Strollerderby : autistic

Mom Tells State Don't Make Me Vaccinate

JeanneSager — Mon, 18 May 2009 15:04:00 GMT

It's one of only two states that won't allow parents to use religion as an excuse to avoid vaccinating their kids, and now West Virginia is facing a lawsuit from a mom who says she doesn't want her six-year-old daughter to receive the shots.

Jennifer Workman says it's a "sacrilege" to expect her to vaccinate her daughter. But wouldn't you know, this so-called religious excuse is coming from a mom who claims vaccines cause autism.

I say so-called religion in this case because it sounds awfully convenient. Workman describes herself as "bapticostal," a mix of Baptist and Pentecostal religions, and she's asked a federal judge to overturn the state's demands that her daughter be immunized before attending public school based on religious freedom.

But her real problem? Her elder daughter, teenaged Susanna, has autism. And she's afraid of vaccinating Madison because she believes the vaccines are to blame. Never mind the long line of studies that have discredited that theory. That's only a small portion of the problem here - because Workman isn't presenting this as a medical case.

She's clearly using religion to push through her agenda. And she's not alone. Two years ago, Babble reported on a hike in religious dispensations being requested by parents who didn't want to vaccinate.

But where our forefathers were talking the right to assemble and pray to your own God (or G-d or Allah . . .), to circumcise your kids, to not eat pork, to string a cross around your neck, they were also talking about personal rights as they affect one person. They weren't, however, talking about excuses couched in religious belief that void the social contract. Just as ritualistic killings can not fall under the guise of religion because it's an express harm to others, an unvaccinated child walking into a school building is a public health risk. Allowing these types of dispensations only increases that risk.

Should kids in West Virginia be forced to bow to a mother's attempts to skirt the law?

OctoMom's Kid - Bite Mark And Black Eye

Brett Singer — Thu, 30 Apr 2009 21:30:00 GMT

This is disturbing.

Social Services paid a visit to Nadya Suleman's home the other day. Surprisingly, this isn't a regular occurrence. They were there to investigate because one of the OctoMom's children, Aidan, had gone to school with a black eye and a bite mark on his back. After a 45 minute interview, investigators left without taking action.

Orange County Child and Family Services and La Habra police did not comment because, you know, things like this are supposed to be confidential. Nadya, however, did an interview with her exclusive outlet, RadarOnline. (Remember when Radar was this hip and cool magazine? Yeah, not anymore.)

In the interview, she managed to make me question her parenting skills even more than I might have previously, which is impressive if you think about it. She tells the interviewer that the social services visit was her fault, because she didn't see the note that Aidan's teacher had pinned to his backpack asking about the injuries. To be fair, I've missed notes as well, but they weren't asking me if my children were participating in after-school cage fights. The scariest line to me is that Aidan's black eye is from "falling down," something he does because he has autism. There's a moment where Nadya says the black eye is from his meltdowns, and "in the process of throwing him... throwing himself on the floor..." I know, it's just a slip, but it's creepy.

As for the bite mark, Nadya says it's from one of his siblings. (To borrow a line from Robin Quivers on the Howard Stern Show, "They're eating each other!")

In the video, you get to see Ms. Suleman attempt to discipline one her kids as he first hits his sibling, then hits the camera. "We're just starting time outs," she says. Seems to be working great. She also tells us that the officials told her they were impressed with how well the family was doing, and "how well-organized her home was." Wow. I don't believe that statement one bit.

I know. It's not fair to criticize parenting skills. Right? Except that she's making these videos on putting them online. Mostly I just feel bad for the kids. There's no way they could possible be getting anything resembing a decent amount of attention from their mother.

Source: AP via Yahoo and RadarOnline

Suleman Cashing In - Trademarks Term Octomom

When Toddlers Attack The Neighbors

10 Year Old Author Alec Greven Is Back

Dad Drives Drunk With Kids In Car

From Playboy to Medical School: Jenny McCarthy Now a Doctor

JeanneSager — Wed, 01 Apr 2009 20:01:00 GMT

Love her or hate her, former Playboy Bunny and Singled Out host Jenny McCarthy is donning a white coat for her new role: doctor. Her voice for the fight to cure autism has earned McCarthy her medical degree from Harvard Med.

The announcement comes just as McCarthy's fifth book, co-authored with autism specialist Dr. Jerry Kartzinel, hits shelves. The work behind Healing and Preventing Autism and McCarthy's extensive research of the subject was subject of a face-off with science editor Jeffrey Kluger this week in TIME Magazine.

But it's that work that has earned McCarthy the attention of Harvard Med, one of the most respected institutions in America. They've decided to grant McCarthy the degree not as an honorary title but with full credentials. She will still have to pass the boards in order to actually practice medicine.

Does the Harvard Med. seal of approval change your opinions of McCarthy?

Image: Amazon

Spiderman Rescues Autistic Boy

Brett Singer — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 19:00:00 GMT

To be fair it was really "a Bangkok firefighter in a Spiderman suit." But to the kid, it was probably Spiderman. So I prefer my original phrasing.

The BBC reports that a Thai fireman named Somchai Yoosabai put on a Spidey suit in order to coax an eight-year-old autistic boy down from a ledge. It was his first day at school. The boy's mother told Somchai that her son had a "passion for comic superheroes," which prompted the costume change.

In case you, like me, were wondering why a firefighter keeps a Spiderman outfit handy, it's to "liven up fire drills in schools." Good idea. If someone had done that when I was in school, I might have joined the force.

Source: BBC via Wired

Baby Born in Penn Station During Rush Hour

Open Letter To The Woman Who Pushed Me While I Was Picking Up My Kid

What Explains High Autism Rates Among Somali Immigrants?

Kate Tuttle — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 17:01:00 GMT

A medical mystery is brewing in Minnesota, where thirty to sixty thousand Somali refugees and their families have settled and where, increasingly, that community's children are experiencing high rates of autism. According to an article in the New York Times, while about 6% of the Minneapolis public school population is Somali, they represented 25% of the students enrolled in special preschool classes for children with autism. And a Somali father is quoted as saying he knows ten other dads, all from Somalia and living in the US, who have autistic kids. What can explain this alarming and sad development?

Nobody is quite sure, just as nobody knows for certain that it even is a meaningful cluster; public health officials are trying to determine whether Somali communities in other cities are experiencing the same rates of autism. But if the number of Somali kids with autism in Minneapolis means anything, it's too early yet for anyone to determine that meaning, much less to figure out whether there's anything to be done to lower it. Clusters of non-contagious disease can indicate environmental causes, such as mesothelioma among people working near asbestos, and then that cause can be attacked. But so far no environmental cause has been found -- and health workers are concerned that anti-vaccine crusaders are now taking their message to the Somali community, a population that often travels back to the home country, where measles remains rampant. It's probably only a matter of time before an outbreak affects any un-vaccinated Somali kids.

A disease without a known cause appears to be rampaging through a community that has already weathered much hardship. Let's hope someone can help solve the mystery and bring them some much-needed help.

Photo: Allen Brisson-Smith for The New York Times

More by this author:

Boomer Grandmothers: Out Of Control?

Move Over, Booties! Here Come Knitted Boobies

Think Your Baby's Car Seat Is Safe? Think Again

California Daycare Closed; Worker Was Mocking Kids' Genitals

Bad Science: How The Autism Vaccine Scare Snowballed

Kate Tuttle — Mon, 23 Feb 2009 16:31:00 GMT

Jenny McCarthy as an activist, "Green Vaccines," death threats against pro-vaccine doctors, deadly measles outbreaks: all sprang from one source, a flawed medical study with a tiny sample size, a lead author willing to fudge the facts, and a story the media found too fascinating to fully examine.

Writing in this week's Newsweek magazine, Sharon Begley lays out the timeline of what would become one of the biggest medical fairy tales of the past decade -- a narrative of corrupt pharamaceutical companies, poisoned children, and devoted parents. Too bad it wasn't, you know, true.

As is now clear, the study published in the Lancet medical journal back in 1998 linking the MMR vaccine to autism (via intestinal problems) was just plain bad science. The study looked at only twelve children, for one thing. Worse yet, the lead doctor, Andrew Wakefield, fudged the facts. A decade later, ten of the twelve co-authors have disavowed the research they published, but as Begley's story made clear, at the time the media and public found Wakefield and his findings not only trustworthy, but revolutionary. And he wasn't alone; in 2000 U.S. Representative Dan Burton chaired a congressional hearing to look into the connection, and TV's 60 Minutes gave it the old expose treatment. It wasn't hard to paint parents as heroes (because so frequently they are, even when their facts are wrong), nor to deride the drug companies as villains (because, again, they often are). A story so delicious has a tendency to rob the media of its hallowed skepticism -- how else to explain the major coverage of a study of 12 kids, when subsequent studies (such as one at Boston University that looked at two million children) showed zero relationship between the MMR and autism.

The story rode a wave of parental anxiety and media hype so big that it caused actual changes in behavior around vaccination -- and here's where, I think, Wakefield and his ilk bear some major culpability. As vaccination rates went down and outbreaks broke out, children died of easily preventable diseases. And despite the frequent exhortation from anti-vaccine crusaders to "follow the money" in looking at relationships between doctors and pharmaceutical companies, I'd love to see more digging into Wakefield's financial stake in the autism industry (he was officially sanctioned for misconduct in having hidden the financial support he had received from parents of children with autism before undertaking the 1998 study, and now makes his living running a center that claims to cure autism).

The recent ruling by a special court that declared no connection between autism and vaccines has settled the legal question, for now. As for what happens in the court of public opinion, it's clear that's a far more complicated matter. The anguish felt by parens of autistic kids is real, as is the desire of every parent to protect her child. Let's hope that getting past the vaccine witch-hunt will free up more energy toward finding causes, cures and treatments for peope with autism.

Resercher Fabricated Autism Link in Vaccine

Florida Dad Pushing to Ban All Thimerosal in Vaccines

More By This Author:

North Dakota Passes Law Establishing "Personhood" at Conception

Kittens Have Their Say (Aided by Nutty Six-Year-Old)

Twenty-Year-Old Kidnapping Solved

Little Girl with Bowel Disease Kept Alive on Donated Breastmilk

Florida Dad Pushing To Ban ALL Thimerosal in Vaccines

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:01:00 GMT

I'm already prepared for what "Dr. Gary" is going to say to this post.

Because the chiropractor friend of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and father of two autistic children isn't listening to anyone in his bid to have the state ban all vaccines that contain thimerosal.

All of them. Even those not administered to kids.

The proposal by Dr. Gary Kompothecras would be the strictest in the nation, and doctors say it would keep vaccines like the one that prevents the flu, from saving people most at risk of dying. Kompothecras's response? He calls everyone who dares disagree with them "dirt bags."

The argument over vaccines and autism is at an all-time fervor of late, spurred by last week's revelation by the London Times that the "study" that started all the hubub about autism and thimerosal back in the nineties was bogus. As in fabricated. Made up. Nonsense. Then came the report from a special court here in the states that says the measles vaccine didn't cause three children's autism. All of that was preceded by another study, this one in Italy, that determined thimerosal itself is safe.

What's concerned me most in the responses here on Babble to each reporting of these incidents is not that parents are concerned about autism or concerned about vaccines. That's natural. Autism is real. Autism is terrifying. And there is still a lot about vaccinations that we don't know.

It's the all-consuming nature of the focus on vaccinations. It's the refusal to home in on anything else. It's the assumption that disagreement means another parent doesn't care about your plight. We have written dozens of stories here on the 'Derby about other studies that have been linked to autism. The environment. Aged parents. Prematurity.

But there are still parents like Kompothecras who are blind to any other suggestions. Dare disagree with him, and he calls you a "dirt bag." The trouble is, they are not only doing a disservice to their own kids, but a disservice to other people. In Kompothecras' case, his proposed ban of the flu vaccine would put the thousands of Florida residents who are at highest risk for the flu - ie. the elderly, the asthmatic - at permanent risk. People die from the flu. But he doesn't care.

He is doing this because, as he told the Herald Tribune, "If I can do this, my son won't go down for nothing."

How can you argue with that? How can you argue with the parent of an autistic child who only wants an answer? Because I do believe autism is real. And I do believe that the parents of autistic children need an answer. The fact that I am pro-vaccination because I've seen it save lives does not mean I am unfeeling or that I refuse to see the forest for the trees. Autism diagnoses are up, and there are children in trouble. Somewhere, some scientist has to break this code.

But I don't see how taking the flu vaccine out of the hands of people who need it, people who choose to use it, is going to help the parents of autistic children. I don't see how ignoring existing science and accusing parents who are "pro-vax" of being "dirt bags" or "not caring," is going to provide an answer.

Might there be something else in a vaccination that might lead to autism? Maybe. There might also be a link in the environment. In aged parents. In prematurity.

So let's get started on those. Thimerosal is a dead horse. It doesn't deserve another beating.

Image: Herald Tribune

Special Court Says Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Brett Singer — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:15:00 GMT

In a decision that will infuriate many parents (including readers of this web site), a special court has ruled that the MMR vaccine did not cause autism in three children.

Special Master George Hastings of the Department of Justice wrote that, "The evidence does not support the general proposition that thimerosal-containing vaccines can damage infants' immune systems." The ruling comes from The Vaccine Court Omnibus Autism Proceeding. (Aside: "Special Master"? "Omnibus"? It sounds like a comic book.)

Addressing one of the children whose parents say became autistic after receiving the MMR vaccine, Hastings said, "I further conclude that while Michelle Cedillo has tragically suffered from autism and other severe conditions, the petitioners have also failed to demonstrate that her vaccinations played any role at all in causing those problems."

There have been over 5,000 cases filed by parents seeking compensation from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a $2.5 billion fund that was created through a "75-cent-per-dose tax on vaccines," according to Reuters.

Everyone's least favorite vaccine guy Dr. Paul Offit hailed the decision, saying, "it's a great day for America's children when the court rules in favor of science." I think there are a few parents out there who will disagree with him.

Does this put the issue to rest? I doubt it. I myself am highly skeptical of the notion that vaccines "cause" autism, mostly because so far the studies that I have read about can't find a link between the vaccines and autism. Of course, it doesn't help the anti-vaccine movement's case that the doctor who conducted a landmark study on the matter faked his data.

I know that many of you have strong feelings on this issue. Does this court ruling change your opinion at all?

Source: Reuters

Image: USA Today via Babble

Researcher Fabricated Autism Link in Vaccine

What Does a Smile Mean? Teaching Emotions to Autistic Children

They Say: Vaccines are Safe - Take That Jenny McCarthy

Researcher Fabricated Autism Link in Vaccine

JeanneSager — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 17:01:00 GMT

The man who launched a decade's-long fear for parents heading to have their children vaccinated has been proven a forgery.

The Sunday Times revealed the results of an investigation today showing Andrew Wakefield, the man who posited that the MMR vaccine was at the root of the increased autism diagnoses, fabricated his research.

Published in 1998 in The Lancet, the study claimed eight out of twelve children vaccinated with the MMR innoculation began showing symptoms that fall somewhere on the autism spectrum within days of getting the shot. It was performed at the same time as another study, for which Wakefield was paid, that was supposed to help parents who believed there was a link between the two put up a legal case. Some of the kids were used in both studies, and Wakefield has often been accused of crossing a clear ethical boundary in performing both studies.

The study has borne numerous attacks over the years - in part because it included just twelve children - but it is the most-often quoted piece of evidence by parents who point a finger at pro-vax parents as risking their kids' lives (this despite studies published in the time period since that have debunked his story). The investigation by the Times is just another nail in the coffin for that line of thinking. The investigation revealed that in most of the twelve cases, the ailments described in Wakefield's published reports were different from their hospital and general practitioner records.

From the Times: "Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated."

I feel for parents of autistic children who are searching for a reason. Autism is very real and equally terrifying, but as a parent who has vaccinated her child, I have always bristled at the inference that I am a bad parent for making that choice - with so little evidence to support their claims.

Image: USA Today

School Has Autistic Child Arrested

JeanneSager — Mon, 19 Jan 2009 18:08:00 GMT

Charges of battery against an eight-year-old with Asperger's syndrome have been dropped, and her parents are now pursuing legal action against the Idaho school district that called law enforcement.

What's wrong with this picture?

Evelyn Towry was told she couldn't wear her special jacket in class last week, prompting the little girl (whose diagnosis of Asperger's falls on the autism spectrum) to become resistent and act out in the classroom. But instead of telling the child she could just wear her jacket, school officials said they called the cops, alleging she assaulted school staff during the incident.

She's eight. And autistic.

Shouldn't school officials, of all people, understand that?

While Asperger's syndrome falls on the milder end of the autism spectrum, its symptoms are akin to what many people identify with autism - a need for structure, difficulty identifying and expressing feelings. It's also classified as a disability, allowing children who have been diagnosed to qualify for special services from their local school district, including special consideration for their special needs.

So why should a jacket on a child with Asperger's syndrome become an issue? Even if this child were to have become violent, the details of the case would indicate that school officials set this child - who they knew had a difficulty expressing feelings - off. They caused the problem. That would seem a direct violation of civil rights section 504, which protects kids in schools from discrimination for their developmental disabilities.

Should autistic child bear some responsibility for their actions? By calling the cops and pressing battery charges, that's what the school district was suggesting - that Evelyn Towry was responsible for battery. But who's to blame? Should a school district be held liable for the action that caused the equal and opposite reaction?

Image: salem news

Vatican to Women: The Pill Pollutes Environment, His Testes

FDA Asked to Approve Gardasil for Boys

AAP: Delayed Vaccines Too Risky for Kids

They Say: Meningitis Vaccine Actually Works

New Study Says Autism is Environmental

Parent Training An Alternative to Meds for ADHD

New Pro Vaccine Book Author Getting Death Threats

Brett Singer — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:00:00 GMT

A lot of parents feel very strongly that vaccines cause autism. And they are very vocal about their feelings. So Dr. Paul A. Offit, author of "Autism’s False Prophets", probably expected a certain amount of resistance to a book that posits a different theory.

What he might not have anticipated are death threats.

According to the New York Times, Dr. Offit has in fact received death threats. Some members of the antivaccine movement dispute this, however. One of them is J. B. Handley, the founder of Generation Rescue (although a Google search calls it "Jenny McCarthy's Autism Organization"). Handley told the Times: "We have hundreds of fully recovered children. I’m very frustrated that Dr. Offit, who’s never treated an autistic child, is spending his time trying to refute the reality of biomedical recovery."

Offit is called "Dr. Proffit" because he created a vaccine himself and receives "millions in royalties" from it.

I have no idea if the vaccine that Dr. Offit helped create is one that is given to all children, or how much money he makes from it. If Generation Rescue's members believe that Offit's book is just self-promotion, they have a right to question his motives.

It's the fervor that I find disturbing. When you attack anyone who disagrees with you with name-calling and insults, it becomes difficult to convert anyone to your way of thinking. Numerous scientists and doctors feel that autism is a genetic condition, and there is evidence to back this up. It's not possible that there is a similar body of evidence to support the notion that vaccines are a cause of autism simply because the concept hasn't been around long enough to be studied as much as genetic causes. That isn't to say that it's impossible, or that the antivaccine crusaders are wrong. I'm only pointing out that the body of evidence isn't there.

Another reason could be the conspiracy theory version – that vaccine makers work to keep such studies from happening. Personally, I'm more inclined to believe that than I am to believe that vaccines cause autism. I'm not a conspiracy theorist, but our dependence on foreign oil is partly fueled (no pun intended) by an automobile industry that doesn't want to make electric cars. (That's an oversimplification; my point is that sometimes even the weirdest-sounding conspiracy theories can be at least partly true.)

There was a time when doctors told us that smoking was healthy. Or that eating lots and lots of red meat was a great idea. So yes, sometimes doctors and the entire medical industry make mistakes. And Dr. Offit does sound a tad smarmy in the Times article: "I’ll speak at a conference, say, to nurses. But I wouldn’t go into a bookstore and sign books. It can get nasty. There are parents who really believe that vaccines hurt their children, and to them, I’m incredibly evil. They hate me." And, referring to the vaccine he helped create: "When Jonas Salk invented polio vaccine, he was a hero — and I’m a terrorist?" he jokes, referring to a placard denouncing him at a recent demonstration by antivaccine activists outside the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta.

Well, polio was a bigger disease. Also, you're not funny. But maybe that's doctor humor.

I suppose its possible that Dr. Offit is lying about the death threats, but I doubt it. As Dr. Gregory A. Poland, chief of vaccine research at the Mayo Clinic, says in the Times piece, "a few years ago this ceased to be a civil scientific discourse and became about crucifying individuals." The key word there is "civil". Parents can get very emotional when their children are involved; I know I can get a little crazy when anyone is doing something that I feel is harmful to my kid. But I've learned that I get better results when I calm down and try to figure out the best way to solve whatever the problem is. It's not about expressing my anger or frustration. It's about getting something done. If someone really and truly feels that vaccines, which are given to millions of babies every single day, are a cause of autism, that is a very serious charge. It should be taken seriously by those making the claim. If you want to convince someone that what you believe is true, calling them names and making threats is not a good way to do it.

Source: NY Times

Image: Amazon

Pregnant Woman Arrested For Fighting At Chuck E. Cheese

U.S. Children's Health - Biggest Study Ever

On Jett Travolta, Howard Stern Gets It Right

New Study Says Autism is Environmental

In Light of Jett Travolta Tragedy, The Truth About Kawasaki Syndrome

On Jett Travolta, Howard Stern Gets It Right

Brett Singer — Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:00:00 GMT

This morning on Sirius XM Radio, Howard Stern commented on the death of John Travolta and Kelly Preston's son Jett Travolta. In the past, Howard has ruthlessly mocked Scientology; long before it was de rigeur to poke fun at L. Ron Hubbard's celebrity religion, he would read internal Scientology newsletters on the air, exposing their wackiness to the world at large. So one might expect Stern to go after Travolta with both barrels.

Not this time. He said that while some were going to condemn Travolta and Preston for not giving their son medication for what most people felt was autism, he wasn't going to go there, at least not today. Then he made the best point anyone can make about Jett's passing: "There's nothing sadder than burying your own child."

That phrase, "There's nothing sadder", gets thrown around much too easily in my opinion. For example, I once received an email from a parent telling me that there was "nothing sadder than an empty PTA meeting." So I wanted to give Stern credit for showing compassion, as well as use the opportunity to say something about the phrase "there's nothing sadder". Maybe I’m over-reacting, but it makes me nuts when people use it too freely. While I suppose it's possible that there is something sadder than burying your own child, I can guarantee you that there are many things sadder than an empty PTA meeting.

Now, lest you think that The Howard Stern Show has become an encounter group, he did later joke that kawasaki disease, which Jett reportedly suffered from, is a disease that "turns you into a motorcycle." (It was kind of a funny, throw away line said during a conversation.) So whatever you think of Howard or his long-running radio show, let's give him credit for getting this one right.

[image]

Jett Travolta - The Story of His Death

New Details: Jett Travolta Died In His Father's Arms

Jett Travolta's Death Investigated by Police

Jett Travolta's Death: John & Kelly Break Their Silence

Grieving Chinese Parents Not Allowed To Sue

They Say -- Vaccines Work

Should Autistic Children Be Separated From Other Kids?

Brett Singer — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 21:30:00 GMT

The Disabled Politico blog raises an interesting question regarding Magi Klages, the 8-year-old girl who was kicked out of her Brownie troop after an incident that stems from her autism.

Basically, they wonder if having a separate "disabled kids' troop" is a good idea. "Regardless of the intention, the segregation of children with disabilities teaches all children the wrong message." I tend to agree. But a commenter on the site counters with the following: "Mainstreaming is a wonderful concept. The execution leaves a lot to be desired."

I remember a public service ad that aired many years ago starring Tony Danza (formerly of 'Taxi' and other roles). The tag line was the following: "How do you treat a person with a disability? Like a person!" In the ad, if I recall correctly, the disabilities were of the "in a wheelchair" rather than the "bites self" variety. I feel strongly that everyone deserves a chance to be in whatever situation they want to be in. Obviously it won't always work, and not just with autism. If I had wanted to join the track and field team in high school, that wouldn't have worked either, because I was a really slow runner and in less than stellar physical condition. (As opposed to the speedy Adonis I am now.) And another commenter on the site points out that Magi, "already was in an integrated troop, then her parents took her out of that one and put her in a segregated troop, then the segregated troop's leader kicked her out." Interesting point, that.

I admit to being not completely convinced that either solution is perfect. On the one hand, segregation is wrong, yes? Everyone should be given the same opportunities. On the other hand, what if a child really won't thrive in a particular environment? Is it fair to expect them to stick it out just because we think it's "the right thing to do"? And to slingshot back the other way, how long can you separate a kid from the mainstream before mainstreaming them becomes too great a challenge? What do you think? Is it better to keep "special needs" kids separate from everyone else? Or does that send the wrong message to everyone, special needs or no?

Source: disaboom.com

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Denis Leary Puts Autism Comments In Context

Girl Diagnoses Herself With Autism

Can Music Help Cure Autism?

Kindergartners Vote An Autistic Classmate Out of the Class

Rare Condition Makes Boy Look Like Werewolf

Brain Wave Study Sheds Light On Autism

Brett Singer — Thu, 04 Dec 2008 21:30:00 GMT

Interesting news item from The Discovery Channel (via AP) -- "unique brain wave patterns" have been found in children with autism.

Using an imaging helmet that resembles a big salon hair dryer, researchers discovered what they believe are "signatures of autism" that show a delay in processing individual sounds.
That delay is only a fraction of a second...[but] Imagine if it took a tiny bit longer than normal to understand each syllable. By the end of a whole sentence, you'd be pretty confused.

I find this fascinating. More importantly (yes, I acknowledge that there are things in this world more important than what I personally find intriguing), these findings could help parents of autistic immensely. Doctors could potentially discover and diagnose the disorder "in children as young as age 1", according to the article. That would enable parents to begin a treatment program much earlier than usual.

It's all very sci-fi looking – check out the photo. The article says that the device looks like a "salon hair dryer", but I think it looks more like something out of the X-Men. Anyway, I love trumpeting technological advances that are used to help parents and children. It's a reminder that tech isn't all about video games and cellphones that make pancakes. (Apologies to the late George Carlin, from whom I borrowed that line about pancakes. Mmmm... pancakes...)

I'd be curious to hear from anyone with more knowledge of autism than I (doctors, parents) if this treatment sounds promising, and/or if this is something that you have heard about, and whether or not you feel it will be helpful. It certainly sounds to me like it could.

Source: AP via Discovery.com

Autistic Girl Kicked Out Of Girl Scouts

Conjoined Twin Surgery: One Lives, One Dies

High School Student in Hospital After Scavenger Hunt

Rare Condition Makes Boy Look Like Werewolf

Autistic Girl Kicked Out Of Girl Scouts

Brett Singer — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 19:00:00 GMT

This is messed up.

Magi Klages, an 8 year old autistic girl, has been a Girl Scout since she was 6. According to ABC News, her "Brownie troop grew too large". So they put her in a smaller troop with only four other girls, all of whom have special needs.

She was kicked out on the first day after she "threw a fit...biting herself and running out of the circle." The troop leader told Magi's parents that she was a "danger" to the other members and would no longer be welcome.

Her mother, Michele Klages, is understandably upset. Michele says that Magi was, at worst, only a danger to herself, and that reactions like Magi's are not unusual for autistic children.

A Girl Scouts of America spokeswoman, Michelle Tompkins, said that Magi being kicked out of the troop was "terrible". A spokeswoman for the local chapter of the Girl Scouts (Wisconsin Southeast) did not respond to ABC News, according to the article.

The Scouts and Magi's parents are looking for a new troop for Magi, which is probably for the best. But it seems extremely unfair to boot the little girl out after the first day. I'm not saying the other children weren't scared; I wasn't there of course, but I can imagine the situation and I'm sure it was uncomfortable. But the first day? I'm not saying there should be a "three strikes" policy or anything like that, but give the kid a chance. According to ABC News, "the Girl Scouts has been historically open to anyone and prides itself on its anti-discrimination policies." I guess not everyone got the memo.

Source: ABC News via Disabled Politico (thanks to a reader for the tip!)

Girl Diagnoses Herself With Autism

Can Music Help Cure Autism?

Kindergartners Vote An Autistic Classmate Out of the Class

They Say: More Children Have Allergies

Rare Condition Makes Boy Look Like Werewolf

Denis Leary Puts Autism Comments In Context

Brett Singer — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 19:00:00 GMT

Remember when a passage was leaked from Denis Leary's new book? The one where he said, "yer kid is NOT autistic. He’s just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."

Well, that's not what he meant.

To refresh your memory, here is what he says in the book, titled "Why We Suck: A Feel Good Guide to Staying Fat, Loud, Lazy and Stupid":

"There is a huge boom in autism right now because inattentive mothers and competitive dads want an explanation for why their dumb-*** kids can’t compete academically, so they throw money into the happy laps of shrinks and psychotherapists to get back diagnoses that help explain away the deficiencies of their junior morons. I don’t give a [bleep] what these crackerjack whack jobs tell you — yer kid is NOT autistic. He’s just stupid. Or lazy. Or both."

He went on to explain himself to fourth hour Today Show co-hosts Kathie Lee Gifford and Hoda Kotb:

"The chapter is not about autism…The chapter is about people who are actually seeking special-needs diagnoses for their kids because they are spoiled kids because the parents don’t pay attention to them."
Leary said he knows a family with an autistic daughter who needs special schooling with one-on-one attention. The classes make a dramatic difference in the girl’s life, he said, but they are expensive and there is no federal funding or health insurance coverage for them.
"That’s what I was angry about," he said.

Alrighty then.

On The Daily Show, he explained that in the next paragraph of the offending chapter he discusses that particular girl. The chapter – called "Austism, Schmautism" – is about, "the culture of victimization in America," specifically parents who are "seeking a low-level autism diagnosis" for their child.

As Jon Stewart put it, "You're not blaming parents for their kids' autism… cuz you're an a**hole, but you're not that big an a**hole…cuz that would make you a HUGE a**hole." Leary agrees that saying such a thing would make him, "the biggest a**hole of all time." To which Stewart replies, "I know you – you are NEARLY… but not the biggest." (If you want to know why I'm quoting it instead of showing you a video clip, it's because The Daily Show's website doesn't allow such you to do crazy things like embed videos. Here's a link to the full episode if you're interested; the Leary interview is at the end.)

Good enough? I don't know. I think Leary is trying to push people's buttons to sell books. And there are worse sins. According to The Today Show, he wrote the book by starting with chapter titles that he "thought would be provocative." Again, that's fine. But it does make it harder to take him seriously when he starts talking about autism as if he were advocating for better care. I think its difficult to be both a cranky prick AND talk seriously about such a hot-button issue.

So is he forgiven? Or do you not care what he thinks?

image/source: Today Show

Update: Denis Leary Tries to Explain Away Autism Quote

Should Autistic Parents be Thanking Denis Leary for Inflammatory Comments?

Kindergartners Vote An Autistic Classmate Out of the Class

Girls with Autistic Spectrum Disorders Less Likely to be Diagnosed

They Say: How Kids Use Toys Can Show Early Autism Signs

Do You Take Your Baby Bar Hopping?

They Say: Get Some Sleep or Die

They Say: More Children Have Allergies

N-Word Flies at Palin Rally

Brett Singer — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 21:00:00 GMT

This is really ugly.

I hope that whomever you happen to be voting for, this isn't something you can condone.

As the blog We Are Respectable Negroes (the name comes from the Forty Acres and a Mule document) puts it: "It seems that Barack Obama was finally called a 'nigger' at a recent Republican presidential rally."

Palin will get a lot of flack for not responding, and while I can't argue otherwise, I don't know what she should have said. (In a Palin voice: "Oh, come on now! That's a bad thing to say!") Then again, how do you stand in front of a crowd that screams out something like that?

Michelle Malkin is claiming that the person was actually shouting, "Redistributor!"

Yes, of course. I make that mistake all the time.

(Aside: in case anyone is planning to leave a comment along the lines of, "What about that Sarah Palin hanging effigy? Why aren't you railing against that?" It's terrible and should be taken down immediately.)

I'll ask you -- what do you think you heard? I actually closed my eyes so I couldn't see the captioning on the video. Send the kids out of the room and tell us what you think was said.

Source: We Are Respectable Negroes, MichelleMalkin.com

Babble Talk: The Candidates Health Plans

Palin's Ohio Rallies Reveal Frightening Misconceptions about Barack Obama are Alive and Thriving

Morning News: Malia Obama Tells Dad 'Don't Mess With My TV'

Breaking News -- Obama Assassination Plot Thwarted

Babble Podcast for October 27th, 2008

Which Candidate Has The Best Name?

Flip Flopping on Palin's Kids

Palin Speaks Out On Special Needs Trusts

Joe the racist plumber?

Babble Talk: The Candidates Health Plans

Brett Singer — Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:00:00 GMT

Kim Mance breaks down some of the key points in the Obama and McCain health care plans. I have a few thoughts to add.

I didn't realize this, but the debate about a national health care system goes back much further than when Bill Clinton attempted to implement one when he was first elected way back in 1992. "Both Roosevelt and Truman called for health care to be an 'economic right.' Truman then proposed a single-payer health program to cover all Americans. But it was called a 'Communist plot' by a House subcommittee after the American Medical Association denounced it." Funny (not ha-ha funny) how one of the current digs at Obama is that he's a "socialist". I guess socialist is the new communist.

A key difference between their proposals is, "how to ensure that all Americans have access to health insurance. Both want there to be no 'state lines' as there are now, so families can shop around for the best plan. However, Obama will regulate and require insurance companies to cover patients regardless of pre-existing conditions, and McCain will not. McCain will instead work with Governors on (fifty separate) plans to optimize access to health care within each individual state."

One thing that I find very interesting, and encouraging, is that at least both sides are talking about getting more people covered. Back in the 1990's, it was much more of an "us against them" situation, with the Democrats wanting a national health care system and the Republicans wanting everything to stay the same.

To me, a sign that the McCampaign is out of touch on this particular issue is the notion that a family can purchase health coverage for $5,000, or even that they can purchase it at all. First, as Mance points out in her Babble article, $5,000 covers less than half of the typical family's yearly health insurance bill. Obama says that the cost is $12,000, Mance cites a study that puts the number at $12,680. Second, as someone who has run a small business and offered health insurance to employees, I can tell you that it is not that simple to just go buy a plan the way McCain says it is. For an individual, it is significantly more difficult. Health insurers simply don't want to talk to individuals about coverage, they prefer to deal with "groups", meaning employers. So while it sounds nice to say, "hey, here's five grand, you can buy whatever health plan works best for you", it's just not that simple.

There are more details discussed in Mance's article, which is very much worth a read. The bottom line? It's hard to tell what will happen no matter who gets elected, but they agree that the current system isn't good enough. "Neither presidential candidate's health care plan brings us anywhere near a true socialized medicine or single-payer system. But they do both point out the many ways our own health care structure can be improved." That's at least something.

Flip Flopping on Palin's Kids

They Say: More Children Have Allergies

New York Times Anthrax Update

Dr. Greene's Vitamins one way to get extra D

Woman leaves toddler in car while she goes to a bar

Santa Claus says: Smoke More

They say: no one with a uterus should vote for McCain

Mom and son barbecue grandma's remains

Palin Speaks Out On Special Needs Trusts

Brett Singer — Sun, 26 Oct 2008 14:00:00 GMT

Republican Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin gave a speech in Pittsburgh on Friday where she discussed the challenges facing children with special needs.

Here is a video clip with a few choice digs at the Obama-Biden tax plan:

If the clip does not appear, try clicking here to see it.

And a couple of pertinent lines from the speech:

As families across America know, the care of special-needs children requires long-term planning, and especially financial planning. A common practice among these families is to establish financial trusts. These are known as special needs trusts, covering years of medical and other costs, and for parents they bring invaluable comfort.
Understandably, then, many families with special-needs children or dependent adults are concerned that our opponent in this election plans to raise taxes on precisely those kinds of financial arrangements. They fear that Senator Obama's tax increase will have serious and harmful consequences -- and they are right. The burden that his plan would impose upon these families is just one more example of how many plans can be disrupted, how many futures can be placed at risk, and how many people can suffer when the power to tax is misused.

I’m unfamiliar with special needs trusts, but it sounds to me like something only someone with money can do. That is, if a family lives paycheck to paycheck, how much financial planning can they really do? Like most political rhetoric, what Palin says is short on specifics and long on fear mongering. (That's true of both sides; lack of details is non-partisan.) Also, "the power to tax"? Oy vey. You would think no Republican administration had ever raised taxes, or that the tax cuts in recent years actually worked. (That's another conversation, but really. Oy vey.)

She also makes this claim:

In a McCain-Palin administration, we will put the educational choices for special needs children in the right hands their parents'. Under reforms that I will lead as vice president, the parents and caretakers of children with physical or mental disabilities will be able to send that boy or girl to the school of their choice -- public or private.

Just like that? Come on. We're not electing a Supreme Ruler; we're electing a President. And anyone who thinks that a school voucher law like the one that Sarah Palin describes (I know that may be an oversimplification, but hey, I can do it too!) will get passed quickly and easily is at best naïve.

A commenter on the nationaljournal.com article says it pretty well:

I find all these promises far too vague and general to mean much of anything. … What about health insurance? … Sorry, I don't need a 'friend' -- I need someone with a plan that does more than 'hope' that 'market forces' will allow me to afford insurance for my child.

I will say that I think it's interesting to hear this much talk about autism/special needs children during an election year. It's possible that this issue was front and center in the past, but if so, I didn't notice.

Text of the full speech is here if you want to read it.

If anyone has more direct experience with special needs trusts, or any of the other issues Palin raised in her speech, I'd be curious to hear your take on what she had to say.

sources: MSNBC, National Journal

Palin Plays the Race Card, Badly

Piper Palin Carries a Louis Vuitton Bag - Is it Hers? Does it Matter?

Morning News: Pregnant With Palin

Sarah Palin on SNL for real

Breaking News: Maya Rudolph to Play Michelle Obama on SNL

Is Sarah Palin the next Oprah?

They Say: More Children Have Allergies

Dr. Greene's Vitamins one way to get extra D

Woman leaves toddler in car while she goes to a bar

They say: no one with a uterus should vote for McCain

They Say: no link between autism and measles vaccine

Brett Singer — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:30:00 GMT

This news is unfortunately not likely to solve anyone's questions about whether or not vaccines are a cause of autism.

"Dr. W. Ian Lipkin of Columbia University, collaborating with a team from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Massachusetts General Hospital, and Trinity College in Dublin, tackled the hot-button question: whether the MMR vaccine causes autism.

"'We are persuaded there is no link,' said Lipkin, director of the center on infection and immunity at Columbia's Mailman School of Public Health in Manhattan."

HOWEVER…

"The study was not designed to address other rumored theories of autism's cause, such as thimerosal, the much-debated mercury-based preservative in some other vaccines, Lipkin said."

Now, as usual, the devil is in the details. The 1998 study that linked MMR vaccines to autism was based on a whopping 12 children. I'm no scientist (nor have I played one on TV) but that doesn't sound like a very large sample base.

For this new study, "Lipkin and colleagues searched for traces of genetic material linked to the virus in intestinal tissue taken from 25 children with autism and gastrointestinal problems. They compared the samples to those from 13 children without autism but with intestinal problems. In 24 of the group of 25 and in 12 of the 13, there was no evidence of viral persistence, leading researchers to conclude the vaccine did not cause autism or gastrointestinal problems." So it’s a larger group of kids. Not that many, but on the surface it sounds more valid.

HOWEVER…

Why not do a study on thimerosal, which contains, as Jenny McCarthy calls it, "frickin' mercury"? Wouldn't that be, like, actually useful?

In theory, this study will put to rest parents' fears about this particular vaccine. Of course, as the great Homer Simpson once said, communism works -- in theory. In other words, I doubt this news will do anything to change anybody's mind one way or the other.

source: Newsday

image: timesonline.typepad.com

Creepiest spam message ever: "we have hijacked your baby"

Retarded movie boycott

Upcoming Sesame Street Guests

Warner Bros. sues over Hari Puttar film

Revenge of the Baseball Gods-Little League Scandal Revisited

Do kids do better on tests if they get paid?

Palin family online - real or fake?

Sarah Palin, Sportscaster

Man ejected from Yankee Stadium for lack of patriotism

McCain, Palin oppose teen pregnancy aid and sex education

Nasty Surprise in McDonalds Burger

Savage stands by his stupid words

Brett Singer — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:30:00 GMT

Michael Savage meant what he said and he said what he meant. He's really a moron, one hundred percent. (Apologies to Dr. Seuss.)

To paraphrase Tom Petty, Michael Savage won't back down on his "autism is a racket" rant. Here's the latest clip, from Media Matters.

What's so fascinating about people like Savage is the way they defend themselves. He says that he is just being a "skeptic" about issues such as autism, or the "global warming fiction" of Al Gore. "I don't know when it became illegal to be a skeptic," he says.

Michael – can I call you Michael? – no one is saying that what you did was against the law. They are taking issue with what you said, and the criticism ranges from "factually inaccurate" to "deeply offensive." You must have known that you would get a strong reaction when you said it, just as you are getting a strong reaction now. You say, "to thine own self be true" and that you "can't please everyone…but you can please yourself." Standing by what you said is, in a way, admirable. Of course, there's also no shame in admitting that you made a mistake. 99% of autistics are faking it? Really?

In the same clip he bashes pediatricians for prescribing drugs to children with ADD, and other fun stuff. He's a real piece of work, Savage is.

It's worth pointing out that this isn't a free speech issue. No one is saying that Savage can't say whatever he wants to. But he may not be able to say things that are both incorrect and hurtful and continue to make millions of dollars doing it. Radio is a business, and advertisers are dropping out of his show; many radio stations are pulling him off the air. Whether he wants to believe it or not, there are some things that, if you say them in a public forum, can cause you to lose your job. (At least I would think that you would know that, since it already happened to you.) Whether or not you cast yourself as a "hero" of some kind is irrelevant. It's a job. When you tell me you'll do it for free, then maybe we can talk about "free speech."

Media Matters – a group that Savage refers to as "the homosexual mafia…fascist, homo" – is encouraging listeners to call their local stations and ask that Savage be removed. If you want to find out where he broadcasts in your area, click here.

image: Youtube

Michael Savage says kids with autism need to get over themselves

When playgrounds attack, the sequel

Woman goes to jail for adopting children to get money

20 Disturbing Baby Products

S&M Barbie

Top 10 Disturbing Action Figures Marketed to Boys

Creepy Lifelike Dolls Help Owners Grieve

Celebrity Baby Naming Hits New Low

Schools tying up autistic kids

Brett Singer — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:30:00 GMT

This is something that you would hope wouldn't happen anymore, like lobotomies. This isn't that bad, of course, but the fact that it happens as often as it does is pretty alarming.

According to an article in the New York Times, a large number of students with autism, ADHD and other diagnoses are being forcibly restrained when they misbehave. I say "misbehave" because, according to the Times, "defying a teacher’s instructions – 'noncompliance' – can invite a takedown or time alone in a locked room."

And before you say, "well, look, what's the big deal?" the article mentions three children who died because of these "disciplinary measures", including a 9-year-old autistic boy in Montreal who suffocated under a weighted blanket that was being used to restrain him. The harm done is psychological as well as physical: Tim Miller, a 12 year old boy with Asperger's from upstate New York, told his father that he didn't want to go to school anymore "because he thought the school was trying to kill him."

Isn't it illegal to tie kids up? Nope. "Federal law leaves it to states and school districts to decide when physical restraints and seclusion are appropriate, and standards vary widely. Oversight is virtually nonexistent in most states, despite the potential for harm and scant evidence of benefit."

OK, but these are just a few isolated incidents, aren't they? Wrong again. The article states that "one or two a week surface on some parent e-mail lists," which sounds like a lot to me. The Times also implies that for some kids, locking them up is the norm. An 8-year-old California boy was locked in a "seclusion room" 31 times – "at least" 31 times. His parents only found out when another parent "saw the boy trying in vain to escape."

Frankly, once a kid dies, you would think that would spark a major outcry, but that doesn't appear to be the case. This makes the incident where the teacher called a kid to the front of the classroom and invited the other children to berate him seem almost mild by comparison.

While there is a legitimate point about teachers not being properly trained to deal with special needs children, why is violence and dangerous restraint ever the answer? I went to a New York City public school, and I saw some pretty intense behavior, some of it violent. As far as I know, nobody was ever put in restraints or locked in a room. While I of course don't think its appropriate for one child's behavior to dominate a classroom, whatever the reason, there has to be a solution other than what's described here.

image/source: NYTimes

Woman goes to jail for adopting children to get money

Man locks daughters in cage while he works

Mom Arrested After Withholding Cancer Treatments From Autistic Son

Autistic Kids Booted From Yearbook

North Carolina Accused Of Illegally Seizing Autistic Boy

Baby Cages: The 5 Baby Products that Should be Illegal

Green Our Vaccines: Jim Carrey and Jenny McCarthy Get Political

When playgrounds attack, the sequel

Michael Savage says kids with autism need to get over themselves

Brett Singer — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:30:00 GMT

Ah, talk radio. A world where measured political reflections are shared between like-minded folk who only want to make the world a better place.

Survey says: nope.

First, some background. Michael Savage is, according to various news reports, the third most listened to talk show host on radio (numbers one and two are Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity). Like many of the people who have followed in Howard Stern's wake, he has no clue how to be funny or interesting on the air, so he resorts to spewing bizarre and hateful things at anyone who will listen. For example, he once told a caller to "get AIDS and die," and to "go eat a sausage and choke on it." That got him fired from his television show.

Last week, in a bizarre tirade, he said that autism was "A fraud, a racket. ... In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out." What hasn't been reported quite as widely is his statement about asthma, where he says that "everyone had asthma from the minority community" because "The children got extra welfare if they were disabled." No, really. He said it. Here's a clip:

I often wonder if these people actually mean what they say or if they're just trying to get attention but saying something outrageous. Autism is a "racket"? If you want to talk about an increase in diagnosed cases, the expansion of the autism spectrum, maybe there's a valid point to be made – MAYBE (really, really, really BIG maybe). But this: "What do you mean they scream and they're silent? They don't have a father around to tell them, 'Don't act like a moron. You'll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don't sit there crying and screaming, idiot.' "

Sounds like somebody has some daddy issues to work out. Personally, I'd prefer he do it in private.

UPDATE: he's standing by what he said. What a guy.

image, Youtube, video source: MediaMatters

Woman goes to jail for adopting children to get money

Savage stands by his stupid words

20 Disturbing Baby Products

S&M Barbie

Top 10 Disturbing Action Figures Marketed to Boys

Creepy Lifelike Dolls Help Owners Grieve

Celebrity Baby Naming Hits New Low

Autistic Kids Booted From Yearbook

Jen Chaney — Thu, 26 Jun 2008 15:02:00 GMT

First some kids voted an autistic boy out of their kindergarten class. Now a school in California has left autistic children out of its yearbook.

The parents of autistic twins have filed a complaint with the Placer County Board of Education because of the incident, in which the autistic/special needs students in multiple classrooms were omitted from the annual book. A county superintendent characterized it as an oversight. But it's hard to imagine how neglecting this many students could have been a complete accident.

Darla Granger, the mother who filed the complaint, tells MomLogic that she doesn't believe the school was trying to be cruel, but that the principal and others are not mindful enough about integrating the autistic kids with the rest of the students. As she puts it, "Negligence can be a form of intent if you don't care enough to fix it."

That's a valid point. Too bad it won't make those kids feel better about not seeing pictures of themselves, or their classmates, in that yearbook.

Image: MomLogic.com

Wha? School Starts Sex Abuse Investigation Based on Psychic's Tip

Kelly Mills — Sat, 21 Jun 2008 16:02:00 GMT

File this one under, "If it happened to me, my rage would know no bounds." Colleen Leduc has an eleven-year-old daughter, Victoria, who is autistic. Last month, shortly after she picked up her daughter from school, she got a call from the teacher saying she should come to the school immediately for an urgent matter. When she arrived for the meeting with the teacher, principal, and vice-principal, the teacher told her an educational aide in the classroom had been to see a psychic over the weekend, and that the psychic said a little girl with the initial "V" was being sexually abused by a man in his twenties.

Ridiculous, no? Well, by the time the meeting took place, the school HAD ACTUALLY REPORTED IT to Children's Aid Services, opening an investigation. Oh, and they gave Colleen a list of behaviors Victoria was exhibiting--like gyrating on staff members--and said that while these behaviors were consistent with autism, they were part of the report. When Colleeen asked if other autistic kids in the calss did these things, she was told yes, but none of those kids were reported because there was no psychic tip.

Fortunately the CAS worker on the case closed it immediately, so hopefully no more fall-out. But it sure is an example of how "zero tolerance" towards even a hint of abuse can veer into the profoundly idiotic in the wrong hands. I sure hope Colleen gets an apology from the school very, very soon. I might be tempted to tell them, "A psychic told me to bitch-slap you."

Mom Fights Church On Behalf of Autistic Son

Autistic Boy Voted Out of Kindergarten