OT skepticism

[Anonymous]

To those that have seen improvement with OT, how do you know it was the OT thatadenthings better and not just the child outgrowing/ learning things that he would have anyway with time? I wish I didn't see OT as such a wishy washy industry but I do. Can anyone make me feel like the money spent is worth it?

[Anonymous]

No, sorry.

OT that focused on fine motor issues was great for DS with ASD/ADHD. DS got OT for fine motor at school and still does in 3rd grade. The school OT taught him everything from using utensils, tying his shoes, handwriting... To touch typing. Since we get OT at school, it does not cost anything and I do not have take DS out of school early and drive him all across town.

I am sorry that we ever tried private OT which focused on "sensory issues". Even now, I am still unsure what issue this therapy was suppose to address.

[Anonymous]

I think the sensory issues ot is total crap.

[Anonymous]

Handwriting and shoe tying were helpful. I don't hear a lot of evidence around sensory therapies. Which I think is crazy, because these claims have been made for decades now, and there has been plenty of time to do rigorous studies.

[Anonymous]

My child has had motor issue and sensory ot. I thought the sensory ot work actually helped him a great deal.

Now speach therapy... I don't think it was worth it at all.

[Anonymous]

IMO it depends on the therapist. I think this is true for any type of therapy.

[Anonymous]

For a year and a half, back when I didn't know any better, my DS saw a fluffy, frowfy OT who ignored my requests to work on handwriting (the reason why we were paying for OT). When we finally switched I asked a lot of questions about practice philosophies before going with a new one. I was able to find someone who saw herself as a PT for the upper body. They work on handwriting and fine motor at every session and my kid is making progress with her. You really have to interview them to get a handle on their views as the profession is very wide ranging. If you find someone like our new OT I don't think you will think it is BS.

[Anonymous]

As PP have suggested, much depends on the OT, the child and the issues. I've got 2 kids that had extensive OT, the oldest is 12. It absolutely helped him when he was 5-8. It helped him overcome a lot of the anxiety he had with doing novel physical activities and invaluable assistance in helping him with emotional regulation - in addition to addressing fine motor issues. My other kid has many of the same challenges but it took longer to address through therapy.

For us, the issue wasn't if it helped but how long to continue it. Oh, I think it absolutely helped with the sensory issues they were having, partly by teaching us how to work with the kids at home. But, not every therapist is created equal and we've had some flaky, ineffective therapists that I wasted little time on.

[Anonymous]

I thought it was complete crap.

[Anonymous]

It was a game changer for two of my kids. Definitely depends on the therapist and what the kid's issues are. Agree on the uncertainty of how long to continue. There doesn't seem to usually be an ending plan. We basically did it until we couldn't afford it anymore.

[Anonymous]

Too many seem to think that everything comes down to sensory issues and push that as a focus, even when there is no evidence. No, I don't think that sensory issues caused my kid's speech problems and I don't think brushing helped one bit. We bailed on OT quickly and doubled down on speech with the same money. Nor were sensory issues at the root of my gifted but highly anxious nephew's school trouble. But the power of suggestion is strong and kids aren't dumb and within a few weeks, my nephew just started attributing any behavior incidents to "socks are too tight" or similar, as a dodge.

Sure, I think there are kids with legit sensory issues, but if they don't present with any signs, I think it's bullshit for OTs to force it and risk creating an issue that then needs "treatment."

The pp who mentioned their handwriting person who viewed herself as PT for the upper body gives me hope for the profession, that it's not all flaky, woo woo crap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the sensory issues ot is total crap.

My son was supposed to be jumping around and going through hoops to help with speech. While fun, it did not help with speech, wasn't covered by insurance back then and the money would have been better spent on sign language. I was perfectly capable of bringing my son to jump around and have fun on a regular basis myself.
The SLP constantly pressured us to do OT all the time. They learn that in school and they really turn the screws. Sometimes you need a therapist yourself to deal with your kids therapists.

[Anonymous]

The brushing was a life changer for my child... A life changer. I started getting calls from school asking what we were doing. She was more attentive, more talkative, and all her fine motor skills were more focused. I'm a believer

[Anonymous]

Agree with PPs that a lot depends on the specific OT. Quite a bit also depends on a child's diagnosis and whether you reinforce what a child learns between sessions.

Private OT was an enormous help for my son with apraxia/dyspraxia. He is doing far better than I ever could have hoped for. We began very early (maybe around age 2) and didn't take a break for about 5 years. Now that he's older, he just goes on and off as new issues pop up. He also has SPD - sensory seeking (diagnosed by developmental ped and county OT as a toddler) but our private OT didn't seem interested in treating it.

My older child has significant fine motor issues due to a muscle weakness. He learned to tie his shoes, button, snap and type in OT. All were very helpful! However, even with OT, he will always struggle with fine motor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The brushing was a life changer for my child... A life changer. I started getting calls from school asking what we were doing. She was more attentive, more talkative, and all her fine motor skills were more focused. I'm a believer

And an OT?