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

Forum Index » Kids With Special Needs and Disabilities

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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? [/quote]
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?[/quote]

Right. Because speech therapy and floortime are just as toxic as chemo and surgery.  :roll: [/quote]

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.

[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics