Facilitated Communication Calculator Responds Second Opinion
Second Opinion  |   January 01, 1992
Facilitated Communication
 
Author Notes
Article Information
Second Opinions
Second Opinion   |   January 01, 1992
Facilitated Communication
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, January 1992, Vol. 1, 23-24. doi:10.1044/1058-0360.0102.23
 
American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology, January 1992, Vol. 1, 23-24. doi:10.1044/1058-0360.0102.23
Biklen’s article refers to 3 individuals with autism who, with facilitated communication, now communicate content that belies earlier descriptions of the capabilities of such people. Once again, as a reader I find myself frustrated by the lack of descriptive information provided. Who are these people? What types of educational, social, and emotional experiences have they had? What about prior communication instruction? How did they get to the point at which they are now communicating? Earlier, I referred to these and previous accounts reported by Biklen and colleagues as anecdotal. In the present discussion, Biklen alludes to the successful use of this technique with 21 people. In returning to this source, we find that these 21 subjects were selected from an original group of 27. The 6 people who were not included “had a variety of other disabling conditions, including Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, and other physical and intellectual disabilities[italics added]” (Biklen, 1990, p. 293). We are also told that the 21 subjects are nonspeaking or speak only with echolalic expressions; all have been labeled autistic or display autistic behaviors.
First Page Preview
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview ×
View Large
Order a Subscription
Pay Per View
Entire American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology content & archive
24-hour access
This Article
24-hour access