all down to social stigma.

ASD's inherently include (to a greater or lesser degree) general (rather than the 'specifics' of dyslexia) problems with communication and social understanding. Anyone with these type of problems IS going to be socially disadvantaged (disabled), regardless of the responses of the general populace to their condition.

It may be an unfair (NT) 'judgement' but my own feeling is that those at the HF end of the spectrum are more 'disabled' in this regard, because they more often appear to 'want' to be socially active, and to feel more acutely the disenfranchisement their condition creates and to be frustrated by it. Those who are more profoundly affected seem to have a different, less complex, kind of social need, that can be met and satisfied more easily on a physical/tactile level...

Sorry, wandering from the point a bit (wot me? Never!!)...

In a nutshell, Lucas, I'll agree that the problems faced by dyslexic (and autistic) people are often social problems, but sorry, mate, i don't think that's the whole story...

L&P

BD

[call me jaded]

Will you two please stop making me think? It's too exhausting.

 

Could it be argued that ASD is/are an emotional construct centred around lack of empathy?

 

Forgetting about all the co-morbidities, of course. Which is what psychs seem to want to do.

 

Anyhoo, I'll just throw that in and run barefoot back to the kitchen where I belong.

[baddad]

Anyhoo, I'll just throw that in and run barefoot back to the kitchen where I belong.

 

We've got a new Cinders for the Christmas Panto everyone! Elefan is going to have such a hissy fit!!!

 

On that 'empathy' thing: I think sometimes people with ASD have too much empathy, but it just doesn't kick in at the right time, if that makes sense...

I know that (ie) Ben can be very sensitive about other peoples feelings and needs after the event, and the emotions he show are definitely 'real' rather than copied...

I'm not diagnosed, but do see many of my 'traits' emerging in Ben, and I am very good at seeing other peoples POV and all angles of all things, but lack any ability to apply it in my own life! In a nutshell, I'm really good at apologising, but really cr*p at seeing situations that can lead to the need for an apology coming...Does that make any sense?

Sorry if i offended anyone

L&P

BD

[Lucas]

It's late now so I'll have to argue on the finer points tomorrow.

 

But once again I must repeat that with Dyslexia as with Autism, the impairment is not known but assumed. Dyslexics CAN read, so don't say that I'm saying the solution is to not expose them to any scenario which relies on reading. Autistics CAN socialise and do virtually everything else that they are assumed not to be able to do or have difficulty with but then demonstrate ease in doing it.

 

I have never found any proof that the conditions themselves are the cause of any difficulty. It's like saying that laws cause crime because if we didn't have laws nothing would be illegal, hence no crime. It's true, but only on a technicality not in any meaningful way, same with Dyslexia and Autism.

[TuX]

Dyslexics suffer an illness, apparently (from Yahoo news)

 

Teacher sparks row on existence of dyslexiaFriday September 2, 04:08 PM    LONDON (Reuters) - A professor sparked a row on Friday by saying that dyslexia -- an illness which afflicts millions of people worldwide -- was overdiagnosed.

 

Julian Elliott, professor of education at Durham University in northern England, described dyslexia as a "construct" that had no scientific basis but had gained wide currency.

 

"It is hardly surprising that the widespread, yet wholly erroneous,

belief that dyslexics are intellectually bright but poor readers would create an impassioned demand to be accorded a dyslexic label," he wrote in the Times Educational Supplement.

 

The article, to publicise a documentary on the emotive issue to be aired next week, said there was no proof there was any teaching method more appropriate to children diagnosed as dyslexic than those simply classified as slow readers.

 

Elliott declined to discuss the article or its implications when contacted by Reuters.

 

Dyslexia has a very broad definition -- ranging from reading to writing and learning and covering both literacy and numeracy.

 

Experts say four percent of people suffer from a severe form of the condition, with another six percent suffering to a lesser extent -- making it quite hard to pinpoint at times.

 

But dyslexia specialists rejected Elliot's claims as baseless and potentially damaging.

 

"Dyslexia is an internationally-recognised illness. It affects all races, all religions and, importantly, all ability levels -- not just the intelligent as he suggests," Laura Sercombe of the Dyslexic Institute told Reuters.

 

"For people who come to us seeking help, the first step on the road to recovery is the recognition that they are dyslexic. Somebody like this can actually do a lot of damage to their self confidence. We don't need people like this," she said.

 

Symptoms can include problems with short-term memory, maths, concentration, personal organisation and sequencing. School children diagnosed with dyslexia are given more time in exams.

 

The Dyslexia Institute's website www.dyslexia-inst.org.uk said the condition was biological and tended to run in families.

 

"We have been working with sufferers for the past 30 years. Yet parts of this article seems to suggest the condition does not even exist -- and that is just plain wrong," Sercombe said.

It's nothing new,unfortunately.

I blame it on American influence-I have seen so called US professionals describe ADHD and autism as disease and pyschiatric illness,generally,ignorant people are okay with accepting those terms.

[Suze]

Thanks for starting this thread up ...........sounds like a very interesting programme and I shall be watching.I thought we,d moved on from this dyslexia scenario, but it seems there,s always some proffessor trying to gain a little fame and notoriety. I feel very angry .....my son is dyslexic it pervades his life and self esteem it was what started us on this journey. The effects are hard too identify specifically as ASD and dyspraxia play a part in his make-up.I must also add that all these conditions have given him skills and talents.....the NT world has no room for people who process and sequence differently....shall go back into hibernation ......tough time at the mo.

[Lucas]

My school recognised that there was a serious ethical issue with stigmatising a group of people sharing a common trait that puts them in that group and then providing them with the means to destroy themselves as a group. It's creating a problem and providing a solution in a manner which pretends the creator is not responsible.

 

It reminds me of a study where Autistic children were exposed to loud sharp noises which just about anybody would find painful and when they covered their ears this was taken as evidence of Autism's disintergrating influence and the goal was to get them not to protect themselves from harmfully loud noise.

 

In Autism and Dyslexia this is worst when they are described as diseases(therefore those who fit into those groups are diseased) and then those same bodies insist on calling them 'people with Autism' and 'people with Dyslexia' as a means of combating the stigma which they themselves propagated in the first place.

 

You can delve into the history on both and find that there have been many 'recoveries' where it is presumed the person is no longer Autistic/Dyslexic only for co-morbids(which are not caused or even related to the conditions, they are caused by neglect, ignorance and responses) to mount up and no one ever sees the obvious.

[Lucas]

Well there was a post here just before the site went offline to remind everyone about the Dispatches programme, but it seems to have been eaten during downtime.

[Tez]

In Autism and Dyslexia this is worst when they are described as diseases(therefore those who fit into those groups are diseased) and then those same bodies insist on calling them 'people with Autism' and 'people with Dyslexia' as a means of combating the stigma which they themselves propagated in the first place.

 

This is the bit that interests me. I recently applied to do a course on current thinking about autism. One of the things that aggravated me and ultimately made me decide not to pursue the course was the University's insistence that they would not accept the word "autistic" in any assignment and that the correct and only acceptable wording was "a person with autism."

 

Like you Lucas my son insists that he is autistic and that he does not have autism. I agree with him. However, I think it is perhaps best to let each individual decide for themselves which terminolgy they prefer and use it.

 

How do others feel about medical and acaedemic insistence on a particular terminolgy and is there really any point in it?

[Kathryn]

Tez, my daughter feels the same way - she prefers to describe herself as autistic, it is part of her identity: just as she is female rather than "having femininity" (her words).

 

I think I would take the same attitude as you towards the university course. I can see why they do it though, using "having" or "with" + noun is supposed to be less stigmatising as it implies a separation between the real person and the condition, and that's seen as a Good Thing in our PC world.

 

I agree people should decide for themselves how they wish to be called. My daughter hates the phrase "asperger syndrome", flies into a rage when anyone applies it to her and wants her diagnosis and all medical notes and reports be altered to say "autistic". I don't know if it's possible to change them in retrospect, but that's what she wants!

[rufusruff]

But once again I must repeat that with Dyslexia as with Autism, the impairment is not known but assumed.

 

Autistics CAN socialise and do virtually everything else that they are assumed not to be able to do or have difficulty with but then demonstrate ease in doing it.

 

I have never found any proof that the conditions themselves are the cause of any difficulty.

I'm afraid I must ask then how many people with autism you know. If someone can "demonstrate ease" in socialising and make and maintain social relationships without noticeable oddness or difficulty (my emphasis), then they are simply not autistic in the first place and would not get that diagnosis (it's hard enough for many of those who do clearly stuggle). The diagnosis is made by close and careful observation of someone's actual functioning. No assumptions need to be made if you can see the problems quite clearly and repeatedly.

 

You can only take the "social model" of disability so far. A person who is incapable of spoken language, who is terrified of the smallest change and who finds it supremely hard to reach out to anyone, even his/her parents - to take it to the extreme end of the spectrum - has a clear and demonstrable diffculty caused by their condition.

 

Frankly so does the person who after 14 years has still, desite constant and patient teaching, not learned and incorporated into their everyday behaviour such basics as not shouting into people's faces from six inches away, not taking everything said to them completely literally, and not repeating the same conversation over and over when the other person has clearly said they wish to move on. Not to mention, likewise after years of teaching, showing clear and demonstrable difficulties in comprehension of the full meaning of stories or subjects even if they can read perfectly well - the reverse of someone with reading difficulties who would probably have no problem working out what a story was "about" if it was e.g. read to them.

 

Dyslexia I am not familiar with so will not comment on. Autism I have lived with as a parent...

 

We're not making it up, you know.

Edited September 9, 2005 by rufusruff

[Lucas]

You're talking to an Autistic.

 

Do you like my panda?

[rufusruff]

You're talking to an Autistic.

 

Do you like my panda?

Panda is cool. Your experience as an obviously high-functioning autistic person is of course valid for you. But consider this:

 

1) your view of what constitutes "ease" of socialisation may not be, in fact almost certainly is not, the same as those you interact with. To be blunt, you may think you have excellent social skills (my son does too): they may disagree, and they are not necessarily the ones who are wrong.

 

2) what about autistic people with more severe difficulties? They have very obvious problems understanding certain things, and those problems follow a pattern that cannot be put down to other people's attitudes, environment, upbringing etc.

 

Yes, society makes many disabilites much harder to live with. But a paraplegic does not need to use a wheelchair because there are steps down to the Underground Station...

Edited September 9, 2005 by rufusruff

[Lucas]

Thanks for that about my panda.

 

Why do you think I'm high functioning?

 

1) your view of what constitutes "ease" of socialisation may not be, in fact almost certainly is not, the same as those you interact with. To be blunt, you may think you have excellent social skills (my son does too): they may disagree, and they are not necessarily the ones who are wrong.

 

My comments on social ability in Autistics are not based on opinion. One thing I never seem to stop saying to people is "Do not speak to me like I'm another idiot with another opinion, I'm not just a talking head."

 

There has never been a study finding Autism to be the direct cause of the stereotyped difficulties associated with it that has not had a million holes shot in it. There has however been research done at the university of Montreal and elsewhere which has revealed that social development in Autistics is often stunted because those they are learning from are not keeping up with the responses from the subjects. Example:

 

Researchers can sit a parent or family member down opposite the child and ask them to try to get the child to look at an object on the table, pointing and saying "Look at this" or some other prompt. The researchers noted that unless the person kept their eyes on the subject the whole time, they wouldn't notice what was going on. Most of the time they would point to the object, ask the subject to look and add another visual prompt of looking at it quickly themselves, in this split second the subject would have already looked at the object and returned their eyes to where they were before. They then refuse to do so again just as many Autistic children don't see the point of repeating what someone else wants them to do over and over. So the person doing the prompting believes the subject was non-responsive when in fact the subjet's responses have been completely underestimated.

 

2) what about autistic people with more severe difficulties? They have very obvious problems understanding certain things, and those problems follow a pattern that cannot be put down to other people's attitudes, environment, upbringing etc.

 

It was Lorna Wing who first coined the Autistic Spectrum and Asperger's Syndrome. She is considered one of the world authorties on Autism. She now regrets ever having done so and segregating Autistics by supposed ability ranges for which there has never been an accurate measure for. The Spectrum was a value-laden construct based on old prejudices about disability and she accepts that.

 

You should read what those with severe difficulties have to say for themselves: http://www.gettingthetruthout.org/index.html

 

Yes, society makes many disabilites much harder to live with. But a paraplegic does not need to use a wheelchair because there are steps down to the Underground Station...

 

You said earlier before this that the social disability model has it's limits but you never explained why. And what is wrong with using a wheelchair as you imply here?

[Ian Jordan]

Science shown on programme was poor. In my area (visual perception in dyslexia / dyspraxia /ASD ) showed such a lack of knowledge that it could be considered incompetent.

In fact much of the work shown on the programme is likely to be flawed (at least in part). The methods of testing shown were very poor and did not rule out co morbidity, the programme ignored or disparaged inconvenient evidence which is compelling - in all a mess.

The results that they claim are so good are ecclipsed by work presented by me at an International conference this year (average reading age improved by 1.33 years in six weeks without extra tuition) by addressing visual dyslexia.

However, I do not claim a panacea - visual intervention works for around 66%

 

The brain scans we have taken are much more impressive than the ones shown last night, and make more sense too

[UltraMum]

In a nutshell, I'm really good at apologising, but really cr*p at seeing situations that can lead to the need for an apology coming...Does that make any sense?

LOL! That's me!

[UltraMum]

In Autism and Dyslexia this is worst when they are described as diseases(therefore those who fit into those groups are diseased) and then those same bodies insist on calling them 'people with Autism' and 'people with Dyslexia' as a means of combating the stigma which they themselves propagated in the first place.

 

This is the bit that interests me. I recently applied to do a course on current thinking about autism. One of the things that aggravated me and ultimately made me decide not to pursue the course was the University's insistence that they would not accept the word "autistic" in any assignment and that the correct and only acceptable wording was "a person with autism."

 

.....

 

How do others feel about medical and acaedemic insistence on a particular terminolgy and is there really any point in it?

I'm just starting my third year of university at Ultraversity. Last year I did some research into sensory issues and came across this aspect - I decided to use the term 'autistic' in my writing. I explain why here but basically it's the choice of many autistic people who have put voice to their choice of terminology.

[bid]

Lucas,

 

Thank you so much for your link to 'Getting the Truth Out'.

 

Bid <'>

[Zemanski]

As a teacher the programme did get me thinking - even if the science was bad and I don't agree that dyslexia is a myth by any means there were some useful observations.

 

1, why is dyslexia considered to only apply to children with high cognitive levels?

Identifying it through mismatches between say verbal and reading or spelling levels encourages this. There is no reason to believe that a person with low cognitive ability can't have it but it is perhaps less easy to spot because if the overall functioning is in say the 15th centile then any mismatch isn't going to be that noticable and certainly not big enough to be seen as significant.

I think there are many more dyslexic children than are diagnosed and I also think that putting dyslexia specific teaching in place for all children hinders no one and helps far more children than are formally identified.

This is becoming more accepted in many primary schools, Dot's has recently put several things in place - all children who show signs of struggling with reading are tested for irlen syndrome and given coloured overlays (I know your system is much better, Ian, but this is a start I for one am pleased to see), they introduced a semi-cursive script to support kinetic memory in handwriting and spelling and they now use a synthetic phonics programme at both KS1 and KS2. These things benefit all the children; those without problems learn just as easily and develop beautiful handwriting into the bargain and those who do struggle have a better chance of keeping up right from the beginning.

 

2, All children with reading problems benefit from intensive intervention, whether they are dyslexic or not. This is a fact. (I'm not saying it is necessarily the same intervention that is needed though) - I was furious when the government introduced ALS as an intervention for those children just below average in order to get them up to scratch for SATs but made no effort to get schools to help the children who were struggling to read and write below that level. There is a definite gap between those that struggle enough to get SEN support and those who qualify for ALS support; quite a lot of children fall into that gap and we should be doing a lot more to help them.

 

3, I have a child with severe dyslexia who is bright enough to achieve average in her reading and writing. If our LEA were to introduce a similar system to cumbria and n.yorks it is highly likely that she would not qualify for it so she would still need her diagnosis to show that she does indeed have problems. She hasn't got a hope in hell of getting a statement or even being placed at SA+ but with that little bit of paper I can still say she has problems that she needs help to deal with, it shows her huge mismatches clearly and shows what areas she is struggling with so the support can be focused. - there is still a need for children's needs to be identified and recognised as a specific disorder, in this case dyslexia, and mostly it will be the brighter kids whose parents get diagnosis for their kids because the less able are more likely to meet LEA criteria for support without an actual diagnosis.

However, if all children were screened for reading problems and visual dyslexia soon after starting school then there wouldn't need to be this sort of split. All children could then be given the support they need focused on the areas they find difficult and all children with visual dyslexia could be provided with the equipment they need before they fall behind - the sooner any sort of intervention takes place the more effective it will be.

 

oh, for a perfect world - or at least a perfect education system

 

just some thoughts

 

Zemanski

[Flora]

Zemanski, Your observations struck a cord with me. My youngest child is dyslexic in all but name! He has dx of pragmatic language delay, ASD tendencies. He has just started year 4 and struggles to read, spelling is very poor, he is well below average and has severe problems with understanding concepts and maths is almost unchartered territory. However, in a visual perceptual iq test he scored 97th percentile and is obviously very bright to all who know him. I am in the process of trying to get him assessed for dyslexia. An ed psych suggested he was probably dyslexic (when he was 5) but pointed out he was too young to dx. However a special needs teacher assessed him over a period of time and ruled out dyslexia. Which means he gets no extra support in the class room. He's 8 now so I assume that it is now appropriate to assess him for dyslexia.

 

Your post has convinced me that the time for 'waiting and seeing' is over and I should start making some noise.

 

Lauren

[Zemanski]

Dot was 8 when we went for diagnosis - it has definitely been worth it for her

 

Zemanski

[Lucas]

Agreement with Ian here, I think the 'science' shown in the programme was subject to some clever editing.

 

They didn't seem to be discrediting Dyslexia at all, but their own projected version of it: which includes only those with high cognitive ability and no one else with a diagnosis. At school all the children had large ability ranges in every area other than written langauge, where all in the same year were usually evenly matched.

 

The 'proof' shown in the programme that Dyslexia doesn't have a visual component appeared to start with the conclusion and then fill in the blanks from there. As an Autistic I saw the Hebrew symbols on screen as drawn pictures, not written symbols(there is a big difference) and I think the Dyslexic subjects in that study did so too. So the researchers made no effort to check if the Dyslexic subjects were percieving them in the same way as the control group.

 

More questions about the control group: what were the age ranges anyway? If they mentioned it, I didn't catch it. The control group was younger than the study group so that their average reading ability was evenly matched, but this sounds more than a little bit dodgy(there are so many errors with this it's actually hard to put my finger on a specific one). Couldn't they have found 'garden variety' poor readers of the same age to do this test with? I doubt it would have been beyond their means.

 

Later they show the teaching method they are promoting to improve reading for all poor readers. What they don't mention is that some of the assistants shown helping children to read used coloured paper to write on and coloured paper to help focus the children's eyes on single parts of each word that they want them to read out.

 

But didn't they say there was NO visual component? Why do reading assistants need to do this?

[rufusruff]

Thanks for that about my panda.

 

Why do you think I'm high functioning?

 

1) your view of what constitutes "ease" of socialisation may not be, in fact almost certainly is not, the same as those you interact with. To be blunt, you may think you have excellent social skills (my son does too): they may disagree, and they are not necessarily the ones who are wrong.

 

My comments on social ability in Autistics are not based on opinion. One thing I never seem to stop saying to people is "Do not speak to me like I'm another idiot with another opinion, I'm not just a talking head."

 

There has never been a study finding Autism to be the direct cause of the stereotyped difficulties associated with it that has not had a million holes shot in it. There has however been research done at the university of Montreal and elsewhere which has revealed that social development in Autistics is often stunted because those they are learning from are not keeping up with the responses from the subjects. Example:

 

Researchers can sit a parent or family member down opposite the child and ask them to try to get the child to look at an object on the table, pointing and saying "Look at this" or some other prompt. The researchers noted that unless the person kept their eyes on the subject the whole time, they wouldn't notice what was going on. Most of the time they would point to the object, ask the subject to look and add another visual prompt of looking at it quickly themselves, in this split second the subject would have already looked at the object and returned their eyes to where they were before. They then refuse to do so again just as many Autistic children don't see the point of repeating what someone else wants them to do over and over. So the person doing the prompting believes the subject was non-responsive when in fact the subjet's responses have been completely underestimated.

 

2) what about autistic people with more severe difficulties? They have very obvious problems understanding certain things, and those problems follow a pattern that cannot be put down to other people's attitudes, environment, upbringing etc.

 

It was Lorna Wing who first coined the Autistic Spectrum and Asperger's Syndrome. She is considered one of the world authorties on Autism. She now regrets ever having done so and segregating Autistics by supposed ability ranges for which there has never been an accurate measure for. The Spectrum was a value-laden construct based on old prejudices about disability and she accepts that.

 

You should read what those with severe difficulties have to say for themselves: http://www.gettingthetruthout.org/index.html

 

Yes, society makes many disabilites much harder to live with. But a paraplegic does not need to use a wheelchair because there are steps down to the Underground Station...

 

You said earlier before this that the social disability model has it's limits but you never explained why. And what is wrong with using a wheelchair as you imply here?

Although I do agree that "labels" are inadequate tools, and that the important thing is the individual person, I say "high functioning" because you have such excellent verbal abilities and from what you say, are not at all in the same position as some of the folk featured, just for example, on the website you pointed me to - needing the huge amount of daily care that they do. I know a lot of adolescents and adults with autism who simply could not access a message board and talk on it - some because of other learning problems, but many because of things solely related to autistic difficulties.

 

I don't mean to say you have no problems and that life is necessarily easy and successful for you. I'm only going by your self-identification as autistic combined with what I've read of your posts, as it's all I have

 

I'd be most surprised to hear that Lorna Wing has completely disowned talking about the Autistic Spectrum - can you point me to where she has said so? She may well have wanted to stress how much variety there is among people with the same pattern of difficulties she identified, and is trying to be more positive about capabilities - and that's fine.

 

I would never want ASD to be a way of saying "this person *can't* do things", but a way of saying " if you support and try to understand them from a certain perspective, you may make life better for them and probably for you as well"

 

Your views on the social ability of people with autism *must be* your opinion, because they are your views. I did not say that they are wrong because of that, and I'm certainly not accusing you of being just "an idiot with another opinion". But it also does not mean that they are necessarily right, or that they apply to everyone who is autistic. Flaws in studies do not necessarily invalidate every single premise they are based on.

 

Yes, many people with autism can and do achieve more than others may expect of them, and it's very important to be alert for subtle signs that the person may have understood but is expressing it in a unique way. It does not mean that their difficulties do not exist at all, or are "caused" by other people's actions or lack of them.

 

Studies have not shown any clear, one-shot, organic cause for autism - a gene or an area of the brain always affected. Autism is diagnosed by how the person operates, by a pattern of difficulties. But that does not mean that there is no root cause, just that it may be different for different people (the brain is an amazingly complex organ), and that no one explanation fits all.

 

Yes, how others respond and react to a person with autism makes a big difference. But it cannot be the sole cause of the range of problems some kids and adults experience. There is a range of ability in communication, tolerance of change and adaptability, it's true. We should not slap a label on if it's not needed. But if it helps us to begin (and I stress *begin*) to see why some people are as they are, and to react to them better, I see no reason to withold it.

 

It's what you do with a label that counts, in my view.

 

By the "social model of disability" I mean the view that the barriers society puts up are more disabling that anything arising from physical, medical or learning needs. I think that it is true up to a point, and that we should all as a society be a LOT more tolerant and understanding of difference and should recognise everyone's right to be treated decently, and make as many changes as we possibly can to include the widest range of people making choices and having freedoms in their life. But, even if we do, we don't wipe out disability itself.

 

This is where the paraplegic comment fits. I apologise, as reading it again I can see it was not worded well to get my point across. I hope the following is better.

 

The paraplegic needs a wheelchair because he can't walk. Even if he is able to access places which people who can walk are able to go to,because changes have been made to society, he will still not be able to walk. All the social changes and improvements in the world won't alter that.

 

Although it isn't possible to point to an XRay or test for a person with autism and say "There. There's the problem which cannot be fixed," and although good education and good response by NT people can make a big difference, I submit that the core, basic problems in understanding and communication do arise from how a person's brain is set up, that a cure is not possible, and that denying that there are any problems won't make them the same as the rest of us.

 

Of course, whether autistic people should or want to aspire to be the same as NTs is another matter ;-)

[Lucas]

I have already said that my abilities are not consistent or always of use to me. It is not adequete to point at me and say 'See, you can do this but these people can't', this is used often by some people to dismiss what any Autistic person says purely on the grounds that they are able to say it, therefore it can't be relevent to their cited 'low-functioning' Autistics.

 

You may not be saying that I have no difficulty, but you are saying that I that my difficulties are not severe enough for me to speak with any authority on being low-functioning as I can't possibly know what it's like. This in itself is as bad as those who say "Well I know some people with Autism and you're nothing like them, so you can't have Autism."

 

If I am wrong, I would like to know what your purpose is in highlighting a supposed contrast in my difficulties and that of low-functioners?

 

I did not say Lorna Wing has disowned talking about the Autistic Spectrum. I said that she has expressed regret for coining 'Asperger's Syndrome' and 'Autistic Spectrum' and no longer believes them to be useful or accurate. Going by the DSM criteria, you can only recieve the AS diagnosis if it's a misdiagnosis as virtually all who fit it's criteria match the criteria for Autism aswell and the Asperger criteria specifically states that the diagnosis cannot be given if the subject meets criteria for Autism. I'll try to find a source for Lorna Wing's comments, they're hard to find as they weren't in a published article easy available on the net but answers to questions from an Autistic adult. She doesn't seem to do a lot of studies anymore.

 

You haven't actually told me where the limits are on the social disability model because you haven't accurately represented it in your reply. I've never heard anyone advocating the SDM say that a paraplegic is prevented from walking by society and I don't think any ever will though this obvious fact won't stop people who can't find problems from inventing some.

 

The SDM in the case of a wheelchair user argues that society makes the person disabled by enforcing the neccessity of walking on them

 

So you didn't demonstrate any problems with the SDM because you replaced the bits of it you didn't quite get with the Medical Disability Model which advocates that disability is removed in a manner based on cost/benefit to society regardless of the individual. The MDM was used to browbeat Deaf people and deny them rights they enjoy today by insisting that their refusal to become Hearing was selfish.

 

And still, the impairment in Autism is not known but assumed.

 

But it also does not mean that they are necessarily right, or that they apply to everyone who is autistic. Flaws in studies do not necessarily invalidate every single premise they are based on.

 

Yes I know, Autistics are still subject to invasive quack treatments because the world is going mad and even once respectable scientists believe that any theory no matter how bonkers no longer requires proof that it's true to be accepted, but proof that it's not to be rejected.

 

I do not appreciate your sentiments that '...although good education and good response by NT people can make a big difference...' as I'm tired that NT people are the ones charged with how we are treated, percieved and are worth.

 

All the studies saying how flawed we are had little or no Autistic input except as study subjects. Contrast this with the studies putting Autism in context which had a large degree of Autistic involvement in the research and what does that tell you?

[smallworld]

As usual I have been lurking in the background reading all the replies.

Now, back to 'Dispatches'...

This programme was exactly what I expected;a glossed over,cleverly edited (I suspect) 'documentary'.

And to be entirely flippant, I didn't like that Prof. Elliott (hope that was his name, it wasn't gripping viewing !) He was far too smarmy for my liking.

Apologies for my totally subjective opinion.

wac