Aspies For Freedom

In a comparison with a control group of children, there were no benefits to the children who received ABA, or Son-Rise therapy.
This news item out today-

Evaluation of early intervention in autism


The Tizard Centre at the University of Kent recently presented its findings from an important pilot study on early intervention for children with autism.

Funded by the National Autistic Society and The British Academy, and conducted by Dr Julie Beadle-Brown, Professor Glynis Murphy and researcher Hannah Dorey, this pilot study consisted of two parts, each examining different aspects of early intervention programmes for young children with autism.

The first part of this study explored factors affecting parental choice of early intervention, with a particular focus on parenting style. The second part was an evaluation of treatment outcomes for children participating in the Son-Rise and Applied Behaviour Analysis (ABA) intervention programmes.

After working with a total of twenty-one families, the University of Kent team discovered that the main reason parents chose a particular intervention style was because they agreed with the treatment provider’s philosophy. It was originally thought that ABA parents might have a more directive style of parenting while Son-Rise parents would be generally less directive, but no such pattern was found.

Anecdotal recommendations were also the most common way that parents first came to hear of interventions for autism. Only one parent (in the ABA group) stated that published scientific literature had contributed to their decision, although this is understandable for the Son-Rise parents as there have not been any formal scientific evaluations of the programme to date. It is also difficult for parents to gain access to scientific journals and so many rely on anecdotal recommendation from other parents when deciding upon an intervention for their child.

With regard to evaluation of treatment outcomes and contrary to expectations, no real differences either between or within the ABA, Son-Rise or control groups were found.

General conclusions are that some children may respond better to early intervention than others; that treatment should be tailored to suit each individual child; and a combination of approaches may be required to optimise outcomes. The pilot study also revealed that in any further study evaluating early intervention, it was important to use a longer time frame for evaluation – it was possible that the six to nine month follow-up used here was not sufficient to identify significant differences between the groups. It is also important to take into account adherence to treatment principles in order to assess any one intervention type. A full study looking at these issues is planned for the next two to three years.

http://www.innovations-report.de/html/be...36319.html

The Son-Rise programme was featured on QED, a well-respected BBC documentary series, a few years ago. It was even repeated recently during Autism Awareness Week, which I found surprising, because I've yet to come across any independent reports that testify to its effectiveness.

The idea with the Son-Rise programme, it seems, is that the parents join the child in his/her world, thus creating a doorway whence they can bring the child back into their world (i.e., the 'real' world). It sounds a bit more humane than some so-called 'treatments', but it's still just a load of psychobabble, perpetuating the idea that autism is a psychological condition and not a neurological one.
Apparently, the programme was devised by a mother and father who successfully guided their son through it. Their son was diagnosed autistic at two years old, with an IQ measured at 30. Now, as an adult, there are no traces of 'his former condition'. The QED documentary tried to illustrate this point by showing him in his university graduation gear with his arm around a young woman.
How much significance you can attach to the IQ score of a two-year old child in the first place?!

Son-Rise is like an adaptation of the Lovaas method - ABA.
There is a lot of criticism of it, the way it is forcefully marketed to parents, when failures happen the parents are blamed, the high cost, these are some of the common criticisms to be found when searching for information on it, written by parents who have tried it.

Autism, by the classic understanding is certainly neurological, but having said that, on the issue of withdrawal or non involvement, the strength of a person's measurable autism is not a reliable indicator, so some psychology must be involved.

I see some milage in considering whether the degree and type of interaction between a potentially introspective child, and it's early environment (meaning parents, to most extent and purpose) may have a measurable effect. My own parents were pretty laid back about my differences and put me under no pressure to conform, and this seems to be a common theme among those of us who turned out pretty well adjusted, irrespective of being very strongly autisitic. On the other hand, I can fully understand why some children, faced with pushy, extremely conformist parents, who do the usual trick of talking and acting in ways that don't correlate, could simply opt out, and descend into a more rational/sensible world of their own making.

If that's the case, then it should be possible to reverse the trend, if it's spotted soon enough (and it's surely no coincidence that so many kids switch off, just as they acquire language?) but the first step in such case would seem to be to change the parents? Not a nice thought, but I'm surprised there seems to be no research on exploring this possibility.

Of course, changing the parents has two distinct interpretations; as far as I'm concerned, there's far too much emphasis on trying to get autistic kids to understand and conform to NT expectations. Wouldn't it be better to teach parents to emulate autistic outlooks, at least until the danger period is over? It would bring about a lasting improvement in communications between them!

Of course, you would have an uphill battle convincing some parents to modify their expectations of their children. We are in this society that seems to value "independence" and "conformity" but doesn't see the inherent contradictions between these two ideals. No wonder some of us get confused and think it is all too much!