Worried about ASD in my baby. Sorry to be "that mom."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, research shows that 6 months is a great age for intervention, with fantastic results. The problem is many specialists out there aren't trained to work with infants.
"Treatment at the earliest age when signs of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) appear – sometimes in infants as young as 6 months old – significantly reduces symptoms so that, by age 3, most who received the therapy had neither ASD nor developmental delay, a UC Davis MIND Institute research study has found."
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

I was trained in a setting similar to this study. It's about incorporating naturalistic therapy techniques that subtly change your parenting approach to encourage communication from your child.

I don't see anything particularly worrisome in your description of your son. On the other hand, this is not the first rodeo, so trust your instincts, but think logically. Are there any risk factors? ASD in the family, or autistic traits? Delays in meting milestones?

Huh. What I'm gathering from this is that the reason these kids "grew out" of their "ASD" by 3 or so is because they didn't have it in the first place. If you give treatment to babies at 6 months of age, when most doctors think it's too early to diagnose, no wonder the treatment works! Hey, I know! Let's give them cancer treatment at 6 months, then see how many of them don't have cancer at 3 yo?

[Anonymous]

I think the term "that mom" should be banished. Frankly I think that is what people take offense to - you're basically saying you're being overly neurotic but you care more about indulging your neuroses than presenting your concerns in a sensitive way to those with spectrum kids. I know your intent is the opposite and you later apologized but I thought it could be useful to you to know that your intention to be upfront about this, when delivered in such a flippant way ("that mom") is what is causing people to read your post with their hackles up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:That study is very interesting... it's sad that it was published in 2014 and probably still so few families are benefiting from treatment at that early of an age. I don't think I have heard one person on these boards say that they were seen at 6 months of age with a child displaying lack of eye contact... maybe language delay (?) but not the milder ASD symptoms.

What's happening in reality is that parents with concerns like OP (and myself starting at about 1 year) are being told not to worry. Sure, OP can get on a wait list to see a dev ped... but that will take 3 months-ish... only to be dismissed as inconclusive as the most likely outcome.

There just has to be a better way. Regular pediatricians are not catching mild ASDs early enough, IMO. I even told my regular ped that there were 2 family members with confirmed ASDs. He told me that the connection was "too distant," the connection needed to be a sibling or parent. :/

PP here. I posted about that study before. There are other studies on intervention for 12-18 month olds that show. There was another mom who posted that she saw signs of ASD in her infant and started ABA before he turned 1.

I didn't post about my experience, but I'm happy to, if people have questions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the term "that mom" should be banished. Frankly I think that is what people take offense to - you're basically saying you're being overly neurotic but you care more about indulging your neuroses than presenting your concerns in a sensitive way to those with spectrum kids. I know your intent is the opposite and you later apologized but I thought it could be useful to you to know that your intention to be upfront about this, when delivered in such a flippant way ("that mom") is what is causing people to read your post with their hackles up.

"That mom" was a preemptive way for OP to acknowledge that people would unreasonably jump ball over her. Which they did.

[Anonymous]

Ball = all ^^

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the term "that mom" should be banished. Frankly I think that is what people take offense to - you're basically saying you're being overly neurotic but you care more about indulging your neuroses than presenting your concerns in a sensitive way to those with spectrum kids. I know your intent is the opposite and you later apologized but I thought it could be useful to you to know that your intention to be upfront about this, when delivered in such a flippant way ("that mom") is what is causing people to read your post with their hackles up.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, research shows that 6 months is a great age for intervention, with fantastic results. The problem is many specialists out there aren't trained to work with infants.
"Treatment at the earliest age when signs of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) appear – sometimes in infants as young as 6 months old – significantly reduces symptoms so that, by age 3, most who received the therapy had neither ASD nor developmental delay, a UC Davis MIND Institute research study has found."
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

I was trained in a setting similar to this study. It's about incorporating naturalistic therapy techniques that subtly change your parenting approach to encourage communication from your child.

I don't see anything particularly worrisome in your description of your son. On the other hand, this is not the first rodeo, so trust your instincts, but think logically. Are there any risk factors? ASD in the family, or autistic traits? Delays in meting milestones?

Huh. What I'm gathering from this is that the reason these kids "grew out" of their "ASD" by 3 or so is because they didn't have it in the first place. If you give treatment to babies at 6 months of age, when most doctors think it's too early to diagnose, no wonder the treatment works! Hey, I know! Let's give them cancer treatment at 6 months, then see how many of them don't have cancer at 3 yo?

Right. Because speech therapy and floortime are just as toxic as chemo and surgery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, research shows that 6 months is a great age for intervention, with fantastic results. The problem is many specialists out there aren't trained to work with infants.
"Treatment at the earliest age when signs of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) appear – sometimes in infants as young as 6 months old – significantly reduces symptoms so that, by age 3, most who received the therapy had neither ASD nor developmental delay, a UC Davis MIND Institute research study has found."
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

I was trained in a setting similar to this study. It's about incorporating naturalistic therapy techniques that subtly change your parenting approach to encourage communication from your child.

I don't see anything particularly worrisome in your description of your son. On the other hand, this is not the first rodeo, so trust your instincts, but think logically. Are there any risk factors? ASD in the family, or autistic traits? Delays in meting milestones?

Huh. What I'm gathering from this is that the reason these kids "grew out" of their "ASD" by 3 or so is because they didn't have it in the first place. If you give treatment to babies at 6 months of age, when most doctors think it's too early to diagnose, no wonder the treatment works! Hey, I know! Let's give them cancer treatment at 6 months, then see how many of them don't have cancer at 3 yo?

Right. Because speech therapy and floortime are just as toxic as chemo and surgery.

I believe that most of these babies are identified because they are the younger sibling of a child already diagnosed with an ASD. I don't think that just any 6 month old would be enrolled unless they have some sort of risk factor AND clearly identifiable signs. You'd track success by having a control groups of younger sibs who did not get the early intervention. The press release explains it: https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

While this was such a tiny study that I don't think you can rely on it, I'm impressed that the intervention was potentially pretty cheap and non-invasive. It involved 12 one-hour sessions with the parents over three months, training the parents on the interventions, and some follow ups. This actually seems really cost-effective, and not that burdensome. It's not like giving 27/7 ABA to newborns! I can imagine that especially if you already have a diagnosed child it would be worth it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, research shows that 6 months is a great age for intervention, with fantastic results. The problem is many specialists out there aren't trained to work with infants.
"Treatment at the earliest age when signs of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) appear – sometimes in infants as young as 6 months old – significantly reduces symptoms so that, by age 3, most who received the therapy had neither ASD nor developmental delay, a UC Davis MIND Institute research study has found."
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

I was trained in a setting similar to this study. It's about incorporating naturalistic therapy techniques that subtly change your parenting approach to encourage communication from your child.

I don't see anything particularly worrisome in your description of your son. On the other hand, this is not the first rodeo, so trust your instincts, but think logically. Are there any risk factors? ASD in the family, or autistic traits? Delays in meting milestones?

Hi PP, this is OP. Can you please tell me more about these techniques you are trained in and give examples? If nothing else, it will help me assuage my anxiety by feeling like I'm doing something proactive, even if my concerns are unfounded. As for risk factors, my brother's son has ADHD and Asperger's tendencies. Thank you for your kind and insightful response.

[Anonymous]

OP, I totally get your worries. I have two kids with ASD. Bottom line, I just don't think this is the place for you to ask questions about your child's potential needs. I do feel it is insensitive to post your worries about a six-month old here. We aren't doctors and every child with ASD is different. As other posters have said, speak to a developmental pediatrician. You absolutely should trust your gut and follow up...with a professional. Also, I believe babies don't consistently respond to their names until one year.

[Anonymous]

Nobody of any age responds to their name 100% of the time. The more one is able to concentrate and get "in the zone" the more there may be times one doesn't respond.

[Anonymous]

To the original poster - take a look at website you may find it helpful in finding ways to work/play with your baby. http://www.icdl.com/DIR/6-developmental-milestones Good luck!

[Anonymous]

It was our first who has HFA. We didn't realize how different he was as a baby until we had our second. For me, one early sign was that he would tense up his whole body when I tried to put him in the baby Bjorn, whereas our second would snuggle up next to my body. He was really not at all interactive as a baby. Not a lot of eye contact, not a lot of cooing, no pointing. Speak to your pediatrician. Someone said something about intuition. You would know if something was off and it sounds like you're picking up on some subtle signs. And yes, realizing that your child is nothing like the baby book is someting that puzzled me for years before we got the diagnosis. I remember having that exact same reaction to those descriptios of what your baby shoudl be doing every month.

[Anonymous]

My kid was smiley as heck, flirted with waitresses, pointed like a mad man and loved peek a boo.
He still does all of those things and yet he's nonverbal autistic. The one thing he was intensely into was external stimuli and he was pretty repetitive.

My daughter was much more aloof (the boy is a cuddle bug) and smiley and she's 'normal'.

Holy crap woman just enjoy your kid. My autistic one is pretty darned enjoyable anyway - what is to worry about?
It seems that perhaps that you are the one to be worried about with all of this stress and dissecting your kids behavior rather than enjoying him for what he is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP, research shows that 6 months is a great age for intervention, with fantastic results. The problem is many specialists out there aren't trained to work with infants.
"Treatment at the earliest age when signs of autism spectrum disorder (ASD) appear – sometimes in infants as young as 6 months old – significantly reduces symptoms so that, by age 3, most who received the therapy had neither ASD nor developmental delay, a UC Davis MIND Institute research study has found."
https://www.ucdmc.ucdavis.edu/publish/news/newsroom/9182

I was trained in a setting similar to this study. It's about incorporating naturalistic therapy techniques that subtly change your parenting approach to encourage communication from your child.

I don't see anything particularly worrisome in your description of your son. On the other hand, this is not the first rodeo, so trust your instincts, but think logically. Are there any risk factors? ASD in the family, or autistic traits? Delays in meting milestones?

Hi PP, this is OP. Can you please tell me more about these techniques you are trained in and give examples? If nothing else, it will help me assuage my anxiety by feeling like I'm doing something proactive, even if my concerns are unfounded. As for risk factors, my brother's son has ADHD and Asperger's tendencies. Thank you for your kind and insightful response.

Not PP, but you can do Floortime with your child. It's a way to encourage and reinforce social communication and interactions and is not hard to do and it has no real downside and it is not expensive.

https://www.autismspeaks.org/what-autism/treatment/floortime