Jason, Thanks for being so reasonable and honest and also sharing some interesting information about FC in that last post. I still don't really know a thing about FC, but what you wrote in that last email makes sense. I really don't like it when hype causes people to make bad decisions. Those people (the ones who make bad decisions) and the competitors of the hypesters lose out.
I still don't feel comfortable protesting Gupta's nomination on these grounds because I don't know why he featured FC in reports. There is one video of him reporting on FC that I didn't see. Since it was over 15 days old one would have to subscribe to see it. Though a free trial was available I didn't want to go through the process. I read everything else and I didn't find Gupta actively promoting FC, but he did not give clear information about it either. He might have made a summary at the end of each report stating that FC was only an effective therapy for a few and probably should only be tried after other therapies had failed. He also could have warned people who tried FC to be aware of deceptive and self-deceived FC facilitators. Instead the whole thing was somewhat sensationalistic and vague. I would understand if someone felt that this was reasonable grounds to protest against Gupta’s nomination. If I write a protest letter I may include my understanding of this situation in that letter, but I will emphasize the Michael Moore incident. In that case there was a blatant lying on Gupta's part and no serious apology after he was caught. There is one more problem with protesting against Gupta; if it actually makes a difference, some one worse than Gupta may wind up with the job. I will probably write protest letter anyway. Thanks for hashing this out for me. On Jan 9, 1:05 pm, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> wrote: > Isparklaria, > > You don't know the history of Faciliated Communication (FC). > Therapists have been using prompting systems to teach people > communication skills for decades, that is, you help the person use the > device and slowly fad back as much as possible. > > The FC's just packaged this training system, wrapped it in jargon, and > sold it along with a lot of hype. Many therapists and researchers get > annoyed when desperate parents and equally desperate clients get > snooped because advertising gimmicks--with FC, dolphin therapy, etc. > Most of the pseudo-treatments are harmless (only wasting time) > especially when done in conjunction with more effective ones. > > Does FC work sometimes? Sure because fading prompts works to teach > communication skills. FC is just a re-packaged prompting system > wrapped in an aura of mystique AND the hype/mystique/deception sets it > up for abuse by putting words in the client's mouth, giving parents/ > clients unfilfulled hope, and sometimes neglecting to engage in > effective training. > > This is pure speculation, however, people such as Gupta might like FC > because of the hype, which helps with media ratings. Whether or not FC > is beneficial to the client (and population served) should be the > ultimate criteria. > > Jason > > On Jan 9, 12:30 pm, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Jason, > > > So you admit that FC works some of the time. That is what more recent > > studies seem to indicate. It seems like the only problem with it has > > to do with the nature of the training method. It could be true that no > > method used other than FC, to train people on augmentive communcation > > systems would worked for certain people. If that is true than FC is > > something special. If not than it probably isn't unless there is some > > other benefit. The downside is the deception and self deceptions > > possible in obtaining results. But it seems like they have figured out > > how detect this main problem, so what's the problem and why is it > > discredited instead of just discredting the individuals who use it > > frauduantly? Why are they attacking Gupta over it? The only thing that > > I can figure is that the honest skeptics of FC like to make judgements > > and stick to them to the point of not even examining new evidence from > > credible sources. As far as the other Skeptics, I don't know their > > motivation is. > > > On Jan 9, 11:04 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > Isparklaria, > > > > There is not anything special about "Facilitated Communication". We > > > train people on augmentative communication systems all the time. It > > > is just teaching people to use technology (or techniques) to > > > communicate. Some people learn to use the technology/technique and > > > some people don't; some a litte; some a lot. > > > > Now having someone literally holding someone's hand while using the > > > communication equipment and the majority of careful studies indicate > > > that the hand-holder is frequently doing the communicating is > > > concerning. Augmentative communication systems are supposed to > > > increase the person's abilities to communicate to the world--not set > > > up a situation where world thinks that the person said whatever the > > > hand-holder wants him or her to say. The person is sort of like the > > > hand-holder's puppet. > > > > On another note: The fact that these researchers are affilitate with > > > Harvard is irrelevant. There are a number of researchers (Gina Green > > > is one) who've done work with Harvard or even taught at Harvard, > > > Columbia, etc. I even work with a Harvard graduate at my current > > > job. The data and research is more important than the school > > > affilitation. > > > > Jason > > > > On Jan 9, 9:25 am, Isparklaria <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Jason, > > > > > Are you saying that these studies that show that FC works in some > > > > cases are bogus? If you are saying that then please tell me why you > > > > are saying these studies are bogus. Are you saying that Dr. Weiss and > > > > Dr. Nisbet, the two men who made this list of studies, some of which > > > > were negative and some of which were positive got it wrong by > > > > including positive studies? > > > > > Cardinal, D. N., Hanson, D. & Wakeham, J. (1996). Investigation of > > > > authorship in facilitated communication. Mental Retardation, 34, > > > > 231-242. > > > > > "We examined whether facilitated communication users, under > > > > controlled > > > > conditions, could transmit rudimentary information to a na•ve > > > > facilitator. Forty-three students across 10 classrooms were shown a > > > > single randomly selected word with their facilitator out of the room. > > > > The facilitator then entered the room and asked the student to type > > > > the word, which was recorded exactly as typed and later evaluated; > > > > approximately 3,800 attempts were conducted over a 6-week > > > > period" (231). > > > > > "There were two main findings of the study. First, under controlled > > > > conditions, some facilitated communication users can pass information > > > > to a facilitator when that facilitator is not aware of the > > > > information, and second, the measurement of facilitated communication > > > > under test conditions may be significantly benefited by extensive > > > > practice of the test protocol. This latter result could partially > > > > account for the inability of several past studies to verify > > > > facilitated communication-user originated input" (238). > > > > > Sheehan, C. & Matuozzi, R. (1996). Investigation of the validity of > > > > facilitated communication through the disclosure of unknown > > > > information. Mental Retardation, 34, 94-107. > > > > "Three individuals (8, 10, and 24 years old with diagnoses of autism > > > > and mental retardation) participated in a message-passing format to > > > > determine whether they could disclose information previously unknown > > > > to their facilitators. Results showed valid facilitated communication > > > > from each participant" (94). > > > > > "The data from the current study lead us to caution that a phenomena > > > > as complex as facilitated communication eludes a cursory exploration. > > > > Each participant was able to disclose information accurately and > > > > deftly at times and was wholly inadequate in his or her attempts at > > > > other times...The developing picture of an individual's validity > > > > profile replete with the patterns of required support, inconsistency, > > > > language impairment, and strides towards independence may well be the > > > > only reasonable evaluation of a validity confidence level" (104). > > > > > Weiss, M.J.S., Wagner, S.H., & Bauman, M.L. (1996). A validated case > > > > study of facilitated communication. Mental Retardation, 34 (4), > > > > 220-230. > > > > > The case of a 13-year-old boy with autism, severe mental retardation, > > > > and a seizure disorder who was able to demonstrate valid facilitated > > > > communication was described. In three independent trials, short > > > > stories were presented to him, followed by validation test procedures > > > > with an uninformed facilitator providing physical support to the > > > > subject's arm. In trials 1 and 3, several specific answers were > > > > provided that clearly indicated that the young man, not the uniformed > > > > facilitator, was the source of the information. Moreover, some > > > > responses seemed to imply that the subject was employing simple > > > > inferential and abstract reasoning. The case study adds to the small, > > > > but growing number of demonstrations that facilitated communication > > > > can sometimes be a valid method of communication for at least some > > > > individuals with developmental disabilities. > > > > > Dr. Michael J. Weiss and Dr. Jan Nisbet contributed to this report. > > > > Dr. Weiss is a developmental psychologist at Giant Steps School in > > > > Connecticut, a private school for children diagnosed with autism and > > > > other developmental disabilities, and also is an adjunct professor in > > > > psychology at Fairfield University. He has been a faculty member at > > > > the Schools of Medicine at McGill and Harvard Universities and a > > > > staff > > > > psychologist at the Children's Hospitals in Montreal and Boston. > > > > Weiss > > > > has worked in private practice and has published numerous articles, > > > > chapters, and abstracts related to infancy, children and families, > > > > and > > > > developmental disabilities. > > > > > Dr. Nisbet is director of the Institute on Disability and a tenured > > > > associate professor in the Department of Education at the University > > > > of New Hampshire. She has conducted research and writing for the past > > > > 20 years on topics related to school restructuring and reform, > > > > transition from school to adult life, supported employment, self- > > > > determination, inclusive adult lives and aging > > > > > On Jan 9, 9:09 am, "Jason (Memphis)" <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > I definitely agree with this statement, "In my opinion anecdotal > > > > > evidence has some value, but only when the facts are reliable." Some > > > > > treatments used are based anecdotal stories if research isn't > > > > > available. However, when research exists, therapists are supposed to > > > > > go with the research findings and not the money trails. > > > > > > The key question is whether the facilitator or the person who is being > > > > > taught is controlling the movement of his or hand to communicate. > > > > > When this was investigated, it became obvious that when the > > > > > facilitator and learner were shown different objects, the object named > > > > > was what the facilitator saw, that is, the facilitator and not the > > > > > learner was communicating. There are a series of studies that were > > > > > noted in an earlier post. > > > > > > FC is a big money therapy because children who've never- Hide quoted > > > > > text - > > - Show quoted text -... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Memphis Freethought Alliance" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/memphisfreethoughtalliance?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
