New Study Attempts to Prevent Autism in Infants Through Mother/Child Bonding
The UW’s Autism Center has begun looking for 200 Seattle-area infants, 6 months old or younger, who have an older sibling diagnosed with autism. They will be part of the first study designed to prevent autism symptoms from developing in children who are at high risk for the disorder.Another article in a Seattle paper cites autism blogger Kristina Chew, who explains that "preventing" autism is controversial, since some people feel that autism is not a disability:“This is the first trial to attempt to intervene and treat infants who are at risk for autism at the earliest time that symptoms are present,” said Annette Estes, associate director of the UW Autism Center and research assistant professor of psychiatry and behavior science, who will head clinical assessment component of the new study.
“Other research has shown that the earlier the intervention the better the outcome in treating children with autism. One of our goals is to be able to identify autism as early as possible before obvious symptoms show up so we can intervene while the connections in a child’s brain are still plastic.
“At the same time we will be trying to identify early risk factors for autism, something we could do if we had genetic markers. Right now we can’t reliably identify autism until about 24 months of age. We will be looking at genetics, neurobiology and a number of early behavioral measures to predict which children will develop autism,” she said.
Infants selected to participate in the prevention study will be given a preliminary assessment and then will be divided into two groups. Half of the infants will be monitored by specialists and referred for community treatment. The other infants and their mothers will participate in an intervention at the UW Autism Center that promotes first relationships. Mothers will be trained to engage their infants in eye contact and each mother and child will be videotaped interacting once a week for nine weeks.
All of the children in both groups will be evaluated when they are 12 months old. Those in the UW treatment group then will participate in an early intensive intervention program. At 24 months, the children will be re-evaluated to see if the intervention reduces the symptoms of autism.
"I think the general feeling is being autistic is part of being human," said Chew, who added that treatments described appeared helpful. "If we are going to prevent autism, are we going to start preventing other differences in human beings?"
Kristina's point is well taken - one can certainly see this move as the first toward the edge of a slippery slope. But there are other issues to consider as well. For example, they seem to feel that simply connecting infants more fully to their mothers (and only their mothers) through eye gaze and other techniques can actually prevent autistic traits from forming.
If their study holds water, it would suggest that autism - with all its complex uniquenesses - is really just a lack of connection with mom. This, in itself, seems like a very slippery slope indeed. It implies that, if only moms were better at connecting with their infants, those infants' brains would never have developed autistic tendencies.
Do the words "refrigerator mother" ring a bell?
Comments
I’ve also noted a similar suggestion that parents are not “connecting” and providing the right (emotional) environment in some accounts of Floortime (as in this post). Thanks for the mention and best wishes in 2008.
I am also concerned about the language of the study: “prevent” autism. I wish that the focus was more about teaching and helping kids in a way that helps them function, but also respects their differences.
I also found it strange that it appears that the only skill they are targeting is eye contact. Many people with autism find eye contact very difficult, and believe that it hinders, not helps, their efforts at listening to and comprehending others. I think that interventions should target more useful skills. However, for infants I’m not sure what that would be. Baby sign language, maybe?
I also noticed that there was no mention of a “control” group (unless I missed it). It said that one group would receive “community treatment” and the other would participate in the mother-child bonding study. What if these children were not autistic in the first place? Then, it would look like their autism was “cured” even though it was never there! Was I reading that correctly?
Although I am all for pre screening the siblings of our autistic kids, to imply I didn’t or wouldn’t try extra hard to watch for and apply what I learned with the first, is out and out crap.
So glad there is a new study to insult and make parents, especially moms feel worse.
“Do the words “refrigerator mother” ring a bell? ”
Yes they do. Hard to believe they are heading down that path again.
I can’t believe this. Of course, this is why I left Seattle. My son is now 29, and I fought for years and years against the stigma of being a “bad” mother, and blamed for “making” my son autistic. Autism does not need a cure – it is simply a different way of relating to others. PLEASE – read Jim Sinclair’s essay “Don’t mourn us” to gain wisdom and insight into this puzzling condition.
What is wrong with these people? I have a great bond with both my boys, and my son with autism had always looked me in the eyes and showed affection with me (one reason that I did not think he had autism)
Yikes! If I would have held, sung, loved, kissed, wooed, gooed, cuddled, slept with, immersed myself into my child anymore than I did and still do, we wouldn’t be two separate people. I think it is upsurd to suggest this with all that we do know about autism. This makes me ill because we know that public money is probably funding some of this type of &(%#!!!!
I did attachment parenting with my child. The method Dr. Sears rights about. I was with my kid 24/7. My years as a preschool teacher and attachment parenting technique is why I knew something was up with my son by the time he was 3 months old. I brought him to different doctors told I was a worried new mom and that I needed to back off. Now this study is saying I was not involved enough with my kid. We can’t win. Plus how would these people doing this study explain the new research into Fragile X and the turning off of autistic behaviors in Mice with the syndrome by suppressing a certain protein? If the mommy mice had paid more attention to their genetically altered to have Fragile X babies would the protein been suppressed?
Disgraceful! A huge waste of time and money. Send all the mothers on another guilt trip! As my son’s pediatrician said to me at his 18 month old check up, when he still was not babbling. “Oh no, he can’t have autism. Look at how much he loves to hug you and smiles in your face!” Well…that’s not the whole story is it?
Yes, finally somebody is on the right track! Mom’s need to touch they babies 24/7 literally!
Veronica, did you really hold and touch your baby 24/7? Carried him in a sling and did not strap her/him in a car- or stroller seat longer than few minutes at a time the most? Did not live him with dad, baby sitter or anybody else for any period of time? I have tought long about the autism rate among babies who have been with they mothers truly 24/7 the first cuple of years. I feel that baby will be damaged little each time she is not in her mothers present and would like to know is out there autistic child who truly was with her mom 24/7 the first 2 yers.
Dr. Phil Bate, a pioneering psychologist with biofeedback and nutrition has designed a vitamin and nutritional diet for pregnant woman to prevent autism by removing toxic chemicals from the mother and baby on the way. You can check out a video at the address given, and go to drbate.com/Ref/autism.html to learn more.
Peter Jason Meilahn
Psychotherapist
Vice President
BHI Inc.