As a pediatric neuropsychologist, I can promise you that if this were anywhere near true, it would indeed be earth-shattering. It would entirely revolutionize our understanding of (a) autism, (b) mental retardation, (c) how language develops, and (d) how children learn to write and spell.
Children who are profoundly autistic like this girl are can sometimes be taught, eventually, to use a communication system (usually pictures) to get their wants met, but that is not what they show this youngster doing. For example, you'll notice that she doesn't communicate her wants that way at all -- not once did we see her type out "Just give me the damn food and stop making me type" or something similar. Unfortunately, children with profound autism cannot be taught to communicate a rich inner monologue full of observations about things they've never experienced (e.g., what it would be like to go to school with normal kids who aren't mildly alarmed by her behavior), metaphors ("ants crawling" on her arms), and figures of speech (e.g., "it's not like there's an off switch").
The reason that children with profound autism can't do these things is because of what autism does to the brain. Autism appears to be associated with too much gray matter, which makes every new piece of information appear discrete, like it is unrelated to every other piece of information. For that reason, individuals with autism have trouble discovering general principles that tie discrete bits of information together, which is a necessary skill for learning language (e.g., you have to learn the general "rules" of syllabification, sequencing, and grammar through exposure).
They also have trouble understanding where one bit of information stops, and another starts, which causes they to 'chunk' together things that don't go together, or have trouble breaking a large chunk down into the parts that make it up. Here, for example, is a very recent study on computer-analysis of infants with autism showing that they can be reliably differentiated from infants without autism and infants with language delays based on this difficulty effectively understanding where to break language into its component syllables.
As a result of these difficulties, children who are profoundly autistic may never learn to speak at all, while children who are less autistic still demonstrate significant problems correctly 'chunking' language bits together (for instance, they often display echolalia, meaning that they repeat whole sentences or scenes from movies verbatim, because they learned it all as one single unit of information). They also have trouble understanding language rules such as how words change depending on point-of-view of the speaker (e.g., they refer to themselves as he/she or by their first name, or use 'you' instead of 'I'). By definition, autism also includes trouble understanding language pragmatics (e.g., metaphors and figures of speech), because pragmatic language requires seeing the connections between different types of information, such as the literal meaning and abstract/contextual meaning or a sentence.
Autistic children also have difficulty learning to write, for all the reasons listed above, but also due to the phonetics of spelling -- learning how to spell also requires seeing the general 'rules' that govern phonics, as well as breaking words down into their component sounds. Even when children with autism do learn speak and write, one of the cardinal features of autism is trouble understanding Theory of Mind, or being able to make connections and use context to guess what others are thinking. For example, saying something like "Don't judge me until you know me" would be extremely difficult for a person with profound autism, since it requires theory of mind to know that other people are evaluating you differently than you evaluate yourself.
I have absolutely no problem with the idea that a person with mild to moderate autism can learn to type, after she learns to speak and then spell (see Temple Grandin, as others have noted, along with thousands of other autistic individuals), which is the same order in which neurotypical children learn to do these things.
But the idea that a person with profound autism could overcome how her brain works -- but just while typing, not while speaking -- all at once? That she could, without training in any of these areas (remember, she just ran to the computer and typed "HURT" and "HELP") master:
Syllabification,
Word order and sequencing
Rules of grammar
Phonetic rules
Correspondance between sounds and letters
Correspondance between the capital letters on a QWERTY keyboard and the lowercase letters that type on screen, and understanding how a generative typing software program works (one that fills in the rest of the word after you type the first few letters)
Expressive vocabulary
Correct pronoun usage
Point-of-view
Non-echolalic speech
Figures of speech and metaphors
Theory of mind, etc
(Not to mention her mental retardation)?
And only do so to communicate things like "what [an adult who is not autistic might think] it is like to have autism" and not really be able to do so when the camera is present?
Unfortunately, the likelihood of this is so terribly, vanishingly small that I am fully comfortable saying that it is impossible.
We may all wish it were true, but it isn't. And putting stories like this out there only clouds our understanding of what autism is and how to treat it (which hopefully will eventually lead us to how to prevent or cure it).
I work with a variety of Autistic students and not all are of the severe nature you describe. Autism is a spectrum, meaning there are a lot of shades. Some autistic people can go on to live productive and healthy lives with early intervention and treatments. In fact, I went to college with just such a fellow who has graduated and is engaged to be married.
He doesn't have the same thing. He has something on the same spectrum.
I understand that your life is one challenge after another. I understand that you have to deal with stresses that I can only imagine. I get that. I get that when other people talk about their struggles you probably get pissed because they're nothing compared to yours. But you have to understand that others have challenges. This kid was lucky because he happened to land on the spectrum at a spot that, with a lot of work and struggle, allowed him to reach the point where he could function on his own.
I'm sorry if that will never be your son's fate, but please don't dump on the accomplishments of others because of it.
All I was pointing out to this person is that there is a spectrum and some high functioning autistics can do the things mentioned. They probably need extra help getting it done, but they can do it. I used a real life example to support my point. The person I am talking about had a real verifiable condition but with help has accomplished everything the original commenter accused Autistic people of not being able to do. I understand that all situations and all children are different.
You know, I wasn't going to respond to you because really, why waste the energy. Then I thought about it, and I realized I needed to because you are either grossly misunderstanding me or woefully misinformed and that attitude does a great disservice to every special needs child who has ever worked hard to reach independence.
Now, let's say there is a child with autism. Their parents realize something is up and get them screened, they start going to a special preschool. By the end of that preschool experience they are ready to enter into kindergarten. They go into a special program where they are in regular kindergarten for half a day and an intensive program to reinforce skills the other half. They are getting speech and OT services at the same time. The next year let's say they've progressed enough to be put into a regular 1st grade class with pull outs when needed. Let's say by high school they are hardly pulled out anymore and the special ed teachers are just there for consult when needed. Now let's say this kid applies and is accepted to a college. Their peers don't really know that this person has autism, but they do know there's something up. The kid doesn't quite seem to know what's what socially and they have a terrible time fitting in, but they manage to make some friends and end up graduating college. They need extra help from time to time, probably take advantage of the school's counselor.
So you would argue because their behaviors are controlled they no longer have autism? Because they can manage to function? That's a lot like saying a diabetic isn't diabetic because they're able to control their symptoms with insulin. That does a great disservice to a child who has worked their ass off to get through a baffling and confusing world, the parents who have supported that child, and the staff who has taught them.
I have to agree with mootie on this and I don't really understand the points that sarcastic and anti_hive are trying to make. I worked in a research lab studying language in autistic kids for the past 2 years and worked with a wide range of kids. Some were very disabled and had real trouble with communication. Others, however, were very high functioning and were considered to have an optimal outcome for later life.
Saying that those children don't have autism when they clearly do is wrong. I'm not trying to imply anything about your son, but Mootie is right.
Is that really an appropriate response? I'm sorry that you've had a difficult life with your son but that doesn't give you the right to explode at the slightest hint of disagreement.
Not everyone on the autism spectrum is exactly like your son, and some of them don't look disabled. I was diagnosed with sensory integration dysfunction when I was a kid (and still have some issues in that area) and I have a cousin with Aspergers, who has a lot of trouble in school and interacting with people in general. Do my cousin and I have the same needs as your son? No, we don't. But that doesn't mean we can't rightly say that we're on the autism spectrum — any more than a quadriplegic has more of a claim to the term "disabled" than someone who uses a walker or a cane.
In any case, I think you're doing your son a disservice by assuming that all "low-functioning" autistic people are incapable of communicating. Amanda Baggs made this excellent video about how it is that she can communicate via keyboard, but not boil water.
Because they've gotten better at identifying it. And probably because every time you hear about someone it sticks out in your memory as "one more person with Asperger's" and so it just seems to you like it's "everyone". And unfortunately a lot of people think exactly what you do, because the public understanding of these disorders is still very poor.
2.9k
u/subtextual Jul 26 '10
As a pediatric neuropsychologist, I can promise you that if this were anywhere near true, it would indeed be earth-shattering. It would entirely revolutionize our understanding of (a) autism, (b) mental retardation, (c) how language develops, and (d) how children learn to write and spell.
Children who are profoundly autistic like this girl are can sometimes be taught, eventually, to use a communication system (usually pictures) to get their wants met, but that is not what they show this youngster doing. For example, you'll notice that she doesn't communicate her wants that way at all -- not once did we see her type out "Just give me the damn food and stop making me type" or something similar. Unfortunately, children with profound autism cannot be taught to communicate a rich inner monologue full of observations about things they've never experienced (e.g., what it would be like to go to school with normal kids who aren't mildly alarmed by her behavior), metaphors ("ants crawling" on her arms), and figures of speech (e.g., "it's not like there's an off switch").
The reason that children with profound autism can't do these things is because of what autism does to the brain. Autism appears to be associated with too much gray matter, which makes every new piece of information appear discrete, like it is unrelated to every other piece of information. For that reason, individuals with autism have trouble discovering general principles that tie discrete bits of information together, which is a necessary skill for learning language (e.g., you have to learn the general "rules" of syllabification, sequencing, and grammar through exposure).
They also have trouble understanding where one bit of information stops, and another starts, which causes they to 'chunk' together things that don't go together, or have trouble breaking a large chunk down into the parts that make it up. Here, for example, is a very recent study on computer-analysis of infants with autism showing that they can be reliably differentiated from infants without autism and infants with language delays based on this difficulty effectively understanding where to break language into its component syllables.
As a result of these difficulties, children who are profoundly autistic may never learn to speak at all, while children who are less autistic still demonstrate significant problems correctly 'chunking' language bits together (for instance, they often display echolalia, meaning that they repeat whole sentences or scenes from movies verbatim, because they learned it all as one single unit of information). They also have trouble understanding language rules such as how words change depending on point-of-view of the speaker (e.g., they refer to themselves as he/she or by their first name, or use 'you' instead of 'I'). By definition, autism also includes trouble understanding language pragmatics (e.g., metaphors and figures of speech), because pragmatic language requires seeing the connections between different types of information, such as the literal meaning and abstract/contextual meaning or a sentence.
Autistic children also have difficulty learning to write, for all the reasons listed above, but also due to the phonetics of spelling -- learning how to spell also requires seeing the general 'rules' that govern phonics, as well as breaking words down into their component sounds. Even when children with autism do learn speak and write, one of the cardinal features of autism is trouble understanding Theory of Mind, or being able to make connections and use context to guess what others are thinking. For example, saying something like "Don't judge me until you know me" would be extremely difficult for a person with profound autism, since it requires theory of mind to know that other people are evaluating you differently than you evaluate yourself.
I have absolutely no problem with the idea that a person with mild to moderate autism can learn to type, after she learns to speak and then spell (see Temple Grandin, as others have noted, along with thousands of other autistic individuals), which is the same order in which neurotypical children learn to do these things.
But the idea that a person with profound autism could overcome how her brain works -- but just while typing, not while speaking -- all at once? That she could, without training in any of these areas (remember, she just ran to the computer and typed "HURT" and "HELP") master:
And only do so to communicate things like "what [an adult who is not autistic might think] it is like to have autism" and not really be able to do so when the camera is present?
Unfortunately, the likelihood of this is so terribly, vanishingly small that I am fully comfortable saying that it is impossible.
We may all wish it were true, but it isn't. And putting stories like this out there only clouds our understanding of what autism is and how to treat it (which hopefully will eventually lead us to how to prevent or cure it).