Ethnographic Perspectives of Unreliable, Minimal and Non-Speaking Autism Associated With Apraxia.
John Damiao, Galilee Damiao, Jonathan Polanco and 2 others
Three autistic self-advocates describe their speech difficulties as a motor planning problem, not a thinking problem.
All three were misdiagnosed as intellectually delayed, then reassessed after gaining AAC access and the diagnosis was reversed.
Key findings
1The self-advocates describe their verbal output as reflexive and scripted, not reflective of their actual thoughts, while written communication through AAC reveals a higher level of cognitive and linguistic function.
2All three were misdiagnosed as intellectually delayed as children based on traditional assessments. After beginning AAC, each was reassessed and the original diagnosis was reversed.
3The self-advocates describe a double standard in how the professional community treats sensory processing versus motor function: sensory processing is accepted as not indicative of intelligence, but motor difficulties are routinely interpreted as cognitive deficits.
Still to come
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTsWhat it means for SLPs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Three self-advocates. Their accounts are not generalisable to the broader population of minimally or non-speaking autistic individuals. No formal assessments of motor or language impairments were conducted. The self-advocates' descriptions of apraxia are not confirmed by standardised clinical measures. The OT practitioner was both a long-term service provider and a co-author. The close relationship may have shaped what was shared and how it was interpreted. Auto-ethnographic writing is shaped by memory, selective emphasis, and narrative construction. The authors acknowledge this. The authors state explicitly that the findings should not lead to broad practice recommendations and are not intended to endorse specific treatment options.
Declared interests
The authors received no financial support and declared no conflicts of interest.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read three self-advocates' descriptions as evidence that apraxia causes all communication difficulties in autism, or that the specific AAC methods they used are proven effective. The authors state the findings should not lead to broad practice recommendations and are not intended to endorse specific treatment options.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →