Richard Tice comments re autism and ear defenders

[Overthemhills]

I’m so tired of the anti-disability rhetoric everywhere on various sites and from various politicians. This one - Tice calling the sight of children wearing ear defenders in school “insane” is about the most stupid and cruel barrel-scraping comments a politician has come out with for a very long time.
My child is disabled but undiagnosed and does not use ear defenders so I have little on the way of skin in the game, or this particular game, but just how low do some people want to go to make the lives of people struggling with disability worse - on top of the cost of living and NHS issues.
I’m starting to think I will need to avoid every news item and social media platform until the next general election at this rate.

You do that. I'll address him in three different kinds of forrin.

What harm does it do Tice or anyone else if ND children wear ear defenders to help them cope with sensory overload?

The point is (and I think what Tice might be trying to say - badly) is that we don’t know whether they actually help or whether they just create a path of least resistance at the time.

Are we helping autistic children to manage their disability by blocking out or reducing stimulus? Or are we simply putting a sticking plaster over it? My point is we really don’t know.

The use of aids (or withdrawal from lessons or the use of quiet rooms) might be the absolute worst thing we can do in helping children with autism for all we know. Only more research will tell us.

You do know that Tice’s point isnt about ear defenders per se? It’s about the way we are treating neurodiversity in schools and society.

I didn’t say there weren’t. I said we are talking about massively under-researched and poorly understood condition on which the ‘experts’ don’t even agree.

The thought process is ‘I (or my child) can’t cope with everyday life because of my autism and the solution is to remove the stimulus.’

I’m not sure how helpful that is and more and more psychologists are starting to agree.

When I was at primary school there were at least two children who sat with their hands over their ears in assembly. They would be told off which would often result in crying at which point they would be taken to sit outside the hall (in the quiet). If ear defenders had been available in the 1960s then I suspect it would have helped them significantly.

No, the thought process is ear defenders help children cope, improves attendance and educational outcomes.

You may take that as a signal. Richard Tice may take it as a signal. But it's not about you or Richard Tice, or your or his prejudices it's about the individual living with autism.

Turning disabled childrens' needs into a culture war is disgusting.🤢

I don’t think we are understanding each other. This thinking is defensive, un-nuanced and simplistic, and - ironically - quite prejudiced.

It stifles debate and learning about the best way to manage autism.

You're very naive if you think Richard Tice gives a shiny shit about disabled children in school. He wants to cut support for financial reasons. That's all.

And there absolutely is research supporting the use of current interventions. It is not complete or perfect, but just because we don't know everything, that is no reason to stop support.

And again- tell me how ear defenders impact adversely on those who don't need them. They don't. They are a way of managing a disability. Why do you think they aren't? What 'better' ways do you envision that are blocked by using current interventions? Do you think it is possible to make people not autistic somehow?

I do understand what you are saying and avoidance can mean that other coping strategies arent developed and professionals are concerned about this.

But ear defenders can be the alternative to total avoidance. They generally used in classrooms to improve focus on a specific thing in an environment where someone is struggling to focus or to get people to access something they would have avoided completely without them. Children that hid in the loos, or under desks, or played up to get sent out or just stopped working and gazed out the window.

Its not uncommon to see people wear ear defenders for the first go at something, and not the second. Or use them to enter a space, relax and remove them and only pop them on again if they are having a crap day.

A lot adults who 'just cope' have done so by actively seeking out environments that work for them. They havent actually learned to cope in the wrong environment at all. They have just created a life that avoids everything. They arent even aware they do it. They just dont go to parties, work in coffee shops with noisy machines, or go on public transport. Some adults have lived like that for years, then discovered noise cancelling headphones and suddenly instead of avoiding somewhere, they accessed it.

I think your concern is ear defenders are a type of avoidance and therefore people dont learn to cope, but I've not really seen them used like that, I've seen them more supportive to stop avoidance and then used less frequently as other strategies develop.

Evidence?

Which psychologists are saying that simple aids like ear defenders that allow some autistic children to participate in daily life are unhelpful? You say "more and more" which implies multiple psychologists. Who are they?

Thank you - this is such an intelligent response!

This is absolutely what I am trying to say - that there is of course a place for reasonable adjustments as temporary measures, but the danger is that we teach autistic children to simply avoid. Ideally we would get them to a point where they manage their disability in (most) everyday life settings. That’s my goal for myself and my daughter.

There are some environments my DD is always going to opt out of - she’s never going to want to go to a concert or festival for example. But others are part of life - eg work, uni, socialising - and her goal is to get to a point where she can access those situations. That, for her, has meant building up resilience and discovering coping mechanisms that don’t just shut down the environment.

She finds some aspects of her waitressing job hard, for example, but she has learnt to cope well with them and actually enjoy it.

Autism isnt curable, but I (and an increasing number of psychologists) believe that things like managing thoughts, increasing self esteem and developing an internal locus of control can all play a part in managing autism well.

Many people on this thread have made the debate solely about ear defenders though, which I think is missing the point.

Dr Naomi Fisher has some interesting views on this so would be a good place to start, particularly her views on neuroaffirmation.

Calling someone prejudiced when your stance is essentially "take away their aids, do nothing to adapt the environment and they'll just have to learn to not be autistic anymore" is laughable. And all that arrogant nonsense attacking PPs comments as "defensive, un-nuanced and simplistic" is ridiculous given your clear lack of even the most basic understanding of disabled children's needs. Autism is not a disease to be cured.

What does she say? What's her evidence? Who else is saying this? Again, you implied that there is a change in the way the psychology field is viewing some quite fundamental things about autism.

This Dr Naomi Fisher?

Dr. Fisher's Stance on Ear Defenders

• Assistive Tools, Not Props: Dr. Fisher argues that ear defenders are assistive tools that help individuals manage overwhelming auditory environments, enabling them to learn, communicate, and stay regulated.
• Challenging Stigma: She actively challenges the notion that the use of ear defenders in school is "insane" or a "crisis," as some critics have claimed. She states that misinformation about sensory aids creates stigma and prevents children from receiving necessary support.
• Reducing Sensory Pain: She emphasizes that for some, the need for ear defenders stems from real sensory pain and struggle, which should not be reduced to a "punchline" or a sign of "bad behaviour".
• Analogy to Other Aids: She asks why taking away a child's sensory aids would be any more reasonable than taking away any other essential accommodation, such as glasses for vision.

Excellent stuff. So this psychologist supposedly supporting @jade3450's contention that ear defenders stop autistic people from developing the ability to cope in fact says the exact opposite . You couldn't make it up.* *

Can you please tell me how on earth I manage my noise sensitivity? Too much noise is painful and too many noises just go into one loud horrible noise

That is the most idiotic thing I've ever read, sorry.

You take my kid to school without ear defenders and the way he manages his disability is by using his hands to cover his ears and he gets absolutely no learning done. He can't engage, he's overstimulated, he's stressed.

The way he manages his disability is by wearing the ear defenders, so yes, we do fucking know.

Have you tried just not being autistic?

This is a joke before anyone comes for me 😅

You do know that Tice’s point isnt about ear defenders per se?

We've all seen the video where he calls the use of ear defenders in schools "insane". We've seen it. Don't fucking gaslight us.

I'm sure he had lots of other things to say as well, but this was absolutely one of them.

Ha! In my case it's nothing to do with being Autistic

Ah sorry @TigerRag, my bad. I was just having a little poke at the PP who thinks kids can just learn to not have sensory needs.

No problem 🙂