Posted on 08/11/2005 1:48:37 PM PDT by Dont Mention the War
I also like "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Nighttime" Not a true story but a peek into the mind of a high functioning autistic british boy. I also recommend books by Oliver Sacks.
Your district knows. They get a certain amount for every special ed kid. I will try to find some information for you over the weekend if you want. You can call them up and ask them.
My friend's son went from an engaging and bright little boy to a staring vacant silent child to all the worst known symptoms of autism.
Good luck and an extra prayer too.
I also am the parent of a special needs son (Down Syndrome) and in his travels I have seen truly autistic kids - there's no doubt about it - they've got a problem. From my perspective, raising an autistic kid seems one of the toughest parental rows to hoe.
I personally think there has been an increase in true autism. My wife suggests maybe some kids just got labeled "retarded" in the old days. I don't know, but clearly there are more truly autistic kids than there used to be. I figure there is something to the vaccine or food allergy theory.
However, I'm also a grandfather who coaches an elementary age basketball team, so I see all different types of kids. A lot of kids are diagnosed with PDD who are developmentally normal in my opinion. It's my impression that the one thing these kids (boys who are able to play on a mainstream basketball team) have in common is weak parents who are always trying to reason with their kids instead of parenting them. I don't meet a lot of working class kids with PDD.
I was talking to my daughter-in-law about this article. She teaches Special Ed. Her opinion mirrors mine. The one thing she did say though that was very interesting to me was that the vast majority of truly autistic kids started out developing normally. Then their parents report development just suddenly stopped and slowly began to reverse. She laughed about the word trendy being used for autism. She said she and her colleague break the autistic kids into two groups: "really PDD" and "rich kid PDD".
I'm not sure where you've seen that, but I keep up-to-date on that (in several ways) and I have never heard that.
I just meant to bold the 'never'...
I'm only half way through at this point.
I guess that waiting list at my son's school of profoundly Autistic children is also a mirage.
Pinging the Autism list.
I do know that whether or not my son had been diagnosed as autistic 30 years ago, he still would have been in special ed. There is no way he could have been in a mainstream class- even then.
I think there is something to the gut connection. My son improved in behavior on a gluten free diet (and had small improvements when he received secretin during a study.)
Bump for reply in a little while.
A number of years ago (10-12?), my brother was mistakenly diagnosed as schizophrenic. As a result, my mother and I were doing as much reading as we could. We weren't computerized in those days, so we were reading books. Perhaps this was a theory in vogue for awhile.
I haven't kept up on the latest, so I'll guess this is NOT valid. I'm sorry for any confusion.
This would seem to bust the "vaccine" bubble since males don't make up 3/4 of the kids vaccinated.
I understand your criticism but it's actually more complex than you make it.
The schools were saddled with the education of special education by the IDEA act in 1974; shortly after the states reduced the populations of their mental institutions by dropping off their patients on the streets. These were dark days for the mentally disabled indeed.
Now there are some schools, particularly in liberal controlled districts, that do have a habit of reclassifying troublesome students as special education students. These students do get extra money and are removed from the rolls of standardized test taking thus helping the school look better as well.
However, you generalize from this situation to the more general situation of special education. I, and other parents of Autistic children, can assure you that the school districts would prefer to have nothing to do with our truly disabled children. The money supplied by any federal programs doesn't even begin to cover the appropriate methodology to help profoundly Autistic children so they will be less of a burden on society later in life. Thus, we are a scourge, stealing from their general budget.
So who is looking to expand the definition of Autism and why? It's organizations like NAAR, CAN, FEAT, COSAC and more that are doing so. I am a member of two of those organizations. These are organization developed to first help parents deal with their disabled children and then find out how they became that way. Without research, there can be little insight into why Autistic children are they way they are. However, there is lots of competition for research funds whether it's from public or private sources. What the leaders of these organizations discovered was that there was a ton of public money being spent on non-existent global warming or on diseases like AIDS that have known methods for prevention (alas, not followed).
When research is done with federal funds, it becomes part of the public domain and the above mentioned organizations can then affordably scrutinize the data to find insight. Thus, these organizations have INFLATED the number of children covered in the Autism spectrum. Since my son was diagnosed 5 years ago, the number of Autistic children went from 1 in 500 to 1 in 50. This is on the face of it preposterous. And as the father of a son profoundly affected by Autism, it disturbs me that so many relatively normal kids are lumped in the same diagnosis.
That said, the reason the diagnosis inflation is done is the same reason the military asks for thousands of armored humvees in hopes of getting a few hundred. Without these types of numbers, research dollars will otherwise flow into studies on cow flatulence. I don't like the game, I'm just a player.
Would I prefer that charitable organizations be used to benefit my son rather than imposing on the fine taxpayers of my town and the United States. You bet!!! However, my son needs my help now and a method to get to a point that he can survive when I'm dead. The federal government has been usurping the place of church and charity for more years than I've been alive. I want to change the system but I want to help my son more. A conundrum for a FReeper like me but one on which I will fall to the side of favoring my son.
I've been searching depression and sex, depression and sex and (genetics OR heredity) on PubMed and Googled depression maternal linkage. The best that I can find are A population-based twin study of lifetime major depression in men and women. and Evidence for a possibly X-linked trait related to affective illness
FReepmail me if you want on or off my health and science ping list.
Glad to hear it was mistaken though.
bump 4 later
I, too, get sick of people claiming there is no problem. (I forgot my sarcasm tags in my original post).
I would give my right arm (seriously) to have my son not have this. He's a great kid. But it hurts that as much love and affection that I have for him, he just gives me blank stares. I am accepting of him and all that he does, but I know society would rather ridicule and brush him aside.
Well said. I'm right there with you. We'll just keep loving these kids, and doing what we can for them, whatever the eggheads say and whatever the politicians don't do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.