The five most popular articles from Autism Bulletin posted this month:
1. MTV's "True Life" Features Teens With Autism
2. "Strange Son" Recalls Struggle of Autistic Boy Who Gains Words
3. Recent Autism News Headlines
4. CNN's "Larry King Live" Features Autism Talk
5. Massachusetts to Consider Restrictions on Aversive Autism Therapy
Most popular categories or "labels" for readers researching articles on Autism Bulletin this month:
1. legislation
2. ABA
3. autism services
4. Asperger's
5. education
Source: Google Analytics
Saturday, March 31, 2007
School Voucher Plan for Autistic Children Advances in Texas Senate
A proposal to allow autistic children in Texas to use vouchers to attend any public or private school won approval from a split Education Committee in the state Senate, The Dallas Morning News reported March 28. The 5-2 vote means that a bill to allow an estimated 17,000 children in the state with autism spectrum disorders moves to a vote in the full Senate, the newspaper said.
See The Morning News report online here. This news story covers the state Senate committee vote (Republicans voted in favor and Democrats against) and notes that families who have children with autism lobbied in favor of the bill as a way to get educational services for their kids. The teachers unions and education groups opposed it on the principle that any kind of voucher takes money out of the strained public schools pot.
Earlier coverage of this proposal noted that proponents of school vouchers have failed to win enough political support in the past to implement it; attaching the idea it to an issue like autism could be a way to get vouchers approved in Texas, according to this line of thinking.
The newspaper's report cited $14,000 per year as the average cost for educating a student with autism. Under the bill, parents opting to send their child to private school costing more would pay the difference.
Sen. Florence Shapiro, a Plano Republican, is the sponsor of Senate Bill 1000. You can see her February 28 press release on the bill here. A fact-sheet in support of the bill, nicknamed "ASAP" for Autism Services Accessibility Program, is available here (a one-page PDF file).
One of Shapiro's arguments is that a voucher plan for kids with autism makes economic sense. From her press release:
Also see:
Autism Takes Stage in Texas School Voucher Debate
See The Morning News report online here. This news story covers the state Senate committee vote (Republicans voted in favor and Democrats against) and notes that families who have children with autism lobbied in favor of the bill as a way to get educational services for their kids. The teachers unions and education groups opposed it on the principle that any kind of voucher takes money out of the strained public schools pot.
Earlier coverage of this proposal noted that proponents of school vouchers have failed to win enough political support in the past to implement it; attaching the idea it to an issue like autism could be a way to get vouchers approved in Texas, according to this line of thinking.
The newspaper's report cited $14,000 per year as the average cost for educating a student with autism. Under the bill, parents opting to send their child to private school costing more would pay the difference.
Sen. Florence Shapiro, a Plano Republican, is the sponsor of Senate Bill 1000. You can see her February 28 press release on the bill here. A fact-sheet in support of the bill, nicknamed "ASAP" for Autism Services Accessibility Program, is available here (a one-page PDF file).
One of Shapiro's arguments is that a voucher plan for kids with autism makes economic sense. From her press release:
"Because symptoms can vary so greatly, a program that works for one child may not be effective for another," Shapiro said. "That is why individualized programs are so important."
Research shows that with appropriate intervention, almost 50 percent of children with autism can become indistinguishable from mainstream population. However, if proper services are not provided, the majority of adults with autism will require high-level care or institutionalization.
Senate Bill 1000 gives parents the option and the educational freedom to seek out appropriate intervention for their children, providing funding equal to the amount to which their child would be entitled in their home school district.
Also see:
Autism Takes Stage in Texas School Voucher Debate
Thursday, March 29, 2007
Canadian Parliament Panel Urges New National Policy
A committee in Canada's Parliament has called on the central government to play a leadership role in developing a new national strategy to improve the lives of autistic people and their families.
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology on March 29 issued a report entitled "Pay Now or Pay Later: Autism Families in Crisis," which calls on "the federal government, in collaboration with the provinces and territories, establish a comprehensive National ASD Strategy." You can read a press release from the committee here, and see a copy of the 36-page report (PDF file) here.
The panel says that national strategy should cover lifelong services and supports for people with autism. Its list of recommendations (see here) is heavy on information-gathering, increasing public awareness about autism spectrum disorders, and including citizens who have autism diagnoses in future policy-making deliberations. It also calls for more research into best practices for delivering autism-related services and disseminating those best practices around the country. And it calls for tax policies that could help families deal with autism-related expenses.
These are good ideas, to be sure, and the Senate panel is clearly sticking a stake in the ground in front of Parliament Hill in Ottawa to put autism on the national agenda. However, as the listing of ideas above describes, the Canadian panel's recommendations appear to be light on concrete actions or specific proposals that provide direct services to people with autism and their families anytime soon. Contrast these recommendations with those contained in recent state autism task force reports in the United States, such as Washington here and Kentucky here.
On the other hand, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs does endorse a proposal now in Parliament to have Canada's national health plan cover the costs of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) services (also called Intensive Behavioral Intervention, or IBI, in Canada). That's not something anyone in the U.S. could discuss without Washington enacting a health care overhaul or federal budget offensive.
Lastly, the Senate committee's report gives an important clue as to why it didn't come out more forcefully with a set of specific recommendations for national action on autism policies. The reason: Canada lacks a critical-mass consensus on what to do about autism spectrum disorders. Take this early passage from the report:
Like the U.S., autism services -- the rising need for them and the challenge to pay for them -- is a hot-button issue at the provincial level. Also see:
The Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs, Science and Technology on March 29 issued a report entitled "Pay Now or Pay Later: Autism Families in Crisis," which calls on "the federal government, in collaboration with the provinces and territories, establish a comprehensive National ASD Strategy." You can read a press release from the committee here, and see a copy of the 36-page report (PDF file) here.
The panel says that national strategy should cover lifelong services and supports for people with autism. Its list of recommendations (see here) is heavy on information-gathering, increasing public awareness about autism spectrum disorders, and including citizens who have autism diagnoses in future policy-making deliberations. It also calls for more research into best practices for delivering autism-related services and disseminating those best practices around the country. And it calls for tax policies that could help families deal with autism-related expenses.
These are good ideas, to be sure, and the Senate panel is clearly sticking a stake in the ground in front of Parliament Hill in Ottawa to put autism on the national agenda. However, as the listing of ideas above describes, the Canadian panel's recommendations appear to be light on concrete actions or specific proposals that provide direct services to people with autism and their families anytime soon. Contrast these recommendations with those contained in recent state autism task force reports in the United States, such as Washington here and Kentucky here.
On the other hand, the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs does endorse a proposal now in Parliament to have Canada's national health plan cover the costs of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) services (also called Intensive Behavioral Intervention, or IBI, in Canada). That's not something anyone in the U.S. could discuss without Washington enacting a health care overhaul or federal budget offensive.
Lastly, the Senate committee's report gives an important clue as to why it didn't come out more forcefully with a set of specific recommendations for national action on autism policies. The reason: Canada lacks a critical-mass consensus on what to do about autism spectrum disorders. Take this early passage from the report:
PART I: AUTISM: A COMPLEX ISSUE WITH SEVERAL DIFFERING VIEWS
The Committee heard many different points of view on the complex issue of autism. Contrasting views were presented with respect to the definition of autism, its prevalence, the effectiveness of various autism interventions, and the need for treatment. Sometimes, divergent opinions were highlighted among autistic individuals, advocacy groups and families. This makes it very difficult to achieve consensus and to identify potential options for policy considerations. For this reason, it is clear that any set of recommendations will not please everyone. At the same time however, this reinforces the call for a strong foundation of autism research and underscores the need for unbiased, accurate information through education, knowledge exchange and public awareness. This also suggests that consultations with all stakeholders including, perhaps most importantly, autistic individuals, are essential to policy decision-making.
Like the U.S., autism services -- the rising need for them and the challenge to pay for them -- is a hot-button issue at the provincial level. Also see:
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Institute of Medicine to Discuss Investigating Autism-Environment Link
The Forum on Neuroscience and Nervous Systems Disorders, a part of the Institute of Medicine in Washington, D.C., is hosting a workshop on April 18 and 19 to discuss research strategies for exploring the potential relationship between autism and the environment.
The two-day workshop is open to the public and comes at the request of U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt, according to the Institute of Medicine website (see it here, where you can access both a "statement of task" and a workshop agenda). The workshop will focus on these three questions:
The agenda includes participants from government research bodies such as the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, as well as scientists and academics from institutions such as Vanderbilt University; the M.I.N.D. Institute from the University of California at Davis; Harvard Medical School; Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Columbia University; University of Arizona; the J. Craig Venter Institute for genomics research; Baylor College of Medicine; University of Rochester Medical Center. That's on the first day.
Autism advocates are also on the agenda, including Laura Bono, a board member of the National Autism Association and Sallie Bernard, the co-founder of SafeMinds, or Sensible Action for Ending Mercury-Induced Neurological Disorders, who is a board member at Autism Speaks.
This is interesting because both SafeMinds and the National Autism Association have criticized past statements by the Institute of Medicine that concluded there was no causal link between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism. You can view conclusions of a 2004 Institute of Medicine report here. SafeMinds has a list of press releases here that criticizes that finding and the authors of it, alleging conflicts of interest.
On its website (see here), the National Autism Association notes that this Institute of Medicine workshop, to be held right before a Defeat Autism Now (DAN) conference, formed with its leaders' participation. Here's what the group has to say:
The two-day workshop is open to the public and comes at the request of U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Mike Leavitt, according to the Institute of Medicine website (see it here, where you can access both a "statement of task" and a workshop agenda). The workshop will focus on these three questions:
- What are the most promising scientific opportunities for improving the understanding of potential environmental factors in autism?
- What scientific tools and technologies are available, what interdisciplinary research approaches are needed, and what further infrastructure investments will be necessary in the short- and long-term to be able to explore potential relationships between autism and environmental factors?
- What opportunities exist for public-private partnerships in the support and conduct of the research?
The agenda includes participants from government research bodies such as the National Institute of Mental Health, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, as well as scientists and academics from institutions such as Vanderbilt University; the M.I.N.D. Institute from the University of California at Davis; Harvard Medical School; Mount Sinai School of Medicine; Columbia University; University of Arizona; the J. Craig Venter Institute for genomics research; Baylor College of Medicine; University of Rochester Medical Center. That's on the first day.
Autism advocates are also on the agenda, including Laura Bono, a board member of the National Autism Association and Sallie Bernard, the co-founder of SafeMinds, or Sensible Action for Ending Mercury-Induced Neurological Disorders, who is a board member at Autism Speaks.
This is interesting because both SafeMinds and the National Autism Association have criticized past statements by the Institute of Medicine that concluded there was no causal link between the measles-mumps-rubella vaccine and autism. You can view conclusions of a 2004 Institute of Medicine report here. SafeMinds has a list of press releases here that criticizes that finding and the authors of it, alleging conflicts of interest.
On its website (see here), the National Autism Association notes that this Institute of Medicine workshop, to be held right before a Defeat Autism Now (DAN) conference, formed with its leaders' participation. Here's what the group has to say:
Unlike the 2004 IOM Committee, the workshop group will not address causation or issue any formal recommendations. Also, it will not discuss the efficacy of any treatments. Rather, there will be presentations and discussions on strategies for research focusing on the potential relationship between autism and an array of environmental exposures.
A publicly available summary of the presentations and discussions made during the workshop will be prepared by a rapporteur and will reflect what transpired at the workshop. It will be published by the National Academies Press in the early Fall of 2007.
Laura Bono of the National Autism Association and Mark Blaxill of SafeMinds were two of three advocates invited to serve on the workshop planning committee. They were tasked with helping to develop the meeting agenda and presenters.
Laura and Mark made it their primary objective to direct the workshop toward the most relevant research areas to our community that have historically been overlooked by federal health agencies. In addition, Laura has been asked to give a statement at the workshop on the Perspectives of the Advocacy Community.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Discover Magazine Reviews Investigations into Autism-Environment Link
Discover Magazine's April issue has an interesting story that reviews the recent work of medical researchers -- people like Martha Herbert, a child neurologist at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard and Craig Newschaffer, an epidemiologist at Drexel University School of Public Health -- who are investigating a genetic predisposition to autism and potential environmental triggers for autism spectrum disorders.
You can find the article, "Autism: It's Not Just in the Head," at Discover's website by clicking here.
Dr. Herbert gave a lecture about her research, which you can read about in "Studying Autism as a Whole Body Condition," by clicking here; there is some overlap to the issues covered in Discover's article.
What's exciting is that these accomplished researchers are very enthusiastic about the possibilities of their scientific inquiries, and that they could result in some medical treatments that make a difference in the lives of people with autism by changes in diet and other conditions. The Discover article specifically refers to the regimens advocated by the Defeat Autism Now doctors, for example, as mitigating some children's autistic symptoms over time.
What's also tough to convey, in my opinion, even in a well-documented story such as this magazine piece, is the complex, wide-ranging nature of autism spectrum disorders. It's interesting to note that a number of researchers are starting to refer to autism in the plural, as autisms, and that medical investigators who make progress on one of these autisms may not make progress on all of them. (See this article for an example of that idea.)
Or, as the researchers tell Discover:
One last note. In 2006, Autism Bulletin featured Herbert as one of our picks for advocates of the year. See that story here.
You can find the article, "Autism: It's Not Just in the Head," at Discover's website by clicking here.
Dr. Herbert gave a lecture about her research, which you can read about in "Studying Autism as a Whole Body Condition," by clicking here; there is some overlap to the issues covered in Discover's article.
What's exciting is that these accomplished researchers are very enthusiastic about the possibilities of their scientific inquiries, and that they could result in some medical treatments that make a difference in the lives of people with autism by changes in diet and other conditions. The Discover article specifically refers to the regimens advocated by the Defeat Autism Now doctors, for example, as mitigating some children's autistic symptoms over time.
What's also tough to convey, in my opinion, even in a well-documented story such as this magazine piece, is the complex, wide-ranging nature of autism spectrum disorders. It's interesting to note that a number of researchers are starting to refer to autism in the plural, as autisms, and that medical investigators who make progress on one of these autisms may not make progress on all of them. (See this article for an example of that idea.)
Or, as the researchers tell Discover:
Herbert’s full-body perspective helps make sense of the confusion surrounding the diagnosis of autism and helps justify the increasingly common use of the plural “autisms” to describe the wide variations in this disorder. As Newschaffer points out, “Children with Asperger's syndrome certainly share a lot of the behaviors of those with more severe autism. But is it the same disease, and is it caused by the same thing? A number of significant features of autism are not part of the diagnostic schema right now, but eventually, those features may end up distinguishing one causal pathway from another. How is a child sleeping? Does he or she have gastrointestinal symptoms? By looking at those things we may see risk-factor associations pop out that we’ve never seen before.”
One last note. In 2006, Autism Bulletin featured Herbert as one of our picks for advocates of the year. See that story here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
