Skip to main content

when will we offer hope to all autistic children?

Submitted by an LD OnLine user on

from the NY Times

April 13, 2003
Nudging Toward Normal
By JANE GROSS

It is lunchtime at the Alpine Learning Group here, and four preschool children assemble at a small round table and unwrap their sandwiches and juice boxes. The teacher prompts a sweet-faced 4-year-old named Ben to initiate a conversation with his classmate, Emily.

”Ask Emily ‘Do you need a napkin?”’ suggests the teacher, Deirdre Moon. Ben dutifully repeats the question.

”Say ‘Here, Emily,”’ Ms. Moon continues, showing Ben how to pass the napkin to the little girl. He imitates the gesture.

Now Ms. Moon turns to Emily. ”Say ‘Thank you, Ben.”’ Emily thanks him.

Again, it is Ben’s turn. ”Say ‘You’re welcome,”’ the teacher tells him. Ben is muttering to himself, staring into the middle distance. ”Ben, look at me,” Ms. Moon says. His eyes flicker toward her face. She repeats her instruction. This time Ben complies.

This lunchtime chitchat would be effortless for most children. But for Ben and Emily it is an achievement, since both are autistic.

Autism is the mysterious neurological disorder that strands children in a private world, oblivious to others, without the curiosity and instinct to imitate, which makes learning possible. Many have no meaningful language, are prone to
tantrums that disrupt schooling and cling to ritualistic behavior like hand-flapping or twirling that take the place of play. Thus a simple social interaction between Ben and Emily deserves extravagant praise.

”Good job, you guys,” Ms. Moon says buoyantly. ”Awesome.”

The number of children like Ben and Emily seems to be rising steeply, as documented in a new study in California that found an increase of 273 percent in the number of children with profound autism from 1987 to 1998, a number that continues to increase. Some experts attribute this in part to improved diagnosis. Once children like these were considered lost causes, destined for an institution. But along with a growing caseload is new confidence in one form
of treatment, applied behavior analysis.

A.B.A. is the only intervention that has proved successful in controlled experiments, although small and unreplicated. The method has its roots in the research of B.F. Skinner, who developed a system of modifying behavior with rewards and punishments. His early techniques have been refined through the decades and found to be helpful with autistic children. Then came news that recovery was possible for some children: a 1987 study by O. Ivar Lovaas at the University of California at Los Angeles followed 19 autistic children under age 4 through a regime of 40 hours a week of one-on-one behavioral therapy. Nine of 19 children, generally those with higher I.Q.’s, achieved normal cognitive functioning. Followed into adolescence, these children were found, as well, to be socially indistinguishable from peers, shy in some cases but not outside the normal range.

This early, intensive behavioral intervention is now recommended by an array of experts, including the National Academy of Sciences, which issued a report in 2001 urging at least 25 hours a week. But fewer than 10 percent of autistic children receive it, the academy says, because of long waiting lists at special schools, shortages of trained therapists and difficulty persuading districts to pay for this particular treatment when more generic special education, while less effective, would be much cheaper.

Many parents, Ben’s among them, initially react with horror at seemingly robotic techniques. How can a 2- or 3-year-old - the typical age at diagnosis — sit still for hours and hours, bombarded with commands and rewarded for compliance with bits of food, special toys or squeals of praise?

Ben’s mother recalls her initiation to the treatment. Ben was 2 at the time, newly diagnosed. He had no speech and spent most of his time at the window ledge pushing a toy train back and forth, stroking his own cheek and ignoring his parents and twin brother, Oliver. Heeding the advice of a network of parents with autistic children — and unwilling to experiment with unproven treatments like milk- and wheat-free diets, swimming with dolphins or mercury cleansing — the family reluctantly agreed to try an A.B.A. home program, supervised by Alpine’s outreach staff.

The first goal was to get Ben to sit in a chair, make eye contact and follow simple instructions, all prerequisites for language and learning. ”Without basic attending behaviors, a child will just run around the room and flap,” says Ben’s father, Adam. (Adam and Yvonne, both tax lawyers, asked that their surname and hometown not be published.)

Reinforcing Ben’s efforts with M&M’s, a chance to turn the pages of ”Cat in the Hat” and constant praise for ”Good sitting!” and ”Good looking!” the little boy gradually accepted the chair and the eye contact, the tools of engagement. But for the first two weeks, or so it seemed to Ben’s distraught mother, Yvonne, the house in northern New Jersey rang with anguished howling.

”Many times I thought to myself, ‘You’re out of here,”’ Yvonne recalls about the therapists. ”It was heartbreaking to hear him so upset. He’s a little boy. I wanted him playing in the park. Then I remembered he didn’t know how to play in the park.”

Ben’s progress was swift. He mastered simple things like pointing when he wanted something or playing peekaboo. Slowly and methodically, the therapist’s physical and verbal prompting was ”faded,” in the jargon of behavior analysis, and reinforcements for success made less tangible and immediate. The skills were generalized to natural situations, like a family celebration or a trip to the store. Tantrums were discouraged by ignoring them or redirecting Ben’s attention elsewhere.

These outbursts usually have a reason, therapists say, like avoiding a task. Ben was taught to seek relief in a less stigmatizing way, like asking for a break. Anytime he was tantrum-free for five minutes, calculated on a kitchen timer, there were special rewards.

By summer, just before his third birthday, Ben was speaking, the most promising of signs. ”Some children respond more readily and rapidly,” says Bridget Taylor, co-founder of the Alpine Learning Group and a leading researcher in the field. ”We just don’t know in advance who those kids are.” (I.Q. may be an indicator of success, although the test is less reliable in children without speech.)

The four variables, Dr. Taylor says, are the age when treatment begins, the quantity of therapy, the quality of therapy and the neurological potential of the child — whether, for instance, autism is coupled with mental retardation. ”We have control over the first three,” Dr. Taylor says. ”No. 4 becomes apparent over time,” generally between age 5 and 8.

Until last fall, Ben continued his therapy at home — up to 30 hours a week, one on one. His parents were similarly trained, so they could consistently reinforce what Ben was learning. ”You have to keep on top of it every waking minute,” Yvonne says. ”And when you’re tired, the temptation is to say, ‘Just this one time.”’

BEN’S family has been luckier than most in finding and paying for this kind of care, which became wildly popular after the 1993 publication of ”Let Me Hear Your Voice,” an account by a mother of her two children’s recovery from autism, with Dr. Taylor, then a graduate student, as their teacher. With interest at a new high, skilled A.B.A. teachers, who charge $40 to $100 an hour, were scarce. The family’s goal was 30 hours of treatment a week but they could rarely find qualified therapists for that many hours.

At first, Ben’s family paid thousands of dollars out-of-pocket for his teachers. The state of New Jersey expects school districts to pay for a disabled child’s education after age 3 but itself supports only two hours of treatment a week before then. Months of exhausting back and forth with their insurance company eventually produced some reimbursement.

The next hurdle was finding a preschool spot and getting the state to agree to pay for it. Again, Adam and Yvonne were blessed.

Already familiar to Alpine directors from the outreach program, they were offered a coveted slot when another preschooler made the transition to a mainstream kindergarten. And their home school district approved the placement without protest, agreeing to pay the $60,307 for a 12-month school year, including case management, home visits, the training of family and staff and gradual mainstreaming for children ready for it. Some districts might have insisted that a public special education classroom was sufficient, leading to costly litigation if a family had the conviction, stamina and money for the fight.

Like many such schools, the Alpine Learning Group was founded by parents; the first classes were held in 1988, with four children in a church basement. It now ranks among the most respected programs, along with the Princeton Child Development Institute and the Douglass Developmental Disabilities Center at Rutgers University. Its outreach program serves 14 children up to age 5. The school itself has 27 students, ages 3 to 21. Some of the younger children, like Ben, are candidates for mainstreaming, although others never master the necessary language, social and behavioral skills to get by in a regular classroom. The older students at Alpine are more impaired, being readied for jobs and some degree of self-sufficiency in group homes. Obviously, that is not what their parents hoped at the beginning. But untreated they might have been institutionalized, which over a lifetime is far more expensive than even this costly form of education.

Last fall, Ben began at Alpine, working one on one from 9 a.m. to 2:45 p.m. with either Ms. Moon or another teacher, Danielle Spinnato. Formal lessons are interspersed with so-called incidental learning, like the scene at lunch. Four times a week, after school, Ben has two hours of therapy at home. Often Oliver is included and he helps guide Ben through make-believe birthday parties and board games.

Applied behavioral analysis is a way of life, lived 24/7. Immersion is essential because learning to clap, wave or point can require hundreds of repetitions for an autistic child. Hand-washing and similar self-help skills are taught one step at a time: Pull up sleeves, turn on water, wet hands, get soap, rub hands together, rinse off soap, get paper towel, dry hands, throw towel away. Tantrums and other idiosyncratic behavior must be all but eradicated if a child is to attend a regular school, go to church or take a family vacation.

This winter, Ben has worked on more than 40 academic, social and self-help programs, each with a defined objective, step-by-step teaching method and measurable goal. His programs, filed in a fat black binder, include ”requests preferred items from a peer,” ”puts on a shirt,” ”follows instructions from a distance,” ”answers questions about the calendar,” ”cuts using scissors” and ”tolerates the presence of dogs.”

The give-and-take of natural conversation can be a struggle. When Ben drops a piece of paper on the way to the recycling bin, Ms. Moon prompts him to say ”oops.” At lunch, she takes his straw away so he will have to ask for it. In the gym, she asks, ”Who wants to go on the trampoline?” Ben says nothing but climbs aboard. She insists he come down and say ”me” before taking his turn.

Still, by January, Ben had met Alpine’s criteria to spend a few hours a week in a normal preschool: he responds to his name, follows simple one-step instructions like ”Hang up your coat,” takes turns with other children and rarely throws tantrums. Ms. Spinnato accompanies him to the Friends Neighborhood Nursery School in nearby Ridgewood. She reminds him to look at the teacher or stop touching his face, but less conspicuously than in his Alpine classroom —a silent thumbs up, for example, instead of an audible ”Awesome!” as she nudges him toward normal.

Ben easily learns a song about bluebirds. But he does not join the others making bird feeders with crumpled bread, peanuts, raisins and seed. He cleans up nicely when it is time to go and says ”Bye” to his friends. A little girl named Molly asks Ben to make her a Valentine card. The next week he does.

Adjustments — improvisations, really — are necessary as Ben’s life unfolds. In preparation for Friends, Dr. Taylor asked Yvonne to replace his sweatpants with jeans, like his new classmates wore. Some autistic children find certain clothes uncomfortable or make a ritual of wearing the same thing. Everyone at Alpine told Ben how cool he looked. The praise made the scratchy denims bearable.

Ben poses different challenges at home, where it is difficult to maintain the rigorous consistency of school. One afternoon, cranky from the flu, he refuses cough medicine, wrests himself from the nanny’s hold and begins singing ”Old McDonald Had a Farm” at the top of his lungs. Yvonne tries to calm him without success. Both have trouble prodding Ben from a favorite hiding place behind the couch.

During frequent home visits Dr. Taylor guides their way. She does not want Ben behind the couch since it encourages his natural isolation. Nor does she want him confused by two adults telling him what to do at the same time. Yvonne should take the lead, Dr. Taylor advises.

It is always two steps forward and one step back. For several days running, Yvonne says, Ben will be a model 4-year-old, taking his cereal bowl to the sink without being asked and greeting company. Then, for no apparent reason, she wakes to find her son ”the poster child for autism,” moving from one peculiar behavior to the next so the family can’t go anywhere without strangers staring.

But good days outnumber the bad by a widening margin. One recent evening, Adam was on his knees by the side of the model railroad tracks. He is an affectionate father, shaping Ben’s behavior with the sort of praise that would not have registered on the child’s radar screen awhile back.

”How many cars are there?” Adam asks Ben. The who-what-why-where-when-and-how questions were part of the boy’s curriculum that week. ”Four,” Ben answers smartly.

Adam disagrees, touching the little cars — one-two-three-four, all the way to six. Yvonne turns her attention to the counting. Her husband insists there are six cars. Ben holds firm on four. Yvonne sees immediately that the front two were engines, thus Ben is right.

Adam is thrilled by the subtlety of Ben’s reasoning and explodes with high fives. Then he bombards his son with addition problems. 6 + 6? 12; 3 + 7? 10; 7 + 6? Both are confident now, grinning. And Ben looks squarely into his father’s eyes.

Submitted by Anonymous on Tue, 04/15/2003 - 5:05 PM

Permalink

It’s important to know that ABA is not the only game in town for autistic kids. There have been a number of valid criticisms of the original studies by Loovas. Replications of those studies have generally not produced such a high response rate. I’ve seen children respond well to ABA initially, but then plateau and become “prompt dependent”, unable to take initiative on their own, and simply parroting what they have been taught without understanding it. It’s important that ABA is supplemented by other approaches, particularly as time goes on. There are simply things that you cannot teach directly- particularly regarding relationships and social interaction. Other methods are gathering steam in terms of showing their efficacy- I’ve certainly seen children improve dramatically in other types of programs with no ABA- Stanley Greenspan’s DIR, Steven Gutstein’s RDI, The Option Method, Miller’s cognitive method, Barry Prizant’s SCERTS model… They all have much to offer. Hopefully with time, we will learn how to match children with intervention and how to integrate approaches in a seamless manner. We do know that intensive intervention is vital… and these children have enormous potential.

Submitted by Anonymous on Wed, 04/16/2003 - 1:22 AM

Permalink

is that as an unlicensed (read unregulated, un-monitored) method (which actually all the various methods currently in use are), there is no way of knowing whether any two providers of DTT are actually offering what they claim. Lovaas’ own work has survived peer review, and actually has been successfully replicated by independant teams with nearly identical results (the two biggest being WEAP [Wisconsin] and LEAP [London]. It is not enough to watch a video and read Maurice’s book to call yourself an ABA therpist, which unfortunately is all too often the case.

The prompt-dependancy is often cited, and yet those people who have successfully used ABA to elevate the functioning of autistic children don’t seem to have this phenom occur. I believe this is the result not of the method per se, but of a lack of ability on the part of the person heading the program. One of the benchmarks of autism is a great resistance to change, and yet if they are to be recovered into more typical functioning they must learn not only to accept transition and generalize knowledge, but to actually be able to intitiate new thoughts and actions. Prompt dependance is the easy path, and it is up to the lead therapist to tweak the program to prevent this from become established routine.

I do find it very interesting to note that Lovaas is alone in conducting true outcome studies, somthing that none of the creators of the other methods have been willing to do. I also find it interesting to note that both TEACCH and Greenspan have incorporated DTT into their mix, giving their own programs a much needed boost. (Sorry, but the Miller method is a complete sham.)

One of the more promising methods to come along is the Denver Model, although it is too soon yet to tell if it will pan out in the long run. It too incorporates DTT, but adds a greater degree of social contact with typical peers than strict Lovaas does.

Proabably the greatest obstacles to getting ABA offered on a wider scale is the intensity of 1:1 work coupled with the extensive data taking that make it at once cost-prohibitive to administrators and tedious to those persons already hired to work with special ed students. Because neither is a valid reason for NOT using a method that does have a proven track record, they fall back upon attacking ABA, when very often they actally have no direct firsthand experience with it (again, just because someone says they are providing ABA does not mean that they are the real McCoy).

I do not think that ABA is the end-all answer, but I do think that it is a proper first step. Lovaas started his work with adults and aversives, moved down to teens and mild aversives, and ended up with children and positive reinforcements. Makes sense when you think about the new findings of the plasticity of the brain in the 3-8.

Current estimates are that less than 10% of the autistic kids get the type of program needed to effect recovery, and a good portion of those get it privately, either at their parent’s expense, or worse, as part of a settlement against the school district which failed them previously, adding the legal fees on top of the expensive private placement. Considering the ever growing herd of children on Spectrum (14,000 to 21,000 will be born each year in the US, assuming the current rate remains static) and the ever escalating cost associated with failing to recover them ($80K to $100K per year in 1999 dollars), we cannot sit by and NOT use proven methods with these children.

Submitted by Anonymous on Thu, 04/17/2003 - 3:29 PM

Permalink

I’m not against ABA- I’m ABA certified and incoporate it into the programs I develop because I support the need for highly structured work with autistic children. But I take a developmental approach in understanding and treating children and know that ABA is just one aspect of learning, for all- disability or no. I am tired of the “only proven method” argument. This is simply not true- other methods have been tested, also with good results- but then ABA proponents dismiss these studies as not meeting standards for data collection (ABA aces the data collection issue… at least on what they are specifically teaching). And then in turn, some researchers of ABA have admitted that they are simply not finding the same results of Loovas. And then they quibble about exactly what kind of results we are looking for… I’ve met people from the Denver method and one put it best during a typical ABA vs Developmental debate- (and with a certain exasperated tone), “Look, we are trying to build a whole house here… We need more than one tool to build this house. Just a hammer isn’t going to do it!”. Makes perfect sense to me. Greenspan incorporates ABA in his programs because he sees it as important structured practice- like practicing the backhand again and again for the game of tennis. Can you learn the whole game of tennis that way? No, certainly not. Structured practice needs to be put into the context of the game and smoothly incorporated with all the other tennis moves and strategies. Human beings are so complicated (how much more so than tennis!)- we need to appreciate all aspects when we try to understand and help them. Certainly proper training for therapists is also helpful, regardless of the approach. But I have seen children do very poorly and coming from the very best ABA schools and programs in the country. I hope these programs are trying to understand what happened. But in so doing, they will have to be open minded and question their approaches- what worked and what didn’t and perhaps why. The book, Targetting Autism (author escapes me) examines this debate in a fair way. (I agree with you about Miller- it has a few good points, but not enough to legitimize it as a comprehensive program).

Back to Top