Calling all SALTS - help please!

[TheTimeTravellersWife]

I have just had what I can only describe as a bizarre conversation with DD's SALT. She called me out of the blue, to update me on DD. Great, I was really pleased that she had taken the time to call me to talk about DD.

BUT, she then proceeded to say that as DD's progress had slowed, she would be recommend at our AR that her SALT provision is reduced from weekly to termly! The reason she gave for this reduction was that DDs social communication difficulties were due to her autism, that she would have life-long difficulties with social communication and that further weekly SALT sessions would not help.

DD has also been diagnosed with a speech and language disorder, that is separate from the difficulties caused by the ASD, but apparently, that has now been overcome and all the difficulties now are with social communication which is ASD related and cannot be overcome by weekly SALT sessions. She said that her speech was now "age appropriate" but she had on going difficulties with social communication.

I maybe a bit thick, but unless you are talking to yourself, isn't all communication social?! Therefore, she has communication difficulties, therefore she should continuing having regular SALT sessions.

Can any SALTs out there point me in the direction of some research on SALT and ASD to that I can use to counter the argument that as her progressed has slowed, she should have less SALT input.

Surely, she should at least retain the same level of input if her progress has slowed.
I just don't accept that because she has ASD, she cannot make further progress with her communication skills.

She caught me "on the hop" cooking lunch for DS, so I didn't think to ask her for copies of her latest assessment tests.
But I did try to explain that 1:1 with someone she knows well she will perform much better than with a stranger or in a group situation.

Just looking for evidence to counter her recommendation that DD's SALT is significantly reduced.

Lougle, your posts speak for themselves wrt how much you know about ABA. no judgement necessary from me.

Yes,dd1's school is at a house where there are household pets. Dogs and one horse (an old, placid pony)

I do believe that "where you come from" people own pets too. Or are you trying to suggest that in the whole of your county no one owns a horse

I have never hidden the fact that we do not live in a shoebox (although we did, not too long ago). But that fact should not mean dd1 cannot have a basic education.

Once mote, dd1s school does not cost any more than her education at a state SN provision would, or a non-ABA private SN school.

I think you need to loom at what intensive actually means within an ABA programme. Dd1 has the ability to sit and "work" for about 7 minutes at a time. This is after 4 years of ABA. please do not think she sits all day long, in lessons with a strict intensive focus on academics.

She too has small group work (as far as her school allows), and has to take back seat to other pupils, and learn patience and turn taking. Yet again you anti ABA prejudice shows in the fact that you think this would not happen at an ABA school. Have you ever even looked around one? Seen a home programme in action? Because it certainly doesnt sound a though you have done either.

Tbh, lougle, at 5.6 dd1 thought the same re: initial letters and reading etc. She could probably recognise half a dozen letters.

Reading and writing is not the be all and end all * there is a lot more to any child's education. But I do expect it to feature in dd1s education in some way, when she is ready for it. Rather ham just not expecting it to happen.

I just don't know what you are reading, Silverfrog.

You seem to be interpreting my general musings about my thoughts on what I want DD1 to gain out of her education, as a direct slur on ABA.

I don't have any agenda. I really don't. I didn't for one minute think that ABA hot-houses your DD. I didn't for one minute think that she was kept in isolation.

I have explained why it didn't occur to me that you were talking about a private house. You said 'dogs and horses (both present at her school)'. You used a plural word. You didn't say 'dogs and an old, placid horse'. The image that sentence conveyed, was that there were horses.

I don't know why you are feeling so threatened by me. Read again my first 5 sentences, one of which is a direct quote of sickof..., and see if you can find the judgement of ABA you feel I am giving:

""ABA is the only methodology that understands you need to teach the ASD child not just how to talk, but also how to WANT TO talk."

I struggle with that. It seems to me, that ABA doesn't teach the ASD how to want to talk, but rather teaches them that they get further by talking than not talking. It's a transactional method of teaching.

OP, I don't think the SALT's thinking is that your child can't be taught the mechanics of communication, it's that your child can't be taught the function and benefit of communication."

I was assisting the OP, because the OP was thinking that the SALT thought the child couldn't be taught how to speak. The real thinking, was that they couldn't be taught 'why to speak'.

I also pointed out to Sickof, that I think ABA teaches that you get further by co-operating, than not. Which it does. You have added to that a negative stance. I think it's a functional system. We all learn that if you swim with the tide, you get there faster. We all learn that following the rules is ultimately more pleasant.

When ds started his ABA it was 10mins in every 10 playing and pairing and making the person delivering therapy someone that ds looked forward to coming.

Once that was established it was 15seconds 'work' to 9mins 45 secs playing and building up to 2 minutes work in every 10 and it never increased really, except that the 8 minutes 'playing' were usually generalising of the mastered skills because once mastered, ds' confidence in them was so high and he'd been praised so much for his achievement that he wanted to do them more and more.

So intensive it is, but for the tutor, not really the student.

Going out, not ignoring thread, promise.

Even if Silverfrog has got the gold standard of education for her kid, what's wrong with that Lougle? She chose to fight, as did I , rather than accept the crap education on offer in our area via TEACCH. My son's ABA school costs precisely the same as the useless TEACCH school they were offering - that's how I won it. How on earth that means SF somehow isn't helping every other kid is beyond me - it's only by people refusing to accept sub-standard education that anything will ever get changed. When my boy started ABA, he couldn't sit still for even a second. No exaggerration, he literally couldn't sit still. ABA taught him first to sit still, so that he could have a chance of learning. Amongst lots of other fun play-based stuff. And I'm not getting your point about transaction-based learning. Are you seeing that as a bad thing? Cos it's how my nf kid is taught in her bog standard state primary every day (star charts, golden time etc). I think you have swallowed the prejudices against ABA whole, without any personal experience of it. Why wouldn't you want your kid's school to take the best of of every methodology?

my whole quote, as you showed earlier was : dd1 is undergoing a desensitisation programme to dogs and horses (which is where the plural comes in - hangover form ABA , as dd1 wsnot jsut being desensitised to the one horse at school - she visited farms, ws waitlisted for RDA etc) - both are present at her school (a true fact - there are dogs there, and a horse)

quite why you would assume it was a rambling old place, with acres of land and hordes of teachers dancing attendance I really do not know (which is what your posts have implied, obviously this is not a direct quote!). how on earth would a place like that keep going?

you have conveniently neglected to address the issue that actually, ABA school need not cost any more than standard SN provision. boht Star and I have mentioned it, and I know moondog has said the same in the past.

it is not the gold service you assume it is.

it is a hectic, hand to mouth existence, which creates, for my dd1 (to talk specificaly for a moment) a space where she can learn.

Rainbow school is the same, as is Jigsaw, ans Step by Step. they all started out hand to mouth, with no knowledge of where the wages were coming form half the time. they are still, for the most part, at the point where it is a tricky balance taking on pupils - each pupil needs a tutor, but the job cannot be paid for without the pupil (and their funding) so a catch 22. everyhting is a delicate balance.

I am not threatened by you in the slightest. It matters not a bit to me whether you think I am or not.

But I do not like the suggestion (clearly there in your earlier post) that I am selfishly chasing gold standard provision which cannot be made available to all - it can, and shoudl be. but instead millions is wasted on an inefficient, pen-pushing service which leaves a lot of children failing badly (and this is not just restricted to the SN sector)

the judgement of ABa you are giving? it shows through in virtually every post:

you want your dd to have chances to wait and learn patience (implied this does not happen with ABA)

you want your dd to learn to cope in social settings rahter than focus on academics

you think that ABa is so intensively focussed that it pushes things on childrne before they are ready for it (maybe this is a misreading, but I am not sure what else your comment re: the child needing to be ready coudl be aimed at, other than a misunderstanding of how the academics are introduced within ABA)

I do not like the misconceptions surrounding ABA. I don't like it when my (numerous) LA lie to me and others about it, and I do not like it when it is posted as truths form a so-called informed viewpoint on a message board. i do not think it helps at all.

much as you do not like my denigrating the TEACCH system in this country, at least I have had direct experience of it to compare the two.

and I still do nto say that ABA is the only way. I have tried many other things with dd1 - lots of which have worked. and none of which have been form the LA. and I dare say a properly implemented TEACCH system woudl have it's place at some point for her. sadly, she is unlikely to ever see a properly implemented TEACCH system, even if her ABA placement is revoked.

This is ridiculous.

1. I was not complaining about the transactional basis of ABA. I was merely saying that I found it hard to make the leap from that to the notion that ABA taught a child to want to talk. Rather, I see it that ABA shows a child the benefit of talking, which is not, in my view, the same thing.

I do not think that makes ABA substandard, far from it, but it is pointless to argue that it does something it doesn't, when the thing it does do is very useful indeed.

2. I stand by my view that the type of ABA school Silverfrog's DD has currently, is impractical for the greater number of children with SEN. Also, I stand by the fact that many children with SEN do not NEED that level of education. Remembering of course, that we are not entitled to the best education for our children, but an 'adequate' one.

I would never suggest that Silverfrog's DD didn't need that education, as it is hard won, and in my view tribunal results are a 'false negative prone' result. ie. There will be plenty of people who lose at tribunal who would have won, but almost none who win who should have lost.

I also was not commenting on the likelihood of costs if the system was implemented as standard. Economies of scale are a fact of life. I have no idea what it would look like rolled out country-wide.

3)My quoted statements about DD1's education were exactly that. Statements about how I perceive her education to be, and how I process the things that are less ideal. They were not comparative to ABA, but rather the more generalised curriculum and targets that DD1 is exposed to. So, I was actually saying, that I like to think the times where she is not actually 'learning' because she has the target skills, still allow her to 'learn' other skills. Silverfrog has taken that to be a judgement on ABA.

4. I don't want dd to focus on social settings rather than academics. I want her to learn what she is ready to learn. I don't know why you feel this is a criticism of ABA.

What I really don't understand, is why this debate couldn't have been more neutral? Why do you feel so attacked if someone dares to allow TEACCH some breathing room?

Why was I attacked from the moment I questioned, and I do stress questioned, the ABA outcome? If you want it to become mainstream, you will have to drop the defensiveness and share willingly your opinions. Not just shout down whoever dares to think a bit searchingly.

Justa, I don't see what you see. I do know that defensiveness of ABA is forced upon people who engage with it due to constant steam of critiscism it gets on a daily basis in real life, most of which is either ignorance or bare-faced lies.

It is not wonderful. There are lots of problems with the delivery of it in the UK. Most of those problems however would not exist if the ignorance around it was addressed. You cannot win Gold star provision at tribunal. After huge sacrifice of money, relationship and possible home you 'might' win Adequate provision.

There is nothing about ABA that makes you a better person than anyone else. There is nothing about it that means you have to take criticism graciously. As many horrible people as nice people probably do it, but they don't give ABA a bad name. That has nothing to do with it.

'Possibly' the journey that you have to go through to get it makes you bitter and less diplomatic when challenging ignorance, but possibly that is only me.

Justa, I don't see what you see. I do know that defensiveness of ABA is forced upon people who engage with it due to constant steam of critiscism it gets on a daily basis in real life, most of which is either ignorance or bare-faced lies.

It is not wonderful. There are lots of problems with the delivery of it in the UK. Most of those problems however would not exist if the ignorance around it was addressed. You cannot win Gold star provision at tribunal. After huge sacrifice of money, relationship and possible home you 'might' win Adequate provision.

There is nothing about ABA that makes you a better person than anyone else. There is nothing about it that means you have to take criticism graciously. As many horrible people as nice people probably do it, but they don't give ABA a bad name. That has nothing to do with it.

'Possibly' the journey that you have to go through to get it makes you bitter and less diplomatic when challenging ignorance, but possibly that is only me.

justa, when I choose to discuss ABA, I do indeed expect a discussion.

I do not expect to be faced with thr ridiculous notion of a gold star elite service, only available to a select few.

ABA is there.

it exists, and remains the only approach with any decent body of evidence to prove its worth and efficacy. that is fact.

it is also fact that what passes for education in most of the SN placements in this country is woeful, inadequate, and catering more for sensory needs than education (I am NOT saying that meeting sensory needs does not have a place in SN schools)

dd1's school is far form perfect. there are many "perfect (for her) qualities about it; it's size (when she started) was perfect, for her. she was scared of children, so to find a school with so few was good for her, it gave her the space (personal space) she needed. yes, of course the curriculum is fully tailored for her. it is on any ABA programme, whether in a home programme, or a tiny ABA school, or a ms school. that is the point of ABA.

quite frankly, if you want to bring it down to the level of being rude, I do not think you should be pointing the finger at anyone on this thread.

I stand by my posts.

if you, or lougle want ot discuss ABA vs TEACCH (or any other system) it would eb wise to actually know what oyu are talking about first. there seems to be little evidence of this.

lougle: on the costings, I was not talking about ABA being cheaper than TEACCH based systems when rolled out nationwide. I wa stalking abot now: the school the LEA wanted dd1 to go to (first of all the state placement, then the private placement when no space at the state school) does not cost any less thanthe place she is at now. no nationwide roll out, just like for like costings right now. this is the same in many situations.

I hate this talk of elite, gold star services - it just sounds like sour grapes, tbh (this is not dircted at anyone in particular, it is a general observation)

I founght for over 3 years just to get dd1 a statemnent. this is a severely ASD child, who had no interpersonal skills, no play skills, and only echolalic language when she was first assessed, yet she was turned down for a statement even.

at the end of that fight, which cost us our house, our lives (several moves of area), and very nearly our marriage, we have ended up with an adequate education. it is far from perfect. please, do stop this nonsense talk of the "best" education. take a look at the ABA schools - they are all hand-to-mouth (with the exception of Treehouse). take a look at the ABA programmes - they are not hothousign academic programmes with highly qualified multiple degree-holding tutors; they are basic education, delivered by people who are (a lot of the time) learning on the job. this is not gold service; it is suitable provision.

The only reason I argue so passionately for ABA is because I want other kids to have the benefits my boy has had.

And ok lougle, I see your point now about ABA teaching not the 'wanting' to talk but the 'talking gets me a good result, so I will do it'. You are saying, I think, that no methodology can miraculously overcome the key deficit of autism: the lack of a social desire to talk, chat, share information.

I think you are right, except: my boy has been using speech just to get his needs met for years, using the transactional speech that people criticise ABA for. But just recently, coinciding with his starting at full-time ABA school, I have seen the first teeny-tiny signs that he might go beyond that .

We were in the shopping centre the other day, on the ground floor, and we needed to go up to 3 for his fave shop. He turned to me, looked at me, and said "lift?'.

It wouldn't sound like much to another mum, but to me it was the first ever sign of his using speech to share attention with me. It gave me a sliver of hope that he may develop conversation.

It can only be because they are putting such emphasis on naturalistic speech in his school,on commenting on what he and they are doing, with eye contact and facial expression.

ABA is not a brand, it is a behavioural science. I can't prove it, but I think that the work on speech over the years has opened up the speech centre of his brain, and that something is now firing up.

Why wouldn't I come on here and tell people about that? Would you prefer I just shut up and pulled the ladder up after me?

You are just as free to say what TEACCH is doing for your kid.

But sickof... this is where we have come adrift, you and me.

I was expressing my confusion on the wording of what you said. And the basis for therapy.

I was explaining to the OP, that if she was going to try and get effective SALT, she had to challenge the assertion that was made, not the assertion that she thought was being made.

I wasn't implying that ABA wasn't effective at teaching the benefits of communication.

I wasn't criticising ABA for what it does do.

I was taking an analytical view of the OPs problem. It seems, that because of history on this board, I am perceived to be anti-ABA, when in fact, I think it is a very effective provision in many areas, and in general think that most general parenting methods are ABA-lite (the lite being that parents don't scrutinise the effectiveness or progress of the child, they just think 'it's working').

I am glad that your DS said 'lift?' - that's fantastic . It's always the details that encourage me the most.

Thanks Lougle, I think I understand now. You will understand that perhaps defensiveness has become a constant setting for ABAers, because we spend our whole lives defending it it against people who think it's the devil's work!

And yes, I think a lot of it is similar to common-sense parenting. But there is science stuff too that is quite clever.

I wish that someone had told me about it when DS was 2, as I reckon if he'd had ABA during those crucial years of 2-5 he might have developed more speech. My big aim now is to tell new mums coming on here to try it as early as possible.

I am not saying anything is or isn't acceptable. I am saying that it is hard to tell genuine interest from ignorance when questions are worded in the way in writing that they are in real life with an accompanying sneer.

I am saying that experience tells me that when someone asks a question about ABA possibly causing robotic or splinter skills they are being critical and often, nasty.

I know Lougle well enough to know that this is not what she means, and that her questions are genuine and that where she is ignorant she usually seek clarification and explanation. But her words are the same as the sneerers, and the RL sneered have done an awful lot of damage.

I'm sorry Justa, but I can't take risks with my child. I also have no opportunities to evaluate alternative approaches now because they are done to my child in secret. I only find out about them when the damage is done. Having said that On the rare occasion I have been consulted it is because someone has a slip of rationale and although dubious I have pretty much always agreed to give it a go. A peer in OT and a visual timetable in preschool. Both have been helpful to my dd in ways I didn't expect. (although I have to point out they were also ways in which the or wasn't expecting. The critical point being if you give me a rationale and measure the impact, I will agree to just about anything, if the intention behind it is well meant.

And FWIW I very much value Lougles contributions on MN.

Look, the thing is, that the parents of children using ABA have a big voice on this board. I don't blame them.

The board, to me, is worth more than individual posters, so I have to conclude that questions are not welcomed, and I specifically, for some reason unknown to me, will always be perceived to be 'ABA bashing', if I so much as ask a question. So I won't. It also means that I won't be contributing to such threads, as has been the case recently, because I just won't be told what I can and can't discuss.

So I'll continue to lurk, and I'll contribute to threads where I can see a clear way of answering without being seen to criticise this method of education.

I expect I come across as pretty evangelical about ABA Whenever a new poster comes along asking how to cope/what to do to help their 2/3yo dx with ASD, I actually feel compelled to tell them about ABA.

This has been because it was the only thing that we could do ourselves, before ds starting school, that actually seemed to tackle every aspect of his behaviour, communication, interaction, and skill deficit, and the change in ds has been astonishing,

Lougle, I sincerely hope that just because you (and others like you) believe that a method other than ABA is more suitable for your dd, and I (and others like me) believe that ABA has been the best approach for my ds, this should not stop you posting and receiving advice/help, or should stifle any debate about the various approaches. Blimey, if people didn't share their experiencs how tf would any of us know anything??

FWIW the (Verbal Behaviour) therapy my ds has had for the past 10 months has been almost all play-based, with the only (pre)academic element being working on fine motor skills so that he can hold a pen correctly and start trying to write and draw, and letter recognition. He is due to start school in September and cannot read. His programme has been mainly about reducing behaviours, and social interaction with peers.

Going back (sort of) to the original OP, I have to say, I do disagree that ABA does not teach a child to want to talk/interact/play/whatever. You made a distinction between eg talking for the (transactional) benefits of talking vs wanting to talk. I can't see the difference? ABA - particularly VB method- does exactly that - teaches that an activity is rewarding in itself, so the motivation to do it is the same as for an nt child.

Eg a year ago it would not have occured to ds that there was a purpose in communicating beyond labelling or telling us his immediate needs, let alone a 'conversation' (ABA calls it intraverbal). Now he enjoys, in the same way a nt child would, excitedly telling us about what he's seen or done. Because he gets rewarded for it (by attention). Behaviour analysis tells us that that is why all (nt) children rush to tell us things - attention seeking is a function of behaviour, so can be explicitly developed and taught. The key thing is that the motivation to talk is there, for the same reasons as an nt child - attention.