I was just wondering what your views are on this.

I'm not in favour, before you ask.

http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/26/be...-children/

behavior therapy just equals therapy and is helpful for some individuals.

I just read about this...it is good that this therapy involves parent(s). : )

Then i was wondering about the details of the therapy model.
Here is one way to see if it's a cure or not I guess.
http://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/...model-esdm

I think it is interesting that it seems to be about affect.  There are many concepts about the idea that people on the spectrum who cannot communicate and can be disorderly within modern society would be better off with normalized affect.  That does require the idea that the way they are is not meant to teach and provide a contrast.  So, for me it is like the situation of someone being on life support in a coma.  What does that person feel inside about what would change?  

I feel like therapies like this would be best in a culture where the idea that the person STARTED OUT the way they were was celebrated: many people on and off the spectrum feel that no matter what difficulties, autism is deeply beautiful and important, not a disorder.  This would make the therapy even more positive I feel.  
The idea would just be that they were given an alternative to also be able to communicate clearly with those around them whose minds differed.

Helping someone is only a cure if it somehow gets rid of something. Any sort of help or intervention for anything comes from the same reasoning a cure does but a cure is more offensive to some. Not sure why. The people who simply say they don't want a cure because they'd feel changed are way more logical than people who are "offended" at the idea and somehow not offended at the idea of needing or wanting help.

My son does behaviour therapy. Mainly because he NEEDS TO pick up some paperclips from the street regardless whether there's traffic or not.
As soon as he's big enough, how to hold him back? And how about going on his own? No way, atm, and that's what should change.

My view is that, going by the description(s) of "Behavior Therapy" and, while I'm on
the topic, ABA (Applied Behavior Analysis) or for that matter "applied" anything psychological is essentially identical to brainwashing.  Twenty endless hours/week for toddlers who are not even aware of how they are being standardized to the "therapists' " model of good little well-socialized robots.
Somehow I am reminded of a science-fiction story I read years ago in which somebody who was witness to torture of political prisoners overheard two passing torturers discussing in calm professional tones the necessity of experimenting w/ various "therapies" until finding the particular "therapy" that gave desired results in each particular case . . . emergency vomiting may be done in the sink.  Routine vomiting should be into the toilet.
Byehhh!
kullervo

You certainly can overdo it. Fortunately, the "robot"-training you mention is very expensive, so only few parents can afford it.
What we do is restricted only to certain topics, and is (therefore) paid for by the state.

Just read my questions and answers post in the thread in General Discussion (topmost forum on the forum index) where we create the document to send in our email campaign, and you will see where I stand on all of this.

If you showed a dog a photo of a woman's face and then an object: the brain activity might be different just because a dog learns that a woman might give them food - but showing them a photo of their food bowl or a bag of kibble might get the same effect.  It really just means that dogs need food and learn to respond to how to get it.  

I think that some of these studies are just rigged to get the results that provide the funding for their research projects.  

No matter what therapy is done some autistic people might need support for their whole life.  They might learn to deal with certain situations and learn the "rules" such as "never pick up anything in the street" and if you feel you do then ask for help or you will be punished.  

Besides therapy is supposed to help firstmost the person who is receiving the therapy not the parents or teachers or whoever.

Also this is a huge clue "those who provide the therapy need to be certified by a program Dawson and her co-developer".  Where do I see $$$$$$$

........... because the only person who can raise a child is an expert, not a parent ??????????

What qualifications does one require in order to become a parent?

ABA is a program that is used too much. At the HF level, (Aspergers, HF Autism, PDD-NOS) I'd say that no ABA or treatment like you described is necesary. However, I know that ABA has sometimes helped kids at the LF level, even if they're given too many hours of it. Temple Grandin said that ABA (even if that's not what they called it back then) helped her. She supports some forms of ABA, but as for the scientist in your article, it looks like he's doing it to kids at the higher functioning end of the spectrum. I think he's dilusional is he thinks he can "Normalize" autistics.

The artical said it needed to be done before age 6 to get the outcome described, makes some sence to me that if you stimulate a developing brain it may alter its development and be rather moldable were is at 23 i've got about all i'm going to ever get in terms of major alterations in a short amount of time.  What was the real difference between the old way and new way anyway?  All I got out of the artical was that there was a difference in intenceity.  This kind of science is my weak point.

If by behaviour therapy you mean ABA it's hardly therapeutic.

Essentially it's classical conditioning in the skinner model - it uses both the carrot and the stick, the stick being why it's abusive.

While it may work to an extent to get certain behaviours or to reduce others it can also trigger PTSD and generalised stress and anxiety.

How do you feel about cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT)?