SN “Believers” vs SN “Non-Believers” - how to do what is in the best interest of a child

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

You saying this doesn't make it true. Of course a disability can be temporary. As long as it substantially limits one or more major life activities, it falls under the ADA. Selective mutism is a great example because it is severely impairing and is also treatable.

[Anonymous]

There is no question that serious concerns need to be examined seriously and formally assessed as soon as the child is old enough. Developmental pediatricians are appropriate for ages 0-5, and psychologists are appropriate from 5 and up.

When it comes to that grey area with mild symptoms... please, OP, trust your instincts. Observe and monitor.

I have a whole story about my (doctor) husband who refused to acknowledge his son's severe ADHD and autism, partly because he has the same issues. Essentially I had to have a complete fit and threaten all manner of things so that he agree to a full neuropysch when DS was 10, depressed and failing in school. We turned it around, but I will never forget the years of denial my husband went through.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

You saying this doesn't make it true. Of course a disability can be temporary. As long as it substantially limits one or more major life activities, it falls under the ADA. Selective mutism is a great example because it is severely impairing and is also treatable.

Go away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I mean, not every lump is cancer. Not every fever is the flu. But that doesn't mean the person identifying the symptom is imagining it. And it doesn't mean they are wrong to have it checked out. That's where the low-intervention parents go wrong. They're missing an opportunity to identify and treat what might be a serious problem. And then if it turns out not to be, they claim they were right all along and belittle the intervening parent. But the intervening parent was never wrong to have identified a possible issue.

+1 similarly, sometimes people have some traits that are symptoms, but don't check all the boxes that would lead to a diagosis. Nonetheless, knowing that those traits are present can help you identify the deficits you need to work on and the therapists can yelp you do that. Example, child had sensory seeking behaviors, literal inflexible receptive language, and significant deficits in nonverbal receptive language and pragmatics (particularly turn taking in conversation and not reading the reactions of the listener). Not enough for a diagnosis. But, with OT and speech and language therapy, plus tools to work on things at home, much improvement was made in just a few years. Also, teachers and parents were made aware of it, and this lead to greater understanding and less "getting in trouble" for things they expected child should be able to do but actually needed to be taught and supported.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

DP: It doesn't help, because it isn't true. Yes, some people have disabilities that do not improve with therapies. But many people can achieve significant improvement with therapy, especially early intervention when the brain is still elastic. Everyone? No. But you are wrong that no disability can ever be improved with therapy and intervention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, not every lump is cancer. Not every fever is the flu. But that doesn't mean the person identifying the symptom is imagining it. And it doesn't mean they are wrong to have it checked out. That's where the low-intervention parents go wrong. They're missing an opportunity to identify and treat what might be a serious problem. And then if it turns out not to be, they claim they were right all along and belittle the intervening parent. But the intervening parent was never wrong to have identified a possible issue.

+1 similarly, sometimes people have some traits that are symptoms, but don't check all the boxes that would lead to a diagosis. Nonetheless, knowing that those traits are present can help you identify the deficits you need to work on and the therapists can yelp you do that. Example, child had sensory seeking behaviors, literal inflexible receptive language, and significant deficits in nonverbal receptive language and pragmatics (particularly turn taking in conversation and not reading the reactions of the listener). Not enough for a diagnosis. But, with OT and speech and language therapy, plus tools to work on things at home, much improvement was made in just a few years. Also, teachers and parents were made aware of it, and this lead to greater understanding and less "getting in trouble" for things they expected child should be able to do but actually needed to be taught and supported.

This response to me is a perfect example of someone who has gone overboard on buying into SNs. There’s no diagnosis (which says a lot, because you can get a diagnosis for everything these days) yet they’re investing in four different therapies AND escalating for accommodations at school. If I were this persons spouse, we would almost certainly have a conflict about the appropriateness of this approach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, not every lump is cancer. Not every fever is the flu. But that doesn't mean the person identifying the symptom is imagining it. And it doesn't mean they are wrong to have it checked out. That's where the low-intervention parents go wrong. They're missing an opportunity to identify and treat what might be a serious problem. And then if it turns out not to be, they claim they were right all along and belittle the intervening parent. But the intervening parent was never wrong to have identified a possible issue.

+1 similarly, sometimes people have some traits that are symptoms, but don't check all the boxes that would lead to a diagosis. Nonetheless, knowing that those traits are present can help you identify the deficits you need to work on and the therapists can yelp you do that. Example, child had sensory seeking behaviors, literal inflexible receptive language, and significant deficits in nonverbal receptive language and pragmatics (particularly turn taking in conversation and not reading the reactions of the listener). Not enough for a diagnosis. But, with OT and speech and language therapy, plus tools to work on things at home, much improvement was made in just a few years. Also, teachers and parents were made aware of it, and this lead to greater understanding and less "getting in trouble" for things they expected child should be able to do but actually needed to be taught and supported.

This response to me is a perfect example of someone who has gone overboard on buying into SNs. There’s no diagnosis (which says a lot, because you can get a diagnosis for everything these days) yet they’re investing in four different therapies AND escalating for accommodations at school. If I were this persons spouse, we would almost certainly have a conflict about the appropriateness of this approach.

ITA. I think you see this more these days with ADHD than autism.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

You saying this doesn't make it true. Of course a disability can be temporary. As long as it substantially limits one or more major life activities, it falls under the ADA. Selective mutism is a great example because it is severely impairing and is also treatable.

Go away.

I'm not going to go away when you continue to discourage parents to get help for their kids and perpetuate offensive and incorrect definitions of disability. I understand things are hard for you right now but attacking other parents is not going to help you or your kid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

You saying this doesn't make it true. Of course a disability can be temporary. As long as it substantially limits one or more major life activities, it falls under the ADA. Selective mutism is a great example because it is severely impairing and is also treatable.

Go away.

I'm not going to go away when you continue to discourage parents to get help for their kids and perpetuate offensive and incorrect definitions of disability. I understand things are hard for you right now but attacking other parents is not going to help you or your kid.

You can get any help you want for your kid but to claim they have a developmental disorder that was cured by a year of OT or whatever is just offensive. And yes, leads to unfair consumption of resources if you try to get a 504 or IEP. And let’s not talk about the extra time on tests. Meanwhile we all know you will complain vociferously about “those kids” (the ones with actual disabilities) when you want to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Since neither parent is presumably a specialist at diagnosing SN, we deferred to the experts. The real issues for parents arise when the experts are saying X but one or both parents believe that their own parenting 'intuition" supersedes, and conflicts, with the diagnosis of the clinician(s). If there is a conflict like this the tendency of parents is to "wait and see" which is the death knell for the hopes and chances of remediation. SN can be remediated when treated aggressively while the child is young. So therein lies the problem. Anecdotally, I nearly divorced DH. I had to say to him in a final showdown: I am on Planet Reality with the doctors. You are on Planet Denial by yourself. I'm not there. Your parents aren't there. The school isn't there. The clinicians aren't there. You are all by yourself on your planet. Either take a rocket and fly to our planet or I will call my lawyer to blow up your rocket for good. That did it. We have stayed married 13 years since then and he is supportive and on board.

SN cannot be “remediated” like that. By definition.

What definition? Obviously, "SN" includes a lot more than autism. For example, selective mutism can absolutely be completely remediated.

Ask yourself why parents with kids who will never be “remediated” might be irritated with you.

Why are you trying to speak for these parents? Speak for yourself. If a child's disability can be remediated that is a good thing. If you are so bitter that you don't want anyone else's child child to ever experience less impairment because your child is not in that situation, there is truly nothing I can do to make you feel better. My child exists and has a right to exist and is not an affront to you or your child.

It’s not a disability if it can be remediated. Hope this helps!

You saying this doesn't make it true. Of course a disability can be temporary. As long as it substantially limits one or more major life activities, it falls under the ADA. Selective mutism is a great example because it is severely impairing and is also treatable.

Go away.

I'm not going to go away when you continue to discourage parents to get help for their kids and perpetuate offensive and incorrect definitions of disability. I understand things are hard for you right now but attacking other parents is not going to help you or your kid.

You can get any help you want for your kid but to claim they have a developmental disorder that was cured by a year of OT or whatever is just offensive. And yes, leads to unfair consumption of resources if you try to get a 504 or IEP. And let’s not talk about the extra time on tests. Meanwhile we all know you will complain vociferously about “those kids” (the ones with actual disabilities) when you want to.

Who is "we"? I think it is just you.

Fyi, selective mutism is not a developmental disorder. It is a mental health condition. Mental health conditions can be both disabling and treatable.

You can shout and scream and call me names but when you make ignorant, harmful and incorrect statements I will be here to correct you. So do.you want to keep screaming at me? It's up to you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I mean, not every lump is cancer. Not every fever is the flu. But that doesn't mean the person identifying the symptom is imagining it. And it doesn't mean they are wrong to have it checked out. That's where the low-intervention parents go wrong. They're missing an opportunity to identify and treat what might be a serious problem. And then if it turns out not to be, they claim they were right all along and belittle the intervening parent. But the intervening parent was never wrong to have identified a possible issue.

+1 similarly, sometimes people have some traits that are symptoms, but don't check all the boxes that would lead to a diagosis. Nonetheless, knowing that those traits are present can help you identify the deficits you need to work on and the therapists can yelp you do that. Example, child had sensory seeking behaviors, literal inflexible receptive language, and significant deficits in nonverbal receptive language and pragmatics (particularly turn taking in conversation and not reading the reactions of the listener). Not enough for a diagnosis. But, with OT and speech and language therapy, plus tools to work on things at home, much improvement was made in just a few years. Also, teachers and parents were made aware of it, and this lead to greater understanding and less "getting in trouble" for things they expected child should be able to do but actually needed to be taught and supported.

I don't understand how this child could afford therapy without insurance but can't afford evaluation that get an ASD L1 diagnosis for those signs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The problem is it isn’t like they can ethically use identical twins who are borderline being diagnosed with a disability -let’s say with a diagnosis of autism -and give one ABA and/or twin speech therapy or occupational therapy and the other one receives nothing.

So many places that specialize in autism are going to see everything under that light and diagnosis almost all children who go there with autism just to err on the side off caution because insurance will pay for ABA (often times that that center provides).

You absolutel can ethically perform an experiment to randomly provide one or other of two generally accepted treatments. This how research is done for new treatments of existing diseases.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, sometimes it's SN and also parenting could improve.

In grades PK4-4th I thought my DD had pretty subtle autism. Her PK4 teacher flagged it (and she was the mother of a girl with autism), a few elopements, significant sensory *under*sensitivity, hyperlexia, special interests, generally weak social skills and social anxiety/avoidance. No major behavior problem aside from eloping like 2-3 times total in her preschool/K years. In 5th grade she improved a lot socially and has less special interests, so now in 8th I wouldn't say she meets any ASD criteria, though she's still sensory under-sensitive.

My DH never really bought into the autism possibility, and he thinks it was never a thing. I think the massive effort I put into developing her social skills was effective. So of course it irritates me immensely that he reaps the benefit of my efforts and that my successful intervention is, to him, a reason to dismiss the entire problem and tell me that I was wrong all along. It sucks. But DD is okay now so I've had to let it go.

New poster to this thread. Could you share what you did to support your DD's social skill development?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How do you reconcile and do what is best for the child? I am a mom in this scenario and I fear that SN issues that I think I see are discipline/parenting issues my DH claims to be a problem.

OP this is a false dichotomy.

Agree, there is either a diagnosis or there is not. Go to professionals and have your kids assessed. Then if dad doesn't agree, that's a dad problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, sometimes it's SN and also parenting could improve.

In grades PK4-4th I thought my DD had pretty subtle autism. Her PK4 teacher flagged it (and she was the mother of a girl with autism), a few elopements, significant sensory *under*sensitivity, hyperlexia, special interests, generally weak social skills and social anxiety/avoidance. No major behavior problem aside from eloping like 2-3 times total in her preschool/K years. In 5th grade she improved a lot socially and has less special interests, so now in 8th I wouldn't say she meets any ASD criteria, though she's still sensory under-sensitive.

My DH never really bought into the autism possibility, and he thinks it was never a thing. I think the massive effort I put into developing her social skills was effective. So of course it irritates me immensely that he reaps the benefit of my efforts and that my successful intervention is, to him, a reason to dismiss the entire problem and tell me that I was wrong all along. It sucks. But DD is okay now so I've had to let it go.

New poster to this thread. Could you share what you did to support your DD's social skill development?

Well, my DD is very rules-oriented, and I think knowing social "rules" helps with her social anxiety. So I did a lot of explicit explaining of things like if someone says "Hi" to you, they're expecting that you'll say "hi" back, and if you don't say anything or at least wave/smile then they might think you don't want to play with them. (She was 6 years old for that one) She genuinely did not know that kind of thing, and disagreed with my instructions. I helped her to have sort of a "character card" in her head for each friend, knowing a few key activities, likes and dislikes, so that if she didn't know what to talk about, she could fall back on those items. Basically explaining things very explicitly because she wasn't finding it intuitive. Going over examples in books and TV shows about friendship-- it's best not to critique the kid's behavior too much. DD was socially avoidant and tended to read books rather than interact, so I spoke with the teacher about engaging her more and finding friends that she got along well with. Sometimes I signed her up for "jobs" that were social, such as handing out programs at a concert with me. Helping her get past the anxiety by giving her sort of a script or a role was helpful. She tended to freeze up with new people but then relax as she got to know them. But you know, every kid is different. Obviously having COVID happen during early elementary school was not helpful, those are critical years for social development.

Now that she's in middle school, she still applies certain "rules" but more loosely. For example, she knows that attending a friend's sports game or musical performance is an act of friendship, so she does it when she can. To choose birthday gifts for friends, she'll review pictures of them to determine their preferred color scheme and style of dress. It's really cute to hear her fashion analysis. For herself, she sticks to a color palette system that my mom taught me (basically pick a core neutral such as navy, three favorite colors, and a few second-tier-favorite colors), and her fashion choices are very much the median of her friend group-- no fashion risks! She still dislikes group projects, but that's not unusual IMO.