Main Page

AUTISM SOCIETY OF WISCONSIN RESOLUTION ON

AVERSIVE TREATMENT

WHEREAS, the Autism Society of Wisconsin is dedicated to the right of persons with autism to grow, make choices, be educated, enjoy life, work and play as integrated, respected, and responsible members of society; and

WHEREAS, the Society believes that persons with autism have the same civil rights and privileges granted to all citizens under the Constitution and laws of the United States, including:

the Developmental Disabilities and Bill of Rights Act of 1970 granting people with severe disabilities the same rights as non-disabled individuals;

the 8th Amendment prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment; and

WHEREAS, the Society calls for the immediate cessation of the use of any aversive approach, therapy or treatment (including but not limited to extreme stimuli such as shock or pain, physical or chemical restraint, environmental deprivation, social humiliation, coercion, or exclusion for services) which endangers the health and safety of individuals with autism and/or may result in any of the following:

• Obvious signs of pain experienced by an individual with autism;
• Potential or actual damaging physical and psychological side effects, including, but not limited to tissue damage, illness or injury, discomfort, emotional distress, or death;
• Dehumanization of an individual with autism by the use of procedures which are normally unacceptable for non-handicapped persons in all environments;
• Ambivalence of discomfort by family, staff, and/or caregivers regarding the necessity of such extreme strategies or their involvement in such intervention; and
• Revulsion or distress felt by handicapped and non-handicapped peers and community members who cannot reconcile extreme procedures with acceptable human conduct; and

FURTHER, the Society dedicates its resources and its expertise to the development, implementation, evaluation, dissemination, and advocacy of the use of positive behavioral interventions consistent with the Society’s commitment to supporting and improving the quality of life for individuals with autism; and

BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the Autism Society of Wisconsin calls upon all public and private agencies and service providers involved in the provision of service relevant to the needs of individuals with autism to adapt, apply and vigorously uphold the standards set forth in this resolution.

Adopted by the Board of Directors, July 16, 1994

Autism Society of Wisconsin Resolution on

Facilitated Communication

The right to communicate is a basic human right and the means by which all other rights are realized. We believe that everyone has something to say and a right to say it. We need to be constantly open to opportunities to explore methodologies that enhance all communication. Facilitated communication is one of these methodologies.

Facilitated communication is used by some people who have significant communication challenges to express themselves. What distinguishes facilitated communication from other methods of nonspeech communication is the physical contact between a communication partner (facilitator) and the communicator. This contact may be hand on hand, hand on elbow, hand to shoulder, or even finger to shoulder. The communicator then types or touches letters, words, pictures, or other symbols.

In theory, physical contact functions as emotional support and an accommodation for sensory and/or movement difficulties. This contact enables the communicator to filter irrelevant stimuli and focus on communicating. In practice, contact at the hand provides resistance that the communicator has to move through and the facilitator can feel.

The method has become controversial. Sources of the controversy include:

• the perception that those using facilitated communication are incapable of describing their emotions or of having complex thoughts;
• the difficulty in accepting that some people with disabilities are self taught readers and writers; and,
• the inherent risk of facilitator influence when physical contact is used.

Individuals with severe communication challenges do use a variety of alternative communication systems to communicate significantly more complex thoughts and emotions than previously expected. There is no reason to believe that individuals who use facilitated communication are any different. There is evidence that a number of children with autism have learned to read before formal instruction. Finally, evidence of facilitator influence does not mean that the method of communication is invalid. We do not call for an end to speech because the words out of some people's mouths have been influenced or are found to be untrue. We use judgement, and consider the message within a larger context.

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT:

• Access to alternative means of expression is an individual right.
• Facilitated communication should be accessible for people with significant communication challenges.
• People should recognize the complexities of facilitated communication training and practice and stay informed about new research and practices throughout the facilitated communication training process.
• People who decide to become facilitators should seek training in the method.
• Facilitated communication should be used in a careful and reflective way.
• Facilitators should work in collaboration with people with significant communication challenges to find ways to confirm communication competence through the use of controlled designs, portfolio analysis, transitioning to independent typing, and similar techniques.
• When allegations of abuse or other sensitive communications occur, facilitators and others should seek clarification of the communication and work to ensure that facilitated communicators are given the same access to legal and other systems that are available to persons using other means of communication.
• Principles of informed consent should be followed.

Adopted February 1, 1995

Top     ASW Main Page