are social skills playgroups

[Anonymous]

The social skills groups that I've placed my child in are facilitated by speech pathologists and special educators and there is no memorization. Rather, there are themes (i.e. cooperation, getting to know each other by asking questions, etc.) and these groups are not instead of having playdates at home, they are in addition to them and are actually very helpful in having more productive playdates at home since my child does a better job of playing cooperatively and interacting as a result of the groups and I as a parent have a much better ability to facilitate the interactions when necessary. If a child had a melt down in a group, it may not be the right group for your child. However, a well put together group catered to the goals of your child can be very helpful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm the PP who wrote that. Let's see...My post has been referred to as "ridiculous, " I'm also "dangerously ill-informed," that they hope I "have no influence over actual children because it would be unfortunate for them," and the first responder felt compelled to resort to sarcasm to express objection to my post. Who needs the social skills group here, me or the posters who wrote all this about me? Why look for DCUM posters who like to flame others elsewhere? They are right here in this special needs forum. They are the parents of the special needs kids who need extra help with social skills.

You know, we can all go to the sarcasm corner and we can all insult one another's posts. It's easy for me too. But to avoid it and to save such a response for only the most heinous of behavior is the difference between having social skills and not. Isn't that what we want to teach our children?

So to answer your questions - YES, I have attended Parenting Playgroups. Yes, DC attended the social skills groups there. Yes, I'm aware they have psychologists facilitating the groups. Yes, I'm aware that many of the kids there are not on the spectrum. Yes, I have observed/attended many social skills groups, including the ones at a couple of psychologists office here in NoVA and also DIR in Bethesda. Have I attended "ALL"? No, obviously not. But I don't need to attend ALL in order to have a valid opinion based on sound judgment and much experience. Obviously none of you have attended ALL social skills groups but that hasn't stopped you from posting your opinions right?

I have also read a number of books on autism / developmental issues/ regulatory issues such as The Irreducible Needs of Children, The Challenging Child, Overcoming ADHD, Engaging Autism, The Child with Special Needs by Greenspan, Increasing Your Child's Social IQ by Cathi Cohen, The Out of Sync Child, Raising a Sensory Smart Kid, and books on RDI (relationship developmental intervention). So if you must, express your objection to my opinion but you are wrong to say I'm ill-informed. Natural playgroups that are watched over discreetly by YOU, the parents, is best and far superior to structured, facilitated, monitored social skills groups.

Why do I think social skills groups are inappropriate for non spectrum kids? Let me clarify before you parents crucify me further. Kids who are mildly affected do better in more natural playgroup settings. Kids who are mildly affected do not do well in strongly supervised facilitated social skills groups that rely heavily on rote memorization. DC is mildly affected with a regulatory disorder. I noticed that the kids in Parenting Playgroups were more than mildly affected. When one six year old lost a game, along with 3 other children who also lost the game, he began bawling and was not easy to calm down. When one child greeted DC, he threw himself on him to hug him. DC is not friends with the child at all. The class had just started a couple weeks prior. Children with more serious social skills issues do need more intervention and facilitation, but natural playgroups are still better than the heavily monitored and rote memorization aspect of social skills playgroups. I must say though that DIR's social skills group, while heavily monitored, does not involve rote memorization as far as I saw.

We went to see Dr. Stanley Greenspan for our dx. He heavily advocates integrating mildly affected children into mainstream playgroups because it provides them with the best environment for learning social skills. So we do playgroups and play dates from school and from the neighborhood. It works fine for DC and he learns well. I am curious to know - why don't you all do at home playdates and playgroups from school?

One poster said that all children need to learn social etiquette. Social etiquette is different than social skills. Social etiquette is using the fork the right way. Social etiquette is wiping your mouth with your napkin instead of your sleeve when you're done eating. It's asking before you leave the table. That's not what social skills groups try to teach. Social skills groups teach children to respect personal space, teach kids to make eye contact, to allow another person to win sometimes, and there is a fair amount of memorization. Memorization is not required for mildly affected kids. Things learned through memorization do not come across naturally. They come across as memorized. Things learned through memorization can not be generally or specifically applied properly. Non ASD kids can indeed learn things WITHOUT the memorization and if they learn things more naturally they learn it better. That's just a fact.

I'm the PP who recommended Parenting Playgroups and who took exception to your statement about "all social skills groups". You're not getting it. You blanketly condemn all social skills groups without sound basis. I've read just as many books as you, I'm sure I've seen just as many specialist and we currently participate in a lot of research studies. None of them have posited that social skills groups are only for the more-than-mildly afflicted. I can't speak to the other social skills groups but I can about Parenting Playgroups. Some of the kids may be more afflicted than others but that in no way diminished the benefit to the less mildly afflicted. You might call some of what they did "rote memorization". I call it "developing a framework". The kids learned steps for appropriate social interactions, were encoraged to say them aloud repeatedly and to practice. Rather than "rote memorization", this is self-talk which research has shown improves a child's abilty to plan and to problem solve. Remembering and speaking the steps then practicing them in a facilitated group - like a role play- can vastly improve social interactions and improve a child's social confidence. I don't know if you were in my DS's group or not but there was a child in his group that had problems respecting personal space and a child who had problems regulating his emotions. My child doesn't have those challenges but it was very good for him to learn how to respond appropriately to behavior he doesn't like - which they taught and modeled at Parenting Playgroups. It also provided an opportunity for him to self-reflect - how did he feel when the child through his tantrum because he lost? Does he want to play more games with that child? What would have been a better way to respond?

You offer no proof or basis for your assertion that it's only children with serious social issues that benefit from social skills group and that more mildly affected kids do better with natural playgroups - other than that's what Dr. Greenspan says. It also contradicts what every other poster has experienced. I think you're misinterpreting Dr. Greenspan and you sound a lot like a well intentions, but misguided, poster from another thread who said it's never okay for a child to stim. No one here is saying social skills group should replace playdates. In fact, I think I can speak for the group that the whole reason we seek social skills groups for our kids is because we want them to perform better in natural playgroups - because they weren't suceeding in natural playgroups and they needed assistance. My DC has problems inserting himself in play. If he asks to join and is told no, he shuts down and won't try again. No professional would every consider him a child with serious challenges. He needed some help learning how to join a group, how to be resilient when rebuffed and a safe place to practice learning those skills. He couldn't learn those skills in natural playgroups and playdates. What he was learning was certain kids had all the power and made him feel like shit. The other kids learned they had power over him and they felt free to exercise it.

You're also confusing etiquette and manners. Etiquette isn't about which fork to use, it's about making people feel comfortable and promoting harmonious social interactions. For kids with social difficulties, having a play/foundation and self-talk are very useful in learning what to do. It may not be natural at first but the more it's practiced and positive results achieved, the more the child will come to understand it and the more natural it will become. In fact, that's true with just about everything. When we first started practicing positive discipline, we didn't always get why we were to do something a certain way and it certainly wasn't natural to us. But we got positive results, we now understand and now we don't even have to think about doing it, it comes naturally. And, I can tell you, our kids didn't know it wasn't natural and the kids didn't notice my DS's awkwardness when trying to insert himself in play using what he'd learn in the social skills class.

You're certainly welcome to have a different opinion. It's usually good to hear a wide range of experiences but don't expect backlash when you state something as a fact when it's not.

[Anonymous]

Arguing with me over this point is like telling me that organic or natural food isn't better than food with pesticides used on them. You might be arguing from a point of ego in my opinion and not looking at this logically. How on earth can you say that fake playgroups that involve heavy rote memorization work better than natural playgroups discreetly monitored by YOU, the parents?

Well, I can turn this around and ask you: Who have you seen that told you that social skills group is better than natural playgroups?

Oftentimes social skills playgroups are a last resort for parents who were unable to get natural playgroups going because their kids are not able to function well in natural playgroups with neurotypical kids. So they MUST do social skills groups. They have no choice. Or some parents prefer social skills group because to run a playgroup at your home or have kids over for play dates means a disaster in your house, means monitoring the kids a lot, means more work for you, the parent. It's just easier to drop off our child at Parenting Playgroups.

But it is far from what is ideal and best for our children. Yes, it is hard to find extroverted neurotypical kids to play with our kids but they are out there - though just fewer in number.

We've been to ten places between DC, MD, and VA. We've been to Kennedy Kriegers, Children's Hospital, Dr. Conlin's office,Greenspan's office, and numerous other psychologists. NONE knew exactly what my child or could explain how his brain works and why better than Greenspan. They threw out words like 'executive functioning disorder, NVLD, ADHD. Apparently they had parts of the puzzle and could offer me pieces of the puzzle but never the finished puzzle. Only Greenspan could offered me the entire puzzle, beautifully solved.

Every time I see Greenspan he tells us that we must emphasize playgroups and play dates. IF WE CAN'T FIND KIDS FROM HIS SCHOOL FOR DC TO PLAY WITH, then he suggests we see DIR Support Services as they may be able to help out. So I'm reading from this that natural playgroups are best.

You asked for proof. Okay, here's your proof that social skills group that use rote-memorization are NOT WHAT IS BEST FOR OUR CHILDREN. This is the organization Greenspan founded - ICDL.
http://www.icdl.com/distance/webRadio/documents/2-20-2008.pdf

I know the psychologists at Parenting Playgroups think they have a good understanding of special needs issues. It is a big of a ego buster to admit they don't..but they honestly don't. Ask them, any one of them, what the difference between a regulatory disorder and an autism spectrum disorder is. Ask them to explain all the various types of regulatory disorders to you. Ask them to explain how ADHD is related to regulatory disorders. They will do a poor job of it. My own immeidate family members are in medical and mental health field also and even they did not have specific training on regulatory disorders in their programs. Parenting Playgroups is trying to be all things to all people also. Whenever anybody does that, I have to wonder about their qualifications. Our kids are way too special to just put them anywhere. They need an expert to help monitor their progress and development.

Most psychologists do not understand sensory regulatory disorders very well. In fact, most psychiatrists don't either. Kennedy Kreiger, who touts themselves as the preeminent autism clinic, could not figure out what my child had. Even Children's Hospital couldn't. Greenspan did though. He is the only one who can pinpoint diagnose a child's condition if they have regualatory disorders, because after all, my goodness, he was the creator of FLOORTIME. He is the foremost expert on autism and regulatory disorders.

I'm tired of arguing with you about what's best for our children. I'm not doing it anymore. I've provided the proof from the best source there is on this earth on our children's issues. If that isn't enough to convince you, nothing will be. So I'm off this now.

I'm relieved that we found the best person for our child and so releived to be seeing the profound changes in him as the years go by. It is a ton of work though. So much easier to drop him off at Parenting Playgroups and go out for some coffee or get some shopping done while he's been watched by them. So much harder to have kids over at our house and then have to follow them around to watch them for 1.5 hours 2 or 3 times per week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Arguing with me over this point is like telling me that organic or natural food isn't better than food with pesticides used on them. You might be arguing from a point of ego in my opinion and not looking at this logically. How on earth can you say that fake playgroups that involve heavy rote memorization work better than natural playgroups discreetly monitored by YOU, the parents?

I'm a new poster but you have no idea how you come across. I have no idea what you're trying to convince us of other than if we only did a better job of finding other kids and monitoring our child's play, our kids wouldn't need help. I hope you really mean it when you said you're going to stop arguing over this. Enough already.

[Anonymous]

sorry, but I should not have to defend my position to vehemently. I was the one who was attacked for believing that social skills groups are not as beneficial for our kids as natural playgroups are. Did you go back to the beginning of this thread to see the insults my post received first? My opinion was unequivocal and for that I was slammed and insulted. Why aren't you slamming those posters for their rude responses to my position?

If you think the purpose of my posts is simply to say parents who have natural playgroups and monitor their kids would end up with kids who don't need any help, then you misunderstood. In what line did I say that? My point is that natural playgroups are indeed better. Yes, my view is absolute, yes I speak in unequivocal terms. Perhaps because I've already researched this thing to death and have been around this issue for years now. But who cares how absolute my view is. It's just my view right? You don't have to take it. Parents who wonder about their kids issues are better to be safe than sorry. The best case scenario is that a qualified professional will say 'There's no issue here' but on the flip side the worst case scenario is also a good scenario. You would have caught it early and can now really help your child. Ignoring issues, even mild ones, is just digging a grave for yourself. When you are able to get over the tone of my post and can disregard my passionate voice here, I hope you'll rethink this for the sake of your children. It's your children I'm speaking up for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:sorry, but I should not have to defend my position to vehemently. I was the one who was attacked for believing that social skills groups are not as beneficial for our kids as natural playgroups are. Did you go back to the beginning of this thread to see the insults my post received first? My opinion was unequivocal and for that I was slammed and insulted. Why aren't you slamming those posters for their rude responses to my position?

If you think the purpose of my posts is simply to say parents who have natural playgroups and monitor their kids would end up with kids who don't need any help, then you misunderstood. In what line did I say that? My point is that natural playgroups are indeed better. Yes, my view is absolute, yes I speak in unequivocal terms. Perhaps because I've already researched this thing to death and have been around this issue for years now. But who cares how absolute my view is. It's just my view right? You don't have to take it. Parents who wonder about their kids issues are better to be safe than sorry. The best case scenario is that a qualified professional will say 'There's no issue here' but on the flip side the worst case scenario is also a good scenario. You would have caught it early and can now really help your child. Ignoring issues, even mild ones, is just digging a grave for yourself. When you are able to get over the tone of my post and can disregard my passionate voice here, I hope you'll rethink this for the sake of your children. It's your children I'm speaking up for.

I'm 12:11. I'm sorry to see you didn't do what you said in your earlier post and stopped arguing, stopped posting. You probably have no idea but the attitude in your posts mirror very closely many of the posts on the General Parenting thread. It feels like you're contaminating the Special Needs thread. You are definitely the woman who posted on the stimming thread. You may like to think or hope that people will look past your absolutes but you come across as judgmental, as unable to see shades of gray and incredibly unsupportive. You spill your bias and baggage all over the threads you post on. Just like many of the posts on the General Parenting thread that are so alienating.

It sounds like your child has a lot of issues and I'm sorry for that. Please remember that you're not the only one going through that experience and our experiences are very different from yours. It doesn't mean one way is more correct than another, it depends on the child, the parent and the circumstances. A gentle suggestion is much more effective than the sledgehammer you use.

[Anonymous]

My child's diagnosis is growth hormone deficiency. DC has to catch up on social skills on an accelerated timeframe now that we're finally receiving therapy to address the underlying problem. Just as the GH is addressing physical growth, it's also affecting neurological growth and so we're experiencing lots of "catch-up" phenomena. We find a social skills group to be VERY useful!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: quote]

I'm 12:11. I'm sorry to see you didn't do what you said in your earlier post and stopped arguing, stopped posting. You probably have no idea but the attitude in your posts mirror very closely many of the posts on the General Parenting thread. It feels like you're contaminating the Special Needs thread. You are definitely the woman who posted on the stimming thread. You may like to think or hope that people will look past your absolutes but you come across as judgmental, as unable to see shades of gray and incredibly unsupportive. You spill your bias and baggage all over the threads you post on. Just like many of the posts on the General Parenting thread that are so alienating.

It sounds like your child has a lot of issues and I'm sorry for that. Please remember that you're not the only one going through that experience and our experiences are very different from yours. It doesn't mean one way is more correct than another, it depends on the child, the parent and the circumstances. A gentle suggestion is much more effective than the sledgehammer you use.

So why are you continuing to write on this forum? What makes you the arbiter of appropriateness? You really are clueless about me but there you go again trying to denigrate me in your fervent attempt to get readers here to dismiss Dr. Greenspan's position on social skills groups. I rarely get on the General Parenting thread. My time is often spent on the special needs forum, off-topics, private schools, and sometimes politics.

True, I'm expressing Dr. Greenspan's point pretty bluntly and absolutely. As far as I know, DCUM has plenty of people who express opinions that way and they are not deemed to 'infect' threads. But you, on the other hand...was it you who said it'd be a shame if I actually had children under my care because it would be unfortunate for them? How rotten is that to say to a mother of a special needs child that withdrew a portion of her life savings to get her child therapy? How rotten is that to say to any mother? How rotten is it to try to paint a picture of me as a 'thread infector' to blur Dr. Greenspan's position on this issue? How would you like it if I said, "It seems to me that the apple does not fall far from the tree here seeing as how your child needs social skills training also." You didn't just object to my position, you were insulting.

Actually Greenspan himself is pretty blunt much to some of his patients' dismay. You'd probably dislike him too. But sometimes one needs to be because a lot is at stake. But I suspect that whether it was said gently or bluntly, you'd have avoided the advice regardless. You don't want to know of a different opinion and if it's expressed absolutely you reallllly don't want to hear it. And if it comes with reputable proof, well...that's just intolerable to you I suppose. That's fine. That's your perogative to disregard Dr. Greenspan's position and your perogative to disregard my post simply because you don't like the unequivocality of my comments. But you can not stop me from publishing his links and articles and arguing on the merits of this issue, though you are clearly trying your damndest to do so.

My advice to you is - get over the tone and focus on the substance, for the sake of spec needs children. You were the one who asked for proof. I clearly provided it. So now why go back to criticizing my tone and trying to paint an image of me to the readers as the DCUM forum-infector? Why not argue on the merits of this point in question? Why not now attempt to refute Dr. Greenspan's judgment on this? Because, simply put, you can not, and that irritates you.

Social skills group might be helpful to some, even many. But there is no question that natural playgroups WITHOUT rote memorization are best for special needs kids.

[Anonymous]

Furthermore, my child actually was dx with a MILD sensory regulatory disorder. That was when he was two years old. He's in a fine nonspecial needs private school now and doing well. He passed their rigorous interview process. He did extremely well on WPPSI. If he was so affected he wouldn't have been able to manage this. We've been doing play dates and play groups since he was two and a half years old. The only issue that remains is his lack of attention with play dates. He has a hard time spending more than twenty minutes on any particular activity and then he needs to take a 'break.' If he get over his inattentivenes, he is wonderful play date. Nice try in trying to exaggerate DC's issues in another shameful attempt to get another dig into me. How low will you stoop?

[Anonymous]

New poster here -- I think the poster that everyone seems to be slamming has a lot of valid points. I'm not sure why the reaction has been so strong here.

[Anonymous]

Another new poster. My take is everyone seems to have valid points, but has somehow gotten their feelings hurt along the way and felt disrespected. Try to reread your posts, and I think you will realize that your disagreements are smaller than you realize. Relax...you are all bright and well-intended.

Can I ask a question? Here's my situation: My daughter is 3 and her speech is not good. It's really pretty poor, and she's been getting intensive speech therapy. However, her social skills are excellent. She knows how to make friends...she just doesn't know how to communicate. Would she benefit from one of these groups? Or would I just be throwing something else at her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Another new poster. My take is everyone seems to have valid points, but has somehow gotten their feelings hurt along the way and felt disrespected. Try to reread your posts, and I think you will realize that your disagreements are smaller than you realize. Relax...you are all bright and well-intended.

Can I ask a question? Here's my situation: My daughter is 3 and her speech is not good. It's really pretty poor, and she's been getting intensive speech therapy. However, her social skills are excellent. She knows how to make friends...she just doesn't know how to communicate. Would she benefit from one of these groups? Or would I just be throwing something else at her?

Since her social skills are excellent, I'm assuming she's having problems because her expressive speech isn't good, right? How is her receptive speech?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:New poster here -- I think the poster that everyone seems to be slamming has a lot of valid points. I'm not sure why the reaction has been so strong here.

OP here. Because as the next poster said, their feelings were hurt. Greenspan's approach and opinions are always in the best interests of children but he expects A LOT of parents...hours of floortime a day, many sessions of OT a day sometimes. A lot to ask for. He doesn't like social skills groups. I published his article for his reasons why they don't get to treating the CORE issues. Perhaps all this makes parents feel insulted or stupid, that they should have known better, that they should be doing more hands on work with their children. Whatever their reason, I undertand, I honestly do. But I wish people would get over those intial feelings of feeling insulted and focus on what is truly best for their children.
I tend to be the type of person that rips the sheet off of people's head to uncover what's underneath. It's a blunt approach that I often use when I feel so much is at stake. I really love children and am very overprotective of special needs children. So all etiquette probably goes out the window when I see defending approaches that are clearly not in a child's best interest. Yes, these are simply my opinions and I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist. But I've seen the best ones there are and I've been around this issue for so long now. I desperately want to share the information I've learned to help as many children as I can.
To all those who were offended, just ignore my posts and ignore Greenspan's position on this. To those who feel I have valid points, please read Greenspan's ICDL articles that I published. You will likley see wondrous results in your children as I did with mine.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:New poster here -- I think the poster that everyone seems to be slamming has a lot of valid points. I'm not sure why the reaction has been so strong here.

OP here. Because as the next poster said, their feelings were hurt. Greenspan's approach and opinions are always in the best interests of children but he expects A LOT of parents...hours of floortime a day, many sessions of OT a day sometimes. A lot to ask for. He doesn't like social skills groups. I published his article for his reasons why they don't get to treating the CORE issues. Perhaps all this makes parents feel insulted or stupid, that they should have known better, that they should be doing more hands on work with their children. Whatever their reason, I undertand, I honestly do. But I wish people would get over those intial feelings of feeling insulted and focus on what is truly best for their children.
I tend to be the type of person that rips the sheet off of people's head to uncover what's underneath. It's a blunt approach that I often use when I feel so much is at stake. I really love children and am very overprotective of special needs children. So all etiquette probably goes out the window when I see defending approaches that are clearly not in a child's best interest. Yes, these are simply my opinions and I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist. But I've seen the best ones there are and I've been around this issue for so long now. I desperately want to share the information I've learned to help as many children as I can.
To all those who were offended, just ignore my posts and ignore Greenspan's position on this. To those who feel I have valid points, please read Greenspan's ICDL articles that I published. You will likley see wondrous results in your children as I did with mine.

Yes, your posts do make a parent consider if we "should feel insulted or stupid" because we didn't take the same path you did. But I don't. I am not stupid, but you do insult me. And I am beginning to think you are a bit nuts.

I am sincerely happy that you have found Greenspan, and that his approach is working for your son. But I don't need you to "rip the sheets off of my head to uncover what's underneath." Yes, you are not a psychologist or psychiatrist. Just a parent who has decided what we all should do in the interest in our children, and berate us if you don't follow your advice.

I appreciate this forum because doesn't turn into fights like this. So I apologize. My subsequent posts will be in the spirt of this forum. . .helpful, supportive, predicated on the believe that special kids specialized care, not a single approach or recommendations from one expert.

that is all out of me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Because as the next poster said, their feelings were hurt. Greenspan's approach and opinions are always in the best interests of children but he expects A LOT of parents...hours of floortime a day, many sessions of OT a day sometimes. A lot to ask for. He doesn't like social skills groups. I published his article for his reasons why they don't get to treating the CORE issues. Perhaps all this makes parents feel insulted or stupid, that they should have known better, that they should be doing more hands on work with their children. Whatever their reason, I undertand, I honestly do. But I wish people would get over those intial feelings of feeling insulted and focus on what is truly best for their children.
I tend to be the type of person that rips the sheet off of people's head to uncover what's underneath. It's a blunt approach that I often use when I feel so much is at stake. I really love children and am very overprotective of special needs children. So all etiquette probably goes out the window when I see defending approaches that are clearly not in a child's best interest. Yes, these are simply my opinions and I am not a psychologist or a psychiatrist. But I've seen the best ones there are and I've been around this issue for so long now. I desperately want to share the information I've learned to help as many children as I can.
To all those who were offended, just ignore my posts and ignore Greenspan's position on this. To those who feel I have valid points, please read Greenspan's ICDL articles that I published. You will likley see wondrous results in your children as I did with mine.

Are you really the OP of this thread? You appear to be the woman who speaks in absolutes. If so and if you can't let this go, please start a different thread. It's not fair to hijack someone else's thread like this.