Autism Screening
I have mixed feelings about the new Autism Screening that is to be done on every child under the age of 2. I just learned about this on the news this morning, then watched a clip of it on the news tonight.
In a way, the new screening procedure is good. I've seen way too many children come into the school system and they could be the poster child for Autism, but have gone undiagnosed and, as a result, without services. I believe wholeheartedly in early intervention, especially for this group of children. On the flip side, I have seen more and more children lately who have been diagnosed with "high-functioning" Autism where the diagnosis is in doubt. Why does this happen? With increased awareness of the disorder comes more concern from professionals and parents. Now there are checklists on the internet of behaviors to watch for in your children. I think it's a normal thing to see something in your child that may not be there if your senses are heightened about it.
Another aspect to the over-diagnosis or mis-diagnosis of Autism is that savvy parents know that a diagnosis will get them the Cadillac of services. If you know this from the start, what's to keep you from seeking second and third opinions in order to obtain a diagnosis for your child? You're bound to run into at least one professional who caters to the parent, especially since there is big money involved in both assessment and treatment of children with Autism. I hate to be so jaded, but no where in the news are these trends mentioned, and they happen regularly.
How many behaviors need to be present for a child to fail a screening, and how objective is this screening? How are therapeutic services going to be funded? How will this screening trend affect the multitude of lawsuits that already happen in school districts over "appropriate" services? Who determines what appropriate services look like? These are just a few questions and concerns that I find myself asking about the new screening procedure.
In a way, the new screening procedure is good. I've seen way too many children come into the school system and they could be the poster child for Autism, but have gone undiagnosed and, as a result, without services. I believe wholeheartedly in early intervention, especially for this group of children. On the flip side, I have seen more and more children lately who have been diagnosed with "high-functioning" Autism where the diagnosis is in doubt. Why does this happen? With increased awareness of the disorder comes more concern from professionals and parents. Now there are checklists on the internet of behaviors to watch for in your children. I think it's a normal thing to see something in your child that may not be there if your senses are heightened about it.
Another aspect to the over-diagnosis or mis-diagnosis of Autism is that savvy parents know that a diagnosis will get them the Cadillac of services. If you know this from the start, what's to keep you from seeking second and third opinions in order to obtain a diagnosis for your child? You're bound to run into at least one professional who caters to the parent, especially since there is big money involved in both assessment and treatment of children with Autism. I hate to be so jaded, but no where in the news are these trends mentioned, and they happen regularly.
How many behaviors need to be present for a child to fail a screening, and how objective is this screening? How are therapeutic services going to be funded? How will this screening trend affect the multitude of lawsuits that already happen in school districts over "appropriate" services? Who determines what appropriate services look like? These are just a few questions and concerns that I find myself asking about the new screening procedure.