It's a tremendous and revealing documentary about a group of parents and teachers who gather together a bunch of spectrum kids and put on a musical play.
Being mostly exposed to aspie kids and PDD-NOS kids in my regular travels, it was interesting to see what kids on the far end of the autism spectrum are like.
One little guy couldn't speak. A story line within the picture had him learning to use a keyboard to communicate with his parents and others.
Amazingly, he typed to his Mom: "I am going to put you on the spot."
She laughed when she heard it, having no idea what he meant but encouraged by his directness. And he continues typing: "You need to be a better listener."
Wow.
Imagine a kid who doesn't speak feeling that his Mom needs to be a better listener. Why would he say this? What could it mean? It made me realize that all spectrum kids, regardless of their outward behavior or appearance, are "there."
They are present.
They are fully aware.
They are not blind to the world, or the ways of the world, or people's feelings, including frustration, hostility, and most important, love and affection.
Yet they do manifest different groups of symptoms, depending on where they fall on the spectrum, etc.
And it all got me to thinking.
What is the difference between autism, high functioning autism, Asperger's and PDD-NOS? And do we really need all these different labels?
The answer to the first question is still open for some discussion. But the answer to the second question - do we need different terms to describe different groups on the spectrum - is yes, in my opinion.
Different Terms for Different Groups Makes Sense... In Most Cases
Because to me, the terms simply reflect the reality that there are different groups of symptoms and classifying them can be useful when it comes to developing therapies.
There are similarities, perhaps, among all spectrum people.
But the differences between the different groups can be profound and obvious, and require totally different kinds of therapies and interventions.
For example, the differences between a non-verbal autistic person and an aspie are fairly profound and obvious.
Some aspies can even be very talkative and fairly social, especially with adults. NJ is an example. So his challenges might be best addressed with specific social stories and interactions with his peers.
The non-verbal autistic might needs more physical interventions, and occupational training (especially early on). Therapies could focus on self-help skills and the like, along with the usual communication stuff.
When you imagine a public school setting where people are moving fast and teachers and therapists are very busy, having different terms for these two different individuals is invaluable.
They can start with an immediate baseline for working with the student. They can develop therapies based on the markedly different therapeutic models developed for Aspergians and autistics and so on.
In other words, in such settings more specific labels can actually be very beneficial - to the students and everyone involved.
Considering that, I think lumping all spectrum kids together under a single label - autistic - could be a disservice on some level.
And it could actually lead to confusion in the culture, and slow progress toward understanding and acceptance of all spectrum folks.
For example...
If someone's idea of "autistic" is a kid who doesn't speak, and they meet NJ, and he talks their ear off... they might say: "What? This child's not autistic. He must just be rude."
Maybe "autistic" simply isn't the right blanket term to use when we want to use a blanket term.
If we're going to use one term to group together everyone on the spectrum, I suggest we choose the word "spectrum" instead of "autistic."
A spectrum person... a person on the spectrum... a spectrumite... spectrum kids... etc.
This seems to have less negative connotations, for starters.
And it also connotes the broad spectrum of differences among all people on the spectrum, which I believe will incline neurotypical people more toward the realization that every child is different - and that every individual must be treated like an individual human being.
Being "somewhere on the spectrum" is simply more precise than "having autism" which is a heavily emotionalized term that connotes and denotes low functioning.
We've moved away from terms like "idiot savant." And we've done so for specific reasons: the emotional content of words matters.
I'm not arguing that we do away with the term autism, of course.
I am just suggesting that it be used to refer to people who have classic autism.
I think HFA should be used for high-functioning autistics (differentiated perhaps by a combination of normal to high IQ with late language acquisition)...
And I think Asperger's for someone who has normal to high IQ with normal or early language acquisition.
For everyone else displaying symptoms such as lack of social connections, lack of Theory of Mind, etc., then PDD-NOS would still hold.
To do away with these separate terms and definitions I think is a kind of dangerous thing. The needs of an autistic are different than the needs of an Aspergian.
When it serves our purpose to band together, then I think we should go under the term "People on the Spectrum," or spectrumites, or something of that nature.
Anyway, as always I would love to hear your thoughts on this issue.
Labels aside, my basic point is that all people are individuals.
And we must always treat the individual and the symptoms, and not the diagnosis - whatever that diagnosis may be.
Peace.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment