Unless they wanted to do it as some sort of free twin study, I'd pass.

Anonymous wrote:One of my kids just got diagnosed with ASD at age 2. The place that diagnosed her (major medical center in Midwest) is quite insistent that her (fraternal) twin sister should be tested due to "genetic risk". This seems ridiculous to me, since (a) no one is suggesting that my other kid has autism, not EI, not SLP, not NICU follow-up team, etc., and (b) she has no symptoms. She talks normally, is social, has no sensory issues, throws tantrums like a normal 2-year-old, but doesn't have extreme meltdowns or anything, no feeding issues, etc. Plus, I doubt that the risk is genetic-- the risk is that they were born at 25 weeks. Would you even bother to test her?

At age 2 with no red flags? No way. The "testing" they do would be a huge waste of money. You would report she's social, has no sensory issues and her development is on track. Her other caregivers would report the same and the "experts" would tell you that your child does not have autism or at least no symptoms as of yet.
Diagnoses at age 2 are always a little uncertain so it's possible your other child may "grow out" of her diagnosis by the time she's older. In the meantime I'm sure you'll notice any issues that come up with the sibling as she gets older and if needed you know where to go for testing. I see no advantage of getting her tested now and I see a lot of potential downside. The money, time, stress but also the stigma of having the diagnosis if she ends up not having it later. It sounds like the one child needs help but if this one doesn't right now what's the point?

NP, what PP said is technically true but confusing. They think it's a combination of genetic and environmental factors but no one really knows. It's possible that for some kids it was mostly environmental.

Anonymous wrote:There isn't necessarily any genetic component to autism. Get her tested if you are concerned.. if not, don't.

Huh?

There isn't necessarily any genetic component to autism. Get her tested if you are concerned.. if not, don't.

If you were in this area, I'd suggest you look for an ASD study and sign her up. They'd do comprehensive testing at no cost for you. It's what I did with DD after my 2 DS's were diagnosed. I was afraid I didn't know what 'normal' was and was overlooking her symptoms and, thereby, depriving her of all the needed interventions her brothers were getting. Turns out, she was completely 'normal'. If you can't find a study or something similar in your area, I wouldn't bother unless/when you have concerns.

I wouldn't bother. I know so many kids on the spectrum who have siblings who are clearly NT. They are outgoing, social and have a lot of friends.

When I took my 3 yo for ASD testing, I was so annoyed that they kept looking at his baby brother too. But sibs of kids with ASD are more likely to have ASD, and they are also more likely to have subclinical manifestations of ASD. Anecdotally in the families I know with a kid with ASD the other kids are not really typical, even if they don't have an ASD diagnosis. So I would probably have her tested, is my answer.

They want your $$$$. You can always test later if you think there's an issue.

There is a lot of evidence supporting the critical nature of early intervention. I remember reading that there are doctors who are screening newborn siblings with no real symptoms so that they can spot anything of concern as early as possible. I would do the testing, OP. What is the downside?

Anonymous wrote:There's no blood test for autism, so all you can look at is the symptoms. If they aren't there, there's no point. I'm sure you'll be vigilant and if you see anything concerning, you'll get an evaluation right away. No reason to do it now.

I agree with this. Op, if one twin is on the spectrum then of course there is some genetic predisposition somewhere. I would look into enrolling in a clinical trial--twins are often studied. A clinical trial will give you free access to experts which will help even if the other twin isn't on the spectrum.

They may be pushing it because not all parents have such a good handle on what the red flags are. Also twins (including fraternal ones) are often sought after for research spit could be that after evaluating her they would like to recruit you/her into a study.

No

There's no blood test for autism, so all you can look at is the symptoms. If they aren't there, there's no point. I'm sure you'll be vigilant and if you see anything concerning, you'll get an evaluation right away. No reason to do it now.

One of my kids just got diagnosed with ASD at age 2. The place that diagnosed her (major medical center in Midwest) is quite insistent that her (fraternal) twin sister should be tested due to "genetic risk". This seems ridiculous to me, since (a) no one is suggesting that my other kid has autism, not EI, not SLP, not NICU follow-up team, etc., and (b) she has no symptoms. She talks normally, is social, has no sensory issues, throws tantrums like a normal 2-year-old, but doesn't have extreme meltdowns or anything, no feeding issues, etc. Plus, I doubt that the risk is genetic-- the risk is that they were born at 25 weeks. Would you even bother to test her?