Uncategorized

By RICHARD MACKIE UPDATED AT 7:02 AM EST Thursday, Dec. 11, 2003 Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty has promised that his government will help families with autistic children, despite the fact it is in court fighting parents seeking extended treatment for their children. "I think we have a responsibility to help them," the Premier told reporters at Queen's Park yesterday. "We are determined to sit down with the families and find innovative solutions." He said the Liberals are continuing to fight the court case, which was initiated under the former Progressive Conservative government, because of the point of law involved and the issue of the extent to which the courts can order governments to provide social programs. "The best advice I have gotten from the Attorney-General is that there is something larger at stake here in terms of mandating governments to proceed with certain kinds of expenditures. That's why we're in court," Mr. McGuinty said. In the legislature he said: "What the parents are asking the courts to do is to force the government to make certain kinds of expenditures. That has far-reaching effects beyond this particular issue." While Mr. McGuinty talked of larger issues, the immediate focus of the court case is the fact that the government does not provide funds for children over age 5 to participate in a program that has proven successful in enhancing the ability of autistic children to function in school and society. There are about 500 children benefiting from the program while another 1,000 are waiting to get into it and will likely turn 6 before they qualify. Further, an estimated 2,000 have passed age 6 and will never benefit from the program if the government holds to its present policy. Prior to the election, Mr. McGuinty promised to change the policy to extend the program to children over 5. But the government is still in court fighting a group of parents who argue that it is a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to deprive the older children of the program. Ontario's action is similar to a fight being waged by the British Columbia government, which has gone to the Supreme Court of Canada to appeal a court order that it must fund autism treatment for several families.

PRNewswire - A Bi-Partisan House Bill #4169 entitled, "Mercury-Free Vaccines Act of 2004," has been introduced by the only medical doctor in the House of Representatives, Congressman Dave Weldon, MD (R-FL), and his Democratic colleague from NY, Congresswoman Carolyn Maloney.Thimerosal, a mercury preservative, is 49.6% mercury by weight. Five years after the FDA realized its mistake of having high doses of mercury in vaccines, it still remains in many. Additionally, the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) has recommended administration of the flu vaccines to infants at 6, 7 and 23 months of age. Yet they have not recommended to parents or doctors to only give children mercury-free vaccines. This will unnecessarily risk thousands of children to mercury at levels higher than the EPA deems as safe. HR 4169 requires that no childhood vaccine may have more than one microgram (mcg.) of mercury by January 2005, versus the usual 25 mcg. currently in many vaccines. It also requires the flu vaccine administered to children, beginning later this year with the 2004-05 flu season, have no more than one mcg. of mercury, and that all mercury be removed completely from childhood and adolescent vaccines by January, 2006 and adult vaccines by 2007. Hundreds of parents of children originally misdiagnosed with autism, now being treated for mercury poisoning, want to spare other children from the horrible effects of mercury poisoning. They have been faxing and telephoning their Congressmen urging them to do the right thing and get behind the "Mercury-Free Vaccines" Bill. Autism rates across the country have grown over 1000% since 1990. And, there is a growing phenomena: scientific research and medical tests showing autistic children to be heavy metal poisoned, many releasing large quantities of mercury from their bodies as they are treated with FDA-approved chelating agents. And autistic children are getting better with chelation -- many beginning to talk and regain cognitive and social skills after chelation. "Since most parents saw the drop off of our children's skills after thimerosal-containing vaccines and our children have subsequently been diagnosed with mercury poisoning, we have drawn the likely conclusion that our children's mandated vaccines that contained mercury caused their autism," said Jo Pike, President of the National Autism Association. "The science is beginning to prove this theory. I am thrilled that the Mercury-Free Vaccines Bill has been introduced to save children from what I believe was my child's fate." The Institutes of Medicine (IOM) recently held a meeting called, "Immunization Safety Review: Vaccines and Autism" to hear the latest information to consider a link between vaccines and autism. The symptoms of autism and mercury poisoning are virtually identical. Their report is due to be released in May. For the latest scientific research on the link between mercury and autism, visit www.nationalautismassociation.org/library.php .

It's always everything, not just one thing. by Nathan E. Ory, M.A. Why is a supportive environment, positive modelling and "behavior management" with reinforcement for appropriate behavior, and negative consequences for inappropriate behavior sometimes just not good enough? Behavior management isn't "good enough" for someone whose developmental disability is such that they are unable to learn from their own experience. The nature of some very handicapping brain dysfunctions is that some individuals "live in the moment". Often, their attention and consciousness goes through wide fluctuations and is variable within the moment, hour, or day. Living in the moment, when they have an "old" memory, it is reacted to as though it is happening right now. They have no sense of "before" and "after." Later doesn't exist for them. There is only now. Waking up in the morning is like a Post?Traumatic Stress experience. They often display "conditioned" emotional reactions to "old", negative, triggering events, or anything that reminds them of these. Living in the moment, they don't have a sense of continuity, or connectedness to their own past and future. Thus, they can not generalize their experience. Living in the moment, they can not shift their immediate thought. Whatever is on their mind dominates their actions. They can not see alternatives, or the "other" person's point of view. There is only what is on their own mind right now. They can not "share" their attention, or easily shift their attention. Living in the moment, they can not resolve their own feelings of conflict. Having a conflict means having two different, opposite feelings, at the same time. Living in the moment, they can only deal with one thing at a time. They may not be able to resolve conflict, but they know what they do not like. They can tell what is wrong right now. They often are "smarter" than they can act. Being unable to organize themselves towards their own positive goals, they often become overfocused on reacting against what is going on around them that they sense is "wrong", in the moment. Often they become very emotionally fragile. Living In the moment, they are reactive and absorb the emotions displayed around them. Often they magnify the emotions displayed around them. Often they become "stuck" in an emotion and escalate out of control. They have little ability to "take a step back" to attenuate or modulate their emotional reactions. They depend on you to rescue them. This is why some people "don't get better." Nathan Ory is a psychologist with the Island Mental Health Support Team Copyright 2001 challengingbehavior@shaw.ca

by Nathan E. Ory, M.A. For most people with developmental disabilities, they understand far, far more than they can express in their own words. Their "receptive" language is better than their "expressive" language. Most of us evaluate how "smart" another person is by how well they can talk to us about what is on their mind, and what they know. It is often confusing to those who support persons with autism that they can talk a blue streak about things they know about, but not seem to understand or remember what other people say to them. The relatively high expressive ability of a person with autism is often a reflection of their competent, long-term memory. Things that they know about or have memorized they can repeat with amazing indications of intelligence. Things that were of emotional importance are often easily remembered forever. This is why some persons with autism can look at a picture from some long-ago family event and tell you everything about what they ate, who was there, and what happened that day. This is why some persons with autism can repeat all the rules about all the Pokemon characters. The relatively low receptive ability of a person with autism is often a reflection of their distractibility, difficulty in focusing their attention and integrating what is being said, or difficulty in immediate, short-term memory. If they can focus and repeat or rehearse information, they can get it into their long-term storage. Until they do that they are often unable to process much of what is said to them. This is why you ask some persons with autism to do something and they pick up on the last two words, and delete the rest of what was asked. This is why some persons with autism will repeat three words of a ten-word sentence that you ask them to repeat. Difficulties in short-term memory make it extremely difficult for someone to follow sequential directions. This is why we learn to give persons with developmental disabilities single-step instructions. This is why we learn to use constantly available pictures and lists to overcome problems with immediate memory for spoken language. The reason why some people can say more words than they can remember or understand is the same reason why you can remember the phone number of your sister, mother, brother-in-law, and work number. These are four, seven digit numbers. You remember these from your long-term memory that was established with a lot of practice and familiarity. Could you remember four new seven digit numbers if these were read out to you, 28 digits at once. The answer is no! You may only remember four or five digits of the last seven spoken to you. The same thing happens to the people we support who are able to say more than they can understand (all at once.) It is just that their limit is often much smaller. They may only be able to take in three or four digits or words at a time. So we find it necessary to use two and three word, single-step directions with some people, even though they are able to talk to us in 12 word sentences when they are describing something that they know well, or are thinking about in the moment. Often times it is valuable to repeat what you want one person to hear to another two or three people in her environment, before saying it directly to the person you are supporting. This may give her/him time to filter it into their consciousness the third or fourth time they hear it. Just the same way we repeat a new phone number over and over before we "get it" into our heads. Nathan E. Ory, M.A., Registered Psychologist © 2003 Challenging Behavior Analysis and Consultation challengingbehavior@shaw.ca

By Nigel Hawkes Many highly successful people owe their eminence to a small dose of autism, experts in the condition believe. Autism is a disabling and alienating disorder, cutting sufferers off from normal human contact, but milder forms have probably helped successful scientists and artists to achieve the isolation they need to do their best work. Hans Asperger, the Austrian doctor who first described what he called autistic psychopathy of childhood, said: "It seems that for success in science or art a dash of autism is essential." He was describing a set of peculiarities, now named after him, that set apart some children. Asperger's patients were all boys, who often had relations with similar quirks. They were intelligent, original and good at abstract thinking, but ploughed their own furrow to the detriment of schoolwork. They spoke "like little adults", but were poor listeners, making little conversational effort. Asperger wondered if the condition he was observing might be "an extreme variant of male intelligence, of the male character". Since his work became widely known, psychiatrists have enjoyed retrospectively diagnosing figures from the past as having Asperger's Syndrome. Among the earliest, says the psychiatrist Lorna Wing, who played a leading part in making Asperger's work known, was Brother Juniper, a follower of St Francis of Assisi. He displayed the literalness of mind often seen in autism. Urged to give up his earthly goods to the poor, he stripped and handed over all his clothes. A classic Asperger's sufferer was Henry Cavendish, an 18th-century aristocrat and scientist, who gave his name to the Cavendish Laboratory at Cambridge. His most important discovery was hydrogen. He was such a perfectionist that he published only those results that satisfied him completely, and was so reluctant to make contact with others that he built his library four miles from his home. His female servants were told to keep out of sight on pain of dismissal. To avoid talking to them, he ordered his dinner by means of a note placed on the hall table. The philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein did not speak until he was four. He hated school, and did poorly there. He said that his inability to recognise another's humanity was exactly like somebody listening to a foreign language he did not understand. Yet Wittgenstein had a towering intellect which enabled him to write his philosophical work Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus while serving with the Austrian Army in the First World War. His relations with others were often strained. On a visit to the United States he was offered rye bread and cheese for his first lunch. He ate the same thing during his entire stay. To Dr Wing, such examples emphasise how the isolating effects of Asperger's Syndrome can be turned to advantage by those who also have the intelligence for intellectual pursuits. Other candidates for retrospective diagnosis, she suggests, include Albert Einstein and the composer Erik Satie. Others have nominated the Canadian pianist Glenn Gould, a genius of the keyboard, who retired from the concert stage at 31 and thereafter played only in the recording studio. He used the telephone as a lifeline, talking on it to people for hours at a time, enabling him to carry on relationships without having to meet people. The artist Andy Warhol, described by some who knew him as "socially inept", also hated change, a common feature of autistic people. Some have seen in his repeated images the obsessive preoccupations found in people with Asperger's Syndrome. Copyright 2001 Times Newspapers Ltd. Welcome to the Families for Early Autism Treatment Website

By Sam Lister in the Daily Post A postmaster jailed for swindling £50,000 to fund his daughter's out-of-control spending says he may be forced to abandon her. Bill Ainscow was sentenced to 15 months jail in January after pleading guilty to stealing money from pension books at his post office but was released on appeal last month. He and his wife, Wendy, have had to re-mortgage their detached home in Prenton Dell Road, Wirral, to repay the stolen cash. But the couple say they are back in the same desperate position that drove Mr Ainscow, who worked in oceanology for 20 years and for the Ministry of Defence, to steal. Daughter Lisa, 32, suffers from Asperger's Syndrome, a form of autism that causes severe behavioural problems. Her constant threats and jibes are something the couple have learned to deal with since she hit her teenage years. But Lisa's compulsive spending has driven them to financial ruin as well as landing Mr Ainscow in jail and the little money they have is rapidly running out. Mr Ainscow said: "It's nobody's fault, it's not ours, our daughter's or the medical staff who deal with her. "The doctors cannot section her because she doesn't have the correct kind of mental health condition, the police cannot do anything unless she commits a crime. "Everyone is powerless to help but it just means we are back to square one and we don't know where to turn for help. "We are going to see Stephen Hesford, our MP, to see if he can help us. We can't carry on like this. If something doesn't change soon we're going to have to just leave the house and Lisa and start somewhere new. "We don't want to do it, but we can't see any other way. I don't know where we would go." Mr Ainscow stole to fund his daughter's spending sprees. Lisa demands money for expensive clothes daily and has filled every room in their house with her purchases. And Mrs Ainscow, 63, has had to return to work as a supply teacher to pay for her daughter's expensive tastes. She said: "Every day is horrific. From the minute she gets up she bombards us with threats." "Lisa gets very depressed and often talks about killing herself. She's even written to Tony Blair asking if she can be "euthanised". "She is a child in an adult's body. We don't want to leave her to fend for herself but we don't know what else to do." Brenda Nally, regional co-ordinator of the National Autistic Society, said: "It can be extremely stressful for the families of those with Asperger's Syndrome. "Compulsive behaviour like this is a way of someone with the syndrome to have control over their lives. Trying to stop them is not an easy task." New report backs parents' anguished plea A REPORT published today backs the plea for help by Wirral couple Bill and Wendy Ainscow. Autism: Rights in Reality by the National Autistic Society claims that people with autism are still falling between the gaps when it comes to getting the support and benefits they are entitled to. It has been released to coincide with Autism Awareness Week 2003 which starts today, and reveals how sufferers of Asperger's Syndrome don't fit current ways of thinking about disability. Over 60pc of carers found getting support from social services difficult and 40pc were unhappy with the help they received. Steve Broach, co-author of the report, said: "People with autism spectrum disorders continue to find themselves doubly excluded. First as a result of their social and communication impairments, and then because support services are not designed or equipped to effectively meet their needs. "The Government has started to address this exclusion but more needs to be done. "An urgent priority is autism awareness training and job-specific training in autism for all professionals working with this group. "Families affected by autism also need more and better information to help them access their full range of rights and entitlements."

Article By: Marie Inglee Article Date: 09/01/2010Several years ago, a student whom I will call Frank, came to my classroom, introduced himself and said to me "I just cannot seem to pass fourth grade." I told him we would figure it out together. Off we went to fourth grade for a lesson and I sat at the back of the room and watched my new friend participate. The teacher illustrated something on the board and then turning to the class said “If you get this, raise your hand.” Frank put up his hand with the others. So far so good. The teacher then turned her back to the class and went on to write something new on the board. Frank kept his hand up, long after the others had put theirs down. Suddenly realizing that he stood out, he looked very worried, put his hand down and began fidgeting in his seat. He also began flapping his hands and rocking. As the teacher droned on, Frank had tuned out and was missing a great deal of the next lesson. All because there was an implied direction rather than a spoken directive such as “hands down”. He pulled himself together admirably, but this took time, and time was not on his side. Frank and I next went out to recess. Frank looked for a group to participate in and as he found one, he stood there frozen just outside the perimeter of the game, He was on the outside, staring in at what he wanted to be his part of his world. We had much work to do. Frank could pass fourth grade with help, but what he could not pass for was a child who blended in. We devised strategies to help. These included: 1) when in doubt, just do what everyone else is doing. This gives time to blend and attend. 2) Stim modification....when Frank needed to flap/wring his hands, he went to the sink and did so while washing his hands. Frank came up with his own strategies.....I watched him one day start to flap outside and turn it immediately into a pretend swing of a baseball bat. 3) Added visual supports. For whatever he said he did not understand, we made a visual of what was truly going on. We also used index cards as cue cards that he would carry. 4)Role play..we practiced how to enter a group, how to exit a group, what a proper speaking distance was. We would practice it, he would try it out and then report back as to how it worked. If it didn't, we modified it until it did. Frank passed fourth grade that year and got invited to his first birthday party! Frank has the potential to be anything that he wants to be. Yet he was lost in a system that failed to recognize his unique strengths and challenges. He came to me completely baffled; with no tools or strategies to succeed.. No one had ever sought to empower him by teaching him self advocacy. No one had ever made it OK for him to be the magnificent child that he was and continues to be. Frank didn't fail fourth grade. Fourth grade failed Frank.

This was written as an autism website article. The same information applies to any individual who is functionally dependent on others in some specific areas, and who for reasons other than autism does not learn from correction, or who for reasons other than autism does not get why people are distressed with their behavior. Parents, teachers and caregivers of children with autism are sometimes faced with episodes of extreme behavior. The first instinct we all follow is to use 'common sense' methods for controlling the disruptive behavior of any child. In many ways, children with autism think and learn in a different manner than "normal' children. When a child with autism acts out in some excessive or violent manner those of us who support them need to ask ourselves several questions. Whose problem is this? Who has to accommodate? Who has to learn something new to be able to solve these problems? When we are raising our children, our role as parents is to have our own cultural standards for behavior, and to teach our children how to conform and to share in those cultural expectations. Things like "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you", "Don't interrupt while someone is speaking", or "It's polite to share..." we are all familiar with them. They are those slogans on the poster about "Everything I need to know in life I learned in kindergarden." The child is expected to accommodate and to learn. We set the standard. We model correct social behavior. We remind and caution about the "rules". We often make it fun to follow the social rules by offering positive consequences (rewards) for cooperation ("Whoever can use the quietest voice gets an extra book", "Whoever is the most polite gets to go on the computer first, etc.) When necessary we control a child who will not accommodate by removing them from social opportunity. If they are just too tired to get along we may put them down for a nap or have them sit out a turn till they are calmed down and ready to cooperate. Often this is all that is required. These are the methods that we use to elicit voluntary cooperation and to socialize our children to grow up to become responsible, caring adults. Some children still don't get the polite message that the world has boundaries and external expectations. We may use negative consequences (punishments) to teach them that they do not have the right to be omnipotent, to always have their own way, or to bully others. We may use consequences such as sending them to their room. We may briefly take away privileges (bed time, television), or even "ground" them from certain activity. When needed to maintain order and control, these are ways we educate our kids that someone else is in control, and that control will be maintained in their world. In this culture, using these methods, children learn that there are boundaries. We teach children that they are expected to act in a socially responsible manner, be accountable and responsible for their actions, and that they must accommodate some of their own behavior to be able to fit into the social norm. And this works just fine for the greatest majority of our children. If we did not follow these cultural traditions our children would grow up "spoiled", expecting everything to be their way, whenever they want, and not become caring about the rights of others. Here is the dilemma. For a person with autism, their mind does not perceive the other point of view. They can sometimes see the meaning of what is being explained to them through a social story. Even then, it is bringing the information to them, in story form, so that it can become their point of view. They process, as through blinders, only what is concrete, and immediately apparent, in the immediate moment. Many children with autism are not able to learn from correction. They may not have a long enough attention span to connect what they did just before with the correction that was offered. If they are reminded about what is expected ahead of time they may be self-controlled and know exactly what to do. But if they are brought into a problematic situation without re-educating them about the expectation each time, they may be unaware of what is expected and unable to self-monitor their own behavior. Such children do not generalize a "lesson" learned from past experience. If you admonish them about their behavior they may not know what to do to self-correct because they can't make the connection. All they "process" when they hear "no", "don't" and "stop" is "you don't like me", or "I'm bad". Children growing up with these types of differences in their thinking and learning processes often become very emotionally fragile. They don't "get it' about why people are distressed with them. They experience that others are distressed with them and often mirror or reflect back the very emotion that is being shown towards them. For these children, it is very important to really like them when you are speaking to them. They work more off the emotions of those around them than the words and actions of those who are guiding them. Being emotionally angry towards them always further escalates their behavior. For some children, each time they have an experience is like the very first time, no matter how many times they have been through it before. These children may always have to be coached and reminded. When they become frustrated or confused they often become very anxious. Most such children ''telegraph" their anxiety by first becoming slightly agitated. Such behavior must be interpreted by their parents/teachers/caregivers as communicative. The message is 'come rescue me before I go out of control'. If the early signs of anxiety are not responded to the child will often escalate to a point of self-injury or aggression until someone else intervenes to assist them to calm

Why some individuals can be making great progress, then be unable to recover from what seems to be one, small slip. 1. We start with whatever is the person's natural level of ability. At this spontaneous level they may be secure, but unfocused towards any progressive goal. They function at their own natural level.2. We train the individual to enhance their natural level of ability. They acquire a few additional skills that are steps towards a progressive goal that we may perceive to be eventually within their reach. 3. They become secure and relatively independent in the second stage of learning and we raise the bar. The expectations for performance without (or with less) support are increased as the individual becomes practiced and familiar at performing at a higher level. 4. By now the person has made so much progress that anyone who wasn't in the program from the beginning will be unaware of just how far the individual has come. Their original level of dependent functioning seems to be a matter of "ancient history" that they have now progressed beyond. They are doing things that no one who knew them at the beginning could have ever imagined being within their grasp. The critical points (at 4 and 6) come when the individual's independent progress so far exceeds their starting point that they "lose touch" with their spontaneous level of ability. They lose their ground. They can see the goals they wish to achieve and they simply "get ahead" of themselves. It is "too much too soon" for them to continue with confidence. They are able, but inconsistent and need more support to consolidate their earlier learning. 5. The individual has now progressed so far that they don't even, themselves remember how dependent they used to be. They seem to be ready for much more challenge and often are eager to do as much as they can. This, frequently is when they run into some sort of obstacle that they can not, independently overcome. But at this point they themselves expect that they should be able to overcome problems by themselves. They try to cope, but it wasn't within their original coping repertoire, and suddenly they regress and are unable to sustain what they were able to do, just a short while ago. Caregivers sometimes push too fast. Some individuals push themselves too fast. When they are "smarter than they can be" they try to accomplish without assistance, what they may only be able to accomplish with continuous assistance or structure. 6. The individual drops back a level or two and we approach them with encouragement and support to do what they "knew what to do yesterday". This misses the point. Once the individual who was initially dependent becomes insecure they may be unable to make the connection between where they were at level 4 to where they were at level 5. It may be necessary to go back to level one, with very intense, dependent levels of support to assist them to regain their confidence. Then they often can rapidly re-attain a level of ability where, with support, they can grow again in a more independent fashion. Approaching them "from above" to reach back up to where they have been experiencing failure and distress may be too overwhelming. It is much better to approach and support them "from below" to ensure that they are being encouraged to express their original, natural level of ability. Confidence at this level is certain. Go back to the beginning, just to rehearse familiar territory and success without assistance. Rebuild your efforts with a person who has had a set-back from a place where they are naturally confident and certain of their ability to meet expectations. This is the meaning of "support from below". Nathan E. Ory, M.A. Registered Psychologist Challenging Behavior Analysis and Consultation Copyright 2001 challengingbehavior@shaw.ca

BY MARGE BLANC, M.A., CCC-SLP THE STORY THAT FOLLOWS HAPPENED EXACTLY THIS WAY... IT'S ALL TRUE, EXCEPT FOR THE NAMES. I walked through Eddie's backyard, where I had gone for a first home visit. I had just met Eddie and his sister, his mom and his dad. Eddie imitated my name quietly, almost in a whisper, saying "Mah" as we ran along. Without any signs of obvious enthusiasm, he went over to his swing set, whispering a short syllable. It was such a quiet voice that I almost missed it. But his quiet "sih" (for "swing") was unmistakable to ears that have become acutely tuned to such fleeting, subtle pronouncements. "I hope you can teach Eddie to talk," said Eddie's mother; and his father echoed an equally fervent plea. How was I going to tell them that Eddie already did talk? I had been in this situation many times before, and knew that an instant retort would be ill-timed, and seem lacking in credibility. I knew I'd have to wait until I knew Eddie, and his parents, better. Parents are clearly not to blame for not "hearing" Eddie and others like him. In fact, we are all "programmed" to think that talking comes in a certain form, with a certain loudness, with a certain rapidity, and, of course, with accompanying eye contact and referencing (pointing, gesturing, etc.). We think this is always true because it almost always is! Our phone systems expect that we will pause no longer than two seconds. If we do, they cut us off. Our voice mail systems expect us to never talk at a high frequency, or too loudly, or too softly. If we do, they cut us off. It is just "not done." And, we are programmed as parents and teachers to expect that kids will make eye contact and gesture long before they begin talking...a handy order-of-events for us, so we'll know that they are talking, that they're talking to us, what they're talking about, and that they want us to listen and to respond. But, those of us who know and love at least one child on the spectrum know we don't have the benefit of this "expected" order of events. Rather, out-of-the-blue one day, we may hear a sound, a word, even a phrase or sound contour...and never again. We think our ears have deceived us...and we are sure that we should not take it seriously. We think we can't afford to delude ourselves into thinking our child actually talked, or has the ability to use the language it would have required. We are, somehow, "bound" by our child's diagnosis to think that our child's language must be "disordered," and that since his speech doesn't sound like real words to us, that it is "babbling". Back to Eddie... Unlike his parents, I didn't have to worry about being deluded. I had heard dozens of children like Eddie say things that were later validated by repeated, clear productions, and/or other signs of communicative intent, like independent typing. Waiting for that next time a child said a particular word or phrase, though, sometimes seemed to take forever. Usually it did not, however. I learned that if the people surrounding a child believed his words to be real, they would reappear sooner. That was the key! What if Eddie really didn't say my name, though...or didn't tell me what he wanted to do? Would it do him any harm if I thought he had and responded accordingly? Does it do infants any harm when moms hear "mamamama,"and presume [read: "hope"] it means, "Mama?" No, of course not. It is this delighted parental reaction to sound that teaches kids that speech has meaning. It is how children learn to talk! Shouldn't our "non-verbal" ASD kids have the same opportunity? Of course they should! And it should be delivered with even greater regularity and "benefit of the doubt." I've witnessed, first hand, the positive results that can be achieved with our kids when we presume their communicative intent and respond accordingly. (Blanc, 2004.) We have all read that, historically, nearly half the individuals with Autism Spectrum diagnoses have failed to develop useful oral language. They have been known as "non-verbal." And we have all known that motor coordination problems are prevalent across the spectrum, with Occupational Therapy leading the way towards understanding the complexity of "praxis" or motor planning. But it was not until 1997 that Speech-Language Pathologist Gail Richard reported in her book, The Source for Autism, that the 40% or so on the spectrum who are significantly challenged with Apraxia of Speech (Verbal Dyspraxia) are the same 40% who have not developed useful speech. Looking at Eddie, one can understand why. Eddie's voice was extremely quiet...not just because his confidence in being understood was so limited. His muscle tone was low, making all his movements slower and weaker, and the timing of his verbalizations seemed "random," so no one knew when to listen. Essentially, no one could hear him. Without some encouragement and feedback, Eddie was not going to become a competentspeaker on his own. But kids like Eddie are not alone any more. Our kids with apraxia now stand an excellent chance of defying the odds of the past and becoming verbal! How? The rest of this article will address that. First of all, know that there are now excellent resources and many trained SLP's, OT's, and PT's to help. If your child's therapist is trained in Sensory Integration, your child will have a good start. Why? Because we now know that the sensory/motor "pieces" that challenge your child in his overall sensory and motor learning affect "praxis" as well. And what is praxis, you ask, and how does this translate into speech? Praxis, as defined by OT's (after the pioneering work of Jean Ayres), and now used by the rest of us, refers to motor plans...that is, formulating an idea, or an "intention" to do something unique with one's body, initiating