On Sun, 25 Jun 2006 13:58:20 -0700, Bill Southerly wrote:
>Does the scientific opinion continue to be that facilitated communication
>does not work?
I think that the simple answer is Yes, as shown by these two references
I provide below from a quick PsycInfo search:
-Mike Palij
New York University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
DN: Database Name
PsycINFO
TI: Title
The nature and value of empirically validated interventions
AU: Author
Newsom, Crighton; Hovanitz, Christine A
SO: Source
Jacobson, John W. (Ed); Foxx, Richard M. (Ed); Mulick, James A. (Ed).
(2005). Controversial therapies for developmental disabilities: Fad,
fashion and science in professional practice. (pp. 31-44). Mahwah, NJ,
US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. xxii, 505 pp.
DE: Descriptors
*Developmental Disabilities; *Epistemology; *Professional Ethics;
*Treatment; Empirical Methods; Postmodernism; Sensory Integration
AB: Abstract
(Created by APA) All professions involved in developmental
disabilities have ethical standards that include a principle requiring
that the individual professional provide competent treatment. In some
cases, "competent" remains undefined (e.g., American
Physical Therapy Association, 2000; Council for Exceptional Children,
1997). Early in the 21st century, the field of developmental
disabilities finds itself faced with not only increasing demands for
accountability from consumers, government agencies, and the general
public, but also threats to the scientific tenets that have fueled
progress in treatment development and program innovation. These
threats include well-intended but ungrounded theories and treatments,
such as sensory integration therapy (Smith, Mruzek, & Mozingo,
chap. 20, this volume)(see record 2004-22398-020) and facilitated
communication (Jacobson, Foxx, & Mulick, chap. 22; this volume)
(see record 2004-22398-022). They also include the equally ungrounded
epistemic relativism of postmodernist philosophies, currently
fashionable in the humanities, education, and the larger disabilities.
The goal of this chapter is to explore the nature and value of
empirically validated interventions. (PsycINFO Database Record (c)
2005 APA, all rights reserved)
Record 2 of 2
DN: Database Name
PsycINFO
TI: Title
"Communication unbound--or unfound"?--An integrative review on the
effectiveness of Facilitated Communication (FC) in nonverbal persons
with autism and mental retardation/"Communication unbound--or
unfound"?--Ein integratives Literatur-Review zur Wirksamkeit der
"Gest¨tzten Kommunikation" ("Facilitated Communication/FC") bei
nichtsprechenden autistischen und intelligenzgeminderten Personen
AU: Author
Probst, Paul
SO: Source
Zeitschrift f¨r Klinische Psychologie, Psychiatrie und
Psychotherapie. Vol 53(2), 2005, pp. 93-128
DE: Descriptors
*Augmentative Communication; *Autism; *Mental Retardation
AB: Abstract
The treatment method of Facilitated Communication (FC) has been
propagated by Crossley and Biklen claiming to improve the
communicative skills of nonverbal persons with autism and mental
retardation significantly. In this paper an integrative review on the
effectiveness of FC is presented. After outlining definition, concept,
and some socio-cultural aspects of FC, the results of 37 controlled
clinical studies drawn from a sample of 343 persons are reviewed. The
main findings show that there is a highly influential facilitator
guiding effect in FC, and that no case in the sample examined has been
identified who demonstrates "unexpected communicative skills" under
FC. Overall, FC has failed to show clinical validity, shows some
features of pseudoscience, and bears severe risks of detrimental
psychological side effects. Some socio-political consequences in the
fields of education, health care, and law are suggested, in order to
protect the vulnerable group of nonverbal persons and their families.
(PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2005 APA, all rights reserved) (journal
abstract)
---
To make changes to your subscription go to:
http://acsun.frostburg.edu/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=tips&text_mode=0&lang=english
