Meltdown on the road

During the most recent IEP meeting I attended for my daughter, the superintendent of Student Support Services informed me that the school district sees no reason why Caitlin needs an aid on the bus, if I should ever allow the transportation company they contracted to take her to school again.  Well...we have very good reason to ask for an aid, and it was driven home to us in a big way yesterday.

Caitlin forgot a Ziploc storage bag full of little toys at school and realized it when we were five minutes away.  I told her they would be there tomorrow.  She had a meltdown.  People with kids who have autism know the difference between a meltdown and a tantrum, and this was a meltdown.  She threw her backpack into the front seat, threw toys, tried to pinch Jeanie (my significant other), and tried to grab and hit me.  She started crying and screaming.  Then came the big scare: she unlocked her door, unbuckled her seat belt, and opened the door while we were moving.  I immediately slowed down and pulled over.  We got out of the car.  Caitlin wanted to walk back to her school.  I wouldn't let her.  While I calmed her down, Jeanie set the child safety locks so Caitlin couldn't open the door from the inside again.

If I didn't have Jeanie there, I wouldn't have known she unbuckled her seat belt--which already had me slowing down to pull over.  If I didn't have her there, I might not have slowed down in time to make the opening of the door less dangerous.  If she wasn't there, I might have lost my child to a meltdown.  And here's another thing: I found out this morning that Caitlin knows how to switch the child safety locks.  Even if she hadn't seen someone do it, she can read, and the instructions are pretty clear on the door.  She tried to switch it before I could catch her this morning.

So...no aid on the bus?  No bus.  I suppose I should tell the story of what happened with the bus in the first place.  Caitlin was taking a van to school at first, but they switched her to another van after they added another child to the route.  It's understandable; they didn't want the other children to be in the van for an hour and twenty minutes one way (we are forty minutes away).  However, they put her in a van with a driver who apparently doesn't care whether kids get to school.  He didn't show up at the end of my driveway on September 12th, and he claimed to have stopped.  I can't trust someone who will blatantly lie to me and his supervisor to transport her to school.  I asked for alternative transportation, but the school will not provide it.  They said she can take the van she was on, or I have to take her to school.

They had a nurse on that van.  She was rude and combative with me from day one.  She seemed to be nice enough to my daughter, but I had two major problems with her.  First, she didn't even try to listen to Caitlin.  She mistranslated her constantly.  Secondly, she got Caitlin to repeat, "God bless you."  No.  "Bless you" is a cultural expression that has lost its religious meaning, but when someone throws "God" in there, it invokes religion where none is needed.  For fuck's sake, the expression comes from a belief that you're more vulnerable to demon possession when you sneeze.  Virtually no one who says, "Bless you," believes that nonsense anymore, but when you put "God" back in, you hearken back to medieval belief systems that have no place in this age of information.  I don't want my kid mentioning a deity she can't understand, either.  She is in a house full of atheists; "God bless you" has no place here.  It's not cute or funny to introduce religion to an autistic child with a language delay that prevents her from discussing and comprehending abstract concepts.

The school assured me that the nurse wouldn't make any religious references again, but I have trust issues with religious people since I was harassed at work years ago, and I will not trust the driver, no matter what.  He didn't get reprimanded, and the director of transportation even had the gall to tell me that he was "doing a fine job."  Really?  He not only neglected to show up at the end of my driveway on September 12, but he also lied about it and is okay with making me out to be a liar.  Would I spend an two hours and forty minutes of my day driving my kid to and from school if I thought there was any chance I was mistaken about the time I was at the end of my driveway?  Caitlin was watching the time.  We were there at 7:15.  She said at that time: "Van number of minutes?"  I said, "The van should be here in five minutes, kiddo."  Five minutes went by, and I heard, "Van number of minutes?"  I replied, "Any minute now."  Every couple of minutes until 7:35, I heard "Van number of minutes?"  I finally decided he wasn't showing up, so I went back into the house and called.  They said he called twice, the last time at 7:21, and said that I wasn't at the end of the driveway.  What I wonder is: where was he when he called?  It wasn't anywhere on my street.

Figuring out how to get my daughter to get along with the cats

Yesterday, Caitlin punched one of the cats, Paco, in the ribs, after becoming frustrated.  Obviously, this behavior is unacceptable.  Paco is as lovable as a cat can be.  He's friendly to everyone, playful, curious, and not at all skittish.  He's very social.  To his credit, he didn't retaliate at all, as one might expect (either fight or flight would be the result in most cases with the other two cats, I would think), but we have a real problem here.  Caitlin has to learn to get along with the cats and can't be allowed to think abuse of animals is acceptable.  

Caitlin has autism with a language delay.  Although her vocabulary is large, she does not have two-way, meaningful conversations.  She communicates her needs and answers yes or no questions, but an open question will not work with her.  Teaching her about respect for animals through reason simply isn't going to work in her case.

I did some research yesterday and this morning.  After encountering absolutely awful things people said about kids with autism, I did happen upon some useful information.  There are camps and programs, but they aren't accessible to me here (they are in New York; maybe I can find something in PA, though, given time).  The most useful thing I've seen so far is the social story.  Creating a social story with pictures about the correct way to interact with the cat and the correct way to handle her frustration seems like it could work.

Another bit of advice was to have rules.  Jeanie (my significant other) suggested that idea last night, and the presence of success stories regarding the use of clear, written rules reinforces her good idea.  Still another approach that we can use in conjunction with what I've mentioned so far is reinforcement of good behavior.  We've been using the promise of a visit to Chuck E. Cheese as a reward for being good all week.  Being good meant staying out of the "grumpy chair" at school and listening at home, but we can't let abuse of the animals slide at all.  However, the all-or-nothing reward approach doesn't do anything to reinforce all of the good things she's done this week.  She attended Jeanie's son's IEP meeting, where there was a room full of adults--a situation where she doesn't normally do well.  She behaved admirably.  She has been doing her shower on her own--turning on her own water, checking it, washing her own hair and body.  She has finally brushed her teeth willingly, without a fight.  She is doing very well in school, and has even received a reward from her principal for it.  All of these good things should certainly be rewarded immediately.  I think reinforcement of these good behaviors will encourage her to follow the rules and behave, as well as trying to do more things idependently.

Finally, a chart might help, or maybe a calendar.  Every time she demonstrates good behavior or does something new independently, she gets a sticker or a note on the calendar that says what she did and when.  She will get a mark on the calendar if she just gets through the day well, even if she doesn't do anything new or out of the ordinary.  If she does something bad like hitting the cats or refusing to listen, she will get a negative mark.  If she goes a whole week without getting negative marks, she gets a bigger reward, like going to Chuck E. Cheese or Guitar Center (she loves Guitar Center).  A park with a playground would be good, too.  

I am hopeful that all of these ideas in combination will get her to stop hitting--or even trying to hit--the cats.  Any advice from anyone who has been through a similar situation would be helpful.

Escalation

I really love my life at the moment.  I have a great woman in my life who makes me incredibly happy.  I love her kids, and I love my kids.  We have a nice house in a rural setting, set far off the road and away from neighbors.  I work from home the majority of the time.

Sometimes, though, parenting challenges me, and I hate myself for failures in administering discipline and keeping calm.

Last night was an example.  My daughter, Caitlin, gets more and more frustrated when things don't go her way, then does things that are rude and inconsiderate--but doesn't realize that they are rude and inconsiderate.  The following sequence of events led to her melting down and screaming at the top of her lungs:

• She requested that we call my mom, so after work, we called her.  We got her onto Skype.
• Caitlin wanted my mom to take the computer into the kitchen.  My mom didn't feel like unhooking everything and taking the laptop into the kitchen, so she refused.  It's a valid response.  
• Caitlin didn't want to see my mom anymore, because the view wasn't changing to the kitchen, where she would see the microwave, the oven, and the refrigerator.  She is obsessed with these appliances.
• After she asked to see "grandma's flowers" (when my mom doesn't have the camera on, it's  a picture of flowers on Skype, Caitlin would not stop interrupting.  She became more frustrated the more I told her to "stop" and "wait".  I stopped the conversation with my mom.
• I told Caitlin she was being rude, and she smacked the laptop.  I became angry and snapped at her, telling her that she is not to touch to laptop.  
• She wanted me to do her "Knocking on ____, bye bye _____" game (e.g., knocking on yellow flute, bye bye striped flute), and I refused, telling her that she needed to listen to what I was saying.  She became more frustrated.
• The more frustrated Caitlin became, the more violent she was.  She finally slammed the laptop closed, and I lost it.  I yelled at her to get into her room.  
• She laid down and put the blanket on her, but she came back out of the room.  I yelled more and got her back into her room.  She became more agitated and belligerent.  I became more irritated and frustrated, which made me more angry.  
• After she throw her Spongebob Squarepants keyboard at the door, I finally went into her room, put her on her bed, and held her down like they told us to do in a class I took in Michigan.  Supposedly, the child will eventually calm down.  Not Caitlin!  She screamed at the top of her lungs and cried. 

I finally gave up and got off the bed, repeated a few things, then turned of the light and closed the door.  She stayed in her room finally.  

Then I started hating myself for my actions.  

Yelling doesn't do a thing but make my daughter more irritated and frustrated.  Refusing to do that game she does to calm her does nothing but make her more frustrated and agitated, then violent.  Getting angry does nothing to resolve the issue.

So what should have I done?  How do I even discipline her?  Where do I go from here?

One approach would be to calm her down first, but instead of doing what she wants, take her into her room calmly and read to her, maybe with a little bit of her calming game on the way.  When she is calm, explain to her what she did and how she should behave.  Unfortunately, I have my doubts that she will recognize that she's done wrong and about whether or not she will understand my explanation.

Another approach, suggested by Jeanie, is to mentally prepare her for my mom's refusal to go to the kitchen.  Mental preparation seems to work with her more than most things, and we prevent the incident altogether.  This might work.

Still another thing I could do is print out a picture of my mom's kitchen to show her, rather than asking my mom to move into the kitchen for us.  

I know for certain that I have to take an alternative approach, because what I did last night didn't work.  All it caused was anger, frustration, and--for me--pain.  I have injuries that the activity aggravated.  We need to work on remaining calm, no matter what. 

My daughter's art show project

From May 2nd through the 4th, Caitlin's art project appeared at the Fine Arts Festival in Wadsworth Ohio, which was held at the middle school.  It's a close-up of an owl's face, done in various colors.  I put it up on DeviantArt for sale, if anyone wants prints.  Any money earned is hers, not mine.  If she gets a significant amount, I'll invest a percentage for her and put the rest into her therapy.  She can use some extra speech and occupational therapy.

You can view her artwork and buy prints at:

http://revelingindarkness.deviantart.com/art/Caitlin-Owl-Art-Show-453694772

Comparing autism to atheism?

You know what's immoral? Worshiping a deity who punishes finite crimes with eternal torment. 

You know what's immoral? Shunning your family members if they don't believe as you do.

 
You know what's immoral? Turning your back on your child if it turns out that he or she is attracted to members of the same sex. 

You know what's immoral? Believing in a book that condones slavery, misogyny, and the death penalty for such "crimes" as blasphemy, drunkenness, getting tattoos, eating shellfish, wearing material blends, and premarital sex. 

You know what's immoral? Thinking it's okay to believe in a book that condones forcing rape victims to marry their rapists. 

You know what's immoral? Asking a father to sacrifice his son to you. 

You know what's immoral? Telling people that they are innately wicked, so you can sell them salvation from the wickedness you've convinced them is at the core of their nature. 

You know what's immoral? Using autism as a comparison point for anyone's immorality, as if there's something wrong with autistic people.

Learned a new trick for the OCD speech repetition

Caitlin went to the zoo yesterday with my ex-wife and her grandmother for her half-brother's first birthday party.  She said she had fun, took a picture of a lion and a tiger, and she seemed happy...but she came home tired and overwhelmed, and ended up having a meltdown before bedtime.  The meltdown ended in tears, but at least she didn't throw things around or break anything.  It was just constant repetition, total frustration, a shutdown, then screaming and crying.

Kids have tantrums, and they're usually over something they want or attention they're not getting.  With a meltdown, it's about sensory overload, and kids with autism have to do something to get their minds in order, something to calm the mental storm to get back into a more peaceful, pleasant mode.

I learned a trick today, and the next time the repetition starts that marks the meltdown's beginning, I am going to try it, because it works with the OCD repetition.  I learned it from one of the aids at Caitlin's school.  They carry a whiteboard around, and every time Caitlin starts repeating something, they write it down.  Instead of Caitlin repeating it, she will read it from that point on.

I have a whiteboard somewhere around here, but I didn't have it handy when she came home from school, so I grabbed a notebook.  I wrote down things she repeated.  It calmed her very quickly and made her smile.

I'm going to work with this trick and see if I can make it progress to her writing it down herself, or perhaps typing it into her laptop.  Perhaps she can type it to me in a chat client, and I can type back to her...and make that interaction progress into communication.

Reflections on home therapy

While progress has been made in the area of providing autism therapy through insurance and through government sources, in many places, there's still an income component to the process of qualifying for it, and that usually leaves people like me out of the running.  However, I also don't have a lot of disposable income, so I have to do my own research and apply some therapy myself.  I have to become an amateur speech and occupational therapist to help my child's progress. I think it might be helpful to other parents to read about some of the things I've done to help my child along, so I will be doing articles from that angle.  This article is one of them.

When I first learned that Caitlin had autism, I started reading.  I bought a few books and looked up online resources.  One of the books (I do not remember which one; it has been years and I have all of my books in storage at the moment, anticipating my upcoming move) talked about socialization and eye contact.  Eye contact helps children with autism become more social, more affectionate, and more engaged.  It gave techniques on how to gain eye contact, and this one worked for us: I would choose a toy she recognized, hold it close to my face, and had her look at me before giving her the toy.  I turned it into a game with her--one she thoroughly enjoyed.  I worked with her for a few minutes the first time, then about fifteen minutes, then a half hour.  It wasn't long before she was looking me in the eyes.

An amazing transformation took place.  I have video somewhere of her fourth birthday, and if I find it, I will embed it here, because it really shows how she was before I worked with her.  She would not look anyone in the eye, only spoke in monotone, and had no expression of emotion whatsoever,  In a matter of days, she was starting to smile, laugh, and express herself as best she could.  She has a language delay; her vocabulary is huge, but her ability to hold a conversation isn't there.  We communicate, but we don't converse.  Still, she was showing positive emotion (and negative, of course), and even better, she engaged in affection.  She always wanted me to hug her and hold her.  

It's amazing to me how much progress she made, simply from getting her to have eye contact with me, and we formed a strong bond as a result.  It also helped her bond with other people later, because she could get feedback on how they received her from the expressions on their faces, which she wasn't reading when she wasn't looking at them.  How could she?  We can often process emotion from tone of voice, but what did tone of voice mean to her?  It was one more connection made, and it was huge.

Extended school year, moving, positive stuff

Today, I attended a meeting at my daughter's school to discuss the extended school year program.  Caitlin's teacher, Ms. Griest, went through all of the reasons why kids go through the extended school year program, most of which are academic.  It made me very happy to learn that none of those reasons applied to my kid, in spite of all of the school she missed this year.  She is progressing fine academically.  The main reason her school is recommending summer school for Caitlin involves behavioral issues caused by transitions.  Caitlin's behavior regresses when she takes long breaks from school (spring break, winter break, and summer break are the worst).

However, I'm moving in June.  The teacher is still giving me the recommendation, so hopefully I can take it to the new school district and get her enrolled there.  If it doesn't happen, there are other resources to explore in Pennsylvania, but it would be nice to get her acclimated to the new school environment.  I'll definitely be getting her private therapy after we move, and hopefully, somewhere to swim on a regular basis.  She loves swimming.  It's too late to get her into the camp this year, but one of the camps offers music therapy.  She showed excellent progress in a music therapy class in Michigan, so it would be great to give that another try. 

A few good things from the meeting: one, her teachers and principal just love her.  She might not be able to have a conversation, but she does comprehend things.  For another thing, she can type (she just seems unwilling to do so at home), and she likes it when people type messages for her to read while she's looking over their shoulder.  What I'd like to do is use a chat client (maybe develop one or find a free one) and type messages to her on her laptop, then see where that goes.  Finally, they expressed to my fiancee, who came with me to the meeting, that Caitlin got excited when talking about her.  

One more thing about Caitlin's school year that I brought up in the meeting was that I was happy to hear that Caitlin was instrumental in bringing another girl who was socially isolated out of her shell as the school year progress.  She hadn't been talking with anyone, didn't have friends, and didn't participate in class, but because of interaction with Caitlin, she slowly became more social.  Now she has friends and participates in class.  

Good news regarding my daughter

I wanted to share two bits of good news about my daughter.

First, she hit a personal care milestone.  I do not want to go into what it is, to save her future embarrassment, but I was a proud parent, and my fiancee was excited and proud, as well.  It was something that either she learned on her own, or her occupational therapy led to it. 

The second bit of news can be more public.  Until recently, my daughter had three speaking volumes: shouting, talking loudly, and whispering.  I tried telling her, "lower your voice", and she did!  I asked her if somebody taught her that, and she said, "Mrs. Doyle."  That's her speech therapist at school.

These two milestones came at a time when I've been a bit down about not being able to reason with my child the way other parents can.  And before anyone chimes in with, "I can't reason with my neurotypical child," yes, you can--they at least understand you, even if they don't accept your logic, advice, or simple word.  

She did hit a milestone last week that I did not mention: she started using people's names in response to "hello" or "hi".  So instead of answering, "Hi, Caitlin!" when people greet her, she now answers with, for example, "Hi Daddy!"  This milestone gives me hope for a meaningful conversation with more time and therapy. 

I just want to have a conversation with my kid

To the parent whose kid asked, "Why?" to the point where you finally said, "Because!  Enough!  Shut up, already!": I just want to have a conversation with my kid.

To the parent whose child wanted to talk in the morning, who responded, "Not now, I'm busy,": I just want to have a conversation with my kid.

To the parent who had to deal with the tantrum, and complained to anyone who would listen: I just want to have a conversation with my kid.

If my kid asked me, "Why?" and she just kept asking, I'd answer until I ran out of reasons, then I'd go to Google for more.  If I ran out then, I would just give the honest answer, "I don't know."  If she asked "Why?" again, I'd just continue on with it.  Get silly.  Make her giggle.  If only I could have that conversation with my child.

If my child wanted to have a conversation with me at any time, I'd make time, not just because she's important to me, but because that would be the most important thing in the world at that moment...because I can't have a conversation with my child.

Your kid has tantrums?  Mine does, too, but sometimes she has meltdowns.  Sensory overload.  But that's not the point.  Even during your child's tantrum, you were talking with that child, reasoning with him or her, and I can't, because I can't have a conversation with my child.

She can communicate her needs, and we can make plans in our own simple way.  We sing songs, play silly games, and go places together (usually the store), but I cannot have a two-way, meaningful conversation with my kid.  I can't find out what's on her mind, what she wants to be when she grows up, what she thinks about art, what her thoughts are on abstract subjects.

It's heartbreaking when I think about how I could speak with all three nieces and my nephew at much earlier ages, and I still can't have a conversation with my ten-year-old.

I'm not asking for advice, for sympathy, or anything else.  I am just expressing my frustration and painting a picture for parents out there who don't understand what it's like.

Life as it stands right now

In six days, my current relationship will be six months old, and it's going strong.

Anyone who has followed this blog from the beginning knows I was married, but I haven't really talked about the end of that marriage and what's happened since.  I could write about what happened between the time I met my fiancee back to the time my ex decided she wanted a divorce, but it's in the past, it's not going to change anything, and things are going so well right now, I don't want to dredge up the negativity.  To summarize briefly, we had terrible marriage counseling, I immersed myself in gaming, had a lot of deaths among friends and family, let things get a bit out of hand, finally regained control of my senses and finances, and figured out that I was better off without her.  It was just me and my daughter for awhile, then I moved back to Ohio from Michigan, near my mom.

     A few months after I moved, I met Jeanie in a mingling group on Facebook, and we found love.  We fell quickly and deeply, and it continues to grow stronger.  There are so many reasons we're together, but one of the points of compatibility is that she has a son on the autism spectrum.  He has Aspbergers.  Knowing the signs of autism, I could tell when I met him, but if people don't know, they just think he's a goofy, quirky, funny kid.

    Anyway, it's awesome enough that Jeanie and I get along the way we do; we have been told we inspire people to find true love, and we absolutely enjoy each other's company.  We both agree that we've never been happier.  I've never laughed more or harder, never had more affection or passion, never had so many reasons to love someone as I do Jeanie.  But the fact that her son and I hit it off is a huge bonus.

     I've taken him to the store with me a few times and once to get a haircut, and we've gotten to talk and laugh together.  He embraced me on the first visit, and he enjoys sharing jokes with me.  I helped him with his computer, as well, and he wants me to teach him programming.  Jeanie says it is not each for her son to get attached to strange men, but it happened pretty quickly with me, and I love the kid.

    My own daughter hit it off with Jeanie, though she does have problems with breaks in her routine, and we've had some issues when Jeanie was staying at my place the first few times.  When we went to Pennsylvania before that, she loved Jeanie right away, and got along with her very well.  Now she looks forward to the visits from Jeanie and her son, and asks when they're going to be over.  The aids at her school tell me that she talks about them all the time, excitedly.  Caitlin really wants to move to Pennsylvania, and she said it the first time we were there.

      Having a woman in my life who understands the autism spectrum and is such a great advocate for her own children is a huge benefit to our relationship.  It's not why we're together, but it sure makes life easier.  Jeanie has been great about looking into autism resources in Pennsylvania for Caitlin already.

     Jeanie has a daughter, as well, whom I've met, but I've not had much opportunity to interact.  She's a brilliant girl, into art and language, and I think we'll be fine.  It's hard to relate to people when you're really smart, so having someone else who is on her level around the house will be a welcome change, I'm sure.  Eventually.

     Anyway, I'm head-over-heels, crazy in love, and I've been riding that emotional high for almost six months now.  It's been wonderful.  It's done wonders for my outlook on life.  She makes me a better person.

   

Someone stole my daughter's CDs

My wife left her car unlocked accidentally when she came back to town Sunday evening, and overnight, someone got into her car and took a CD holder, mostly full of my daughter's favorite music.

Now, I'm not sure what the motivation would be to steal out of someone else's car in the first place, but once the thief discovered that the CDs had children's music on them, would it be unreasonable to think he/she might just quietly return the stolen items? Just leave them on the porch when we're not home?

I'm expecting too much out of someone who is unscrupulous enough to steal someone else's property in the middle of the night, I know, but man...I'm just so angry and saddened by this violation of our privacy.

People who have read this blog in the past know that my child has autism. She craves structure, and if certain music isn't playing when she wants it played, chaos ensues. Now, we do have some measure of discipline with her (she knows what "no" means and will often listen), but neither my wife nor I should have to deny her the music she likes because some jerk decided to come onto our property, open my wife's car door, and sift through her things in the console in between the seats, hoping for something valuable.

I'm sure the thief isn't going to read this article, but on the off chance that you are that person, are you happy? Are you happy with the copies you stole, which we made so we wouldn't damage the originals? Are you happy that you stole a kid's favorite music? Is your own kid enjoying it now?

It's just stuff. It is really just stuff. But hey, a person who would take my kid's stuff out of my wife's car might not care much about how wrong it would be to break into my house and take more of my kid's stuff. The thought of explaining to my kid that her favorite treasures are gone (little plastic toys she carriers around and collects; nothing very valuable to anyone but her, really) just makes me shudder, because she's not going to stop crying and screaming for awhile, and I'm not really going to be able to make her understand. She understands "broken", but not "gone", really.

A worse thought is that this person could break in when we're here, or when I am gone and my wife and kid are here, and do who knows what to them.

So now what? I'm thinking of canvassing the neighborhood, leaving a flyer on every door that explains exactly what this theif did. If nothing else, it will make the neighborhood aware that there are theives around. At best, someone might turn the culprit in to us.

I really just want my kid's music back. I can burn the CDs again, but it would be nice to know if this thief has a conscience.

Testing for Autism During Pregnancy

Recently, there has been a controversy regarding the possibility of a test for autism during pregnancy. With this information in hand, the parent(s) can make an informed decision on whether to continue the pregnancy, or else prepare for a challenging life as (a) parent(s) of a child with autism.

My problem with this approach is that it presumes that autism most definitely has a genetic marker, and that set of genes alone is responsible. Did they arrive at this conclusion only by analyzing the DNA of people with autism, or did they have a control group of randomly-sampled neurotypical people? Perhaps the genetic marker is really a way to tell whether a person is more susceptible to heavy metal poisioning or gluten/casein allergies, and the cause is partially environmental. The evidence that caused me to form my hypothesis that both are to blame involves a recent study that demonstrates a correlation between rainfall and the number of cases of autism in a given area. The more rainfall there is, the higher the number of cases of autism there are. To me, this correlation (though correlation is not necessarily causation) leads to the possibility that some pollutant (mercury from coal-fired power plants?) is getting into the ground water, then into our children's bodies. Some children can process this pollutant; some cannot.

Parents keep bringing up vaccines as a possible cause for autism. Many "know" that it's the cause. The contradictory evidence comes from a study done on children who have received the MMR combination vaccine. This evidence ignores the fact that there is no safe recommended dose of mercury for children under six months, and many vaccinations are given long before MMR. In the first six months of my daughter's life, she received twenty-six vaccines. Did any of them contain thimersol, a mercury-based preservative, or another, aluminum-based one? I don't know. It's worth studying. I'm betting on the atmospheric mercury from coal-fired power plants combined with moderate to heavy rainfall, but vaccines could still play a role. The way to tell is first demonstrate that cases of autism occur more frequently in places affected by pollution from coal (follow the acid rain path for this data; sulfuric acid raid is directly caused by coal's SO2 pollution, and mercury would follow the same direction), then follow it up by demonstrating that even more children have autism who have had vaccinations in these areas.

The bottom line for me is that no test for autism during pregnancy is valid until someone can show me that the sole cause is genetic.

Taking it up a notch (and Michael Savage is such a liar)

Michael Savage is so infuriating. I'm really trying hard to keep listening to maintain a current list of advertisers, and others are, as well (though there are precious few).

He keeps saying he was taken out of context. Well, I put him into context here. I argued originally that there was no context into which you could put Savage's attack on autism that would make it better, but it turned out that the real context made it worse. First, he talked about how he'd rather fund treatment of cancer and diabetes in America than AIDS in Africa, and then he went into why he didn't throw autism in with cancer and diabetes. That was the context. His sychophantic listeners forget so easily and don't bother to check; they simply accept that the context was what Michael Savage said it was, instead of recognizing what he did as an attack, and what he did susequently as complete spin--a frantic attempt to appeal to advertisers.

He keeps saying that Media Matters led autism advocacy organizations by the nose, as if they're all mindless sheep who wouldn't bother to check their facts before acting. Never mind that I am completely unaffiliated with any group, officially (though I get many newsletters and am on a few message boards); I'm just a loving parent of a daughter who happens to have autism, and I'm coming to her defense. It's not just Media Matters, Michael Savage. It's every parent who recognizes that what you said has been passed on to millions of people who will now suspect our children of merely being brats who haven't been told by their fathers to cut out the act, as you ignorantly said on July 16th. If they follow the work of your "expert", Peter Breggin, then they will suspect us of causing the issues our children have by abusing and neglecting them. That's what's making my blood boil more than anything. I would never lay a hand on my child in malice, and she is very far from neglected. My wife takes her shopping, to the zoo, to Greenfield Village at The Henry Ford, to restaurants, to preschool, to therapy...and I pay attention to her at home with conversation, games, puzzles, and lots of hugs and laughter. It took a lot of work to get those hugs and that laughter out of her, and it angers me to no end that someone like Savage could lash out in all of his intellectual laziness and outrage borne of ignorance in a way that will affect my child and cast suspicion on her relationship with her loving parents.

Savage said tonight that not only are his advertisers staying, but they're increasing their ads. That's funny, because AFLAC, Chattem, Boca Java, Prison Fellowship Ministries, The Heritage Foundation, DirectBuy, Roger Schlesinger, and Home Depot want nothing to do with him. There are other advertisers I haven't heard in a week, either. There are a few new ones, but this week, during his show, there have been advertisements calling for advertisers to support the Michael Savage show, and a couple of the advertisers who had their ads on last week didn't have them this week anymore.

Someone asked me how we can take it up a notch and really get after Savage. There are groups--Media Matters, for one--who are taking the approach of protesting stations who carry him and calling for them to fire him. I'm not saying they're wrong, but I think it makes a lot more sense to contact the companies who support him financially and educate them about Michael Savage's position on autism. No matter how he wants to spin it, the fact remains that Savage calls autism spectrum disorder a fiction. He talks about how "real autism" is "heartbreaking", but never defines what he means by "real autism", then follows up with an "expert" who dismisses all autism and other childhood disorders as the result of abuse and neglect, especially on the part of mothers. During his original attack, he disparaged minorities as dishonestly claiming that their children had asthma to get more welfare, when they are three to six times more likely to die of asthma.

When you contact that advertisers, focus on the facts. People want to make it into a First Amendment issue, but commercial radio involves company image, and no company wants to look bad by associating themselves with someone who will attack children, women, and minorities in the same segment (except Talk Radio Network, apparently). When they have withdrawn their support to the point where the stations that carry him can't afford to do so, he will still have his freedom of speech, but he won't have a nationwide platform from which to exercise it. He has no inherent right to be financially supported on commercial radio.

Help me educate his advertisers. I need more people in more markets listening to his show, preferably in shifts (listening to his show every day will take your IQ down ten points, I swear, if it doesn't give you a splitting headache). I certainly would love to take turns with someone in the Detroit market, and so would others in their markets. If you want to help with this effort, simply listen for the commercials during Michael Savage's show and note the time and company name (with phone number, if you're not sure of the name's spelling, and if they give it), then send it to me at gregtreich@comcast.net. I am keeping these logs so when advertisers tell me that they don't advertise during his show, as so many have claimed, I can give them days and times when their ads were heard. Please tell me the station and city, as well.

Boca Java Responds

Stefanie Hochstadter of Boca Java responded today by saying that Boca Java has not advertised on the Michael Savage show or with the network for more than a year.

I am not reproducing the letter here because there was a privacy notice at the bottom of the email. I know that these notices are not legal and binding, but I've given you the gist: another advertiser is not claiming association with Michael Savage.

Just what is going on here? Only one advertiser so far has admitted to having knowledge of being a current advertiser on the Michael Savage show: Directbuy.com. They chose not to renew the contract. Geico claimed in a response to me that they advertise indiscriminately, and to another person that they pulled their support for Michael Savage years ago (probably from the MSNBC show he had). Either none of these advertisers know that they've bought advertising spots during Savage's show, or their ads are airing without their knowledge and without payment. The former scenario seems more likely to me, but I would really like to know. Do the stations run advertising during Savage's show to make it appear as though he has more financial backing than he really does?

I wonder if there's a way to find out how the bills get paid at a given radio station.

Geico Responds

I received the following message from Geico:

____________

Dear Greg Reich:

Thank you for your Internet request.

Thank you for using GEICO’s online services.

Thank you for sharing your concerns with us. Let me assure you that we value your opinion and your business.

We purchase our advertising through a national media buyer and it appears on television stations and radio stations throughout the entire country. GEICO has no contract with any specific show, station, or channel. GEICO does not take positions or endorse opinions on stations where our advertising is run.

GEICO has long been, and continues to be, an insurer for everyone. As with any large national insurance company, our customer base is comprised of individuals who represent virtually every position on every issue. We support the first amendment rights of our policyholders and we strive to provide them with exceptional customer service, without regard to their views and beliefs.

If you need assistance, you may reply to this email. We are available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

We appreciate your business and look forward to serving your insurance needs for years to come.

Please let me know if I can be of any further assistance.

Sincerely,
Brian Moshier
GEICO Internet Representative

_______________

Essentially, they're telling me that they do not endorse opinions, but their advertising dollars do just that; as long as Savage has financial support, he has a megaphone through which to shout baseless claims about autism.

The First Amendment rights of their policyholders aren't at issue here. The issue is that someone with national syndication--which is only possible with the support of advertising--is saying something that hurts children with autism and their parents, and Geico is part of that financial infrastructure. They most certainly can choose not to advertise during Savage's show; the association of their company with Savage certainly damages their corporate image, especially as other advertisers withdraw their support.

There was actually a spot on the Savage show tonight calling for entrepreneurs to advertise. I found that plea encouraging.

What I am doing now is writing to the advertisers I actually hear during the show, letting them know what time I heard their advertisements. It reduces the number of responses I get that tell me it's false that they advertise on his show.

Has anyone else received responses from anyone on my list at the right? I know AFLAC allegedly withdrew support, but I have never seen an official response, and I heard a commercial for them the other night.

Inspiration from the North

On July 25th, in the midst of the Michael Savage autism spin, I received an email from Leah Bortolotti from Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. Her daughter, Sophia, has autism. Her son, Josh, has become a prominent national figure in Canada, and he's only fourteen. The following article details what he did at age eleven on behalf of his sister and every child in Canada with autism:

<http://www.canada.com/ottawa/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=10cb2740-0200-4e77-8c6f-973c83f26922>

Here is Leah's description of her son's activism to date:

"Our neurotypical 14-year-old son, Josh, has been single-handedly doing an autism fundraiser annually for the past 4 years (door-to-door pledges) and has now raised just over $20,000 for autism charities. The past two years have been for Autism Speaks. He advocates on every level for his baby sister, and has been recognized here in Canada in national newspapers, CTV National Television News, and most recently as a runner up in 2008 Canada's Top 20 Under 20 Awards. His unselfish motivation has graced him with some friendships of important people that are impressed with his accomplishments, and brought more awareness to ASD. He has become friends with Nickelback, Rich Little, and other Canadian celebrities."

I hope this young man's story and that of his family moves you as it has moved me.

The Audio That Started It All: The Context, What Was Overlooked, The Spin, and The Apologists

Here is the audio that started the whole campaign to remove Michael Savage from the radio. Note that I chose to post a video with the preceding context this time:




Here's the transcript of the preceding context:

"But I'm really getting pissed off at the world. I really am. I feel it. I feel it today in particular. When I hear Paulson, the Treasury Secretary, not giving a straight answer to a real conservative Republican, when I read that Bush just slapped us in the face again, and raised the ante on money to Africa for AIDS and malaria from $15 [billion] to $48 billion with a stroke of the pen, without the people's input, I'm telling you, I don't know which way to turn.

"What kind of government is this that can write checks to bail out friends on Wall Street without any oversight by the people, and can write a check for a bunch of degenerate bums in Africa who are going to rob the money, on top of the drug company thieves? Do you think it's actually going to treat people in Africa? I'd rather treat people in America who have cancer. I'd rather treat people in America who have diabetes. Don't get me started on this!"

When I wrote my original article on Michael Savage's attack on autism, it was based completely on what came next. My argument has been that it doesn't matter what context the audio was in; what he said stood on its own and could not be legitimized. I stand by that assertion, but the context is important in light of the subsequent spin. Before I posted my original piece, I had heard the audio I transcribed for you above, and it was obvious to me that there really wasn't a context; he just said the next thing that popped into his head. Basically, his thought process appears to be "I'd rather treat cancer and diabetes, because they're real diseases. Now I'm going to tell you about something I think is not a real disease and does not deserve funding." I don't know how else to take it.

"I'd rather treat people in America who have cancer."

"I'd rather treat people in America who have diabetes."

The implication of what comes next in the audio is that he'd rather NOT treat autism.

"Now you want me to tell you my opinion on autism, since I'm not talking about autism? A fraud, a racket."

In my original article, I mistakenly replaced the "not" with "now", but "not" is the correct word here. He was saying, "I'm talking about funding cancer and diabetes as legitimate diseases that deserve funding, but NOT autism."

Savage is now in spin mode, of course, but remains not only unapologetic, but indignant that anyone could ever think he'd attack children with "real" autism. He made an absolute statement about autism first, then changed the "fraud" to "99 percent of the cases". But first, he went into something that the media is currently overlooking, that the autism community seems to be overlooking, and that the minority communities are overlooking, unless I have just been missing their outrage. I caught this part and gave an opinion on it in my original post, but I want to bring it back up, because I think it's a twisted bit of audio:

"For a long while, we were hearing that every minority child had asthma. Why did they sudden--why was there an asthma epidemic amongst minority children? Because--I'll tell you why. The children got extra welfare if they were disabled, and they got extra help at school. It was a money racket. Everyone went in was told [mocking fake cough]. When the nurse looks at you, you go [mocking fake cough]. 'I don't know. The dust got me.' See, everyone had asthma from the minority community. That was number one."

No one has been talking about this venemous little blurb. I mentioned it, but I'm just a small fish in the ocean of the Internet. Media Matters, autism advocacy groups, and several other people transcribed and published it, but somehow, it became lost.

When were we ever hearing that every minority child had asthma? The tragic truth of the matter is that minorities are three to six times more likely to die from asthma than white children, depending on the group studied. I posted a link to an article about African-American and Puerto Rican children in my original post on this issue, and anyone who wants to research it can find plenty on Google.

Savage hasn't had to answer for these remarks. I mentioned them to several of the advertisers in my letters, but the focus has repeatedly been on autism. I'm glad that so many people want to talk about autism and are sympathetic/empathetic to the cause, but I just don't want people to lose sight of how disgusting this assertion regarding minorities and asthma was, and how it's been largely ignored.

Asthma advocacy groups might also want to give that audio some attention.

Moving on, I want to address the spin where Savage is now saying that he wasn't attacking children with "real" autism, and that the "ninety-nine percent" was hyperbole:

"Now, the illness du jour is autism."

In other words, the illness people--probably minorities, given the previous context--are using to get additional funding and academic help for their children is autism.

Savage's naked ignorance is overwhelmingly on display here.

Anyone who has tried to get extra funding in the area of special education knows that most programs are horribly underfunded and, as a result, inadequate. The preschool program my daughter attends does pretty well, but they could use quite a lot more in the way of resources, and the research-recommended approach of intensive, one-on-one daily therapy is impossible in the public school system. I am paying for additional therapy outside of the preschool to the tune of $780 per month, and I know there is a lot more I could do if I had the funds.

In addition to the lack of resources and funding, it's not as easy as Savage seems to think to get the therapy and extra academic help for autsim. A parent can't just say the child has autism; the child must be screened by a group consisting of a speech therapist, a psychiatrist, an occupational therapist, and a physical therapist. My daughter had to meet certain criteria to qualify for special education, and additional criteria to be in the autism class. It's not just a matter of getting a doctor's note or the word of a school nurse. Maybe things are different elsewhere in this country, but quite a few schools are facing funding crises, and funding is being micro-managed. Anything that sucked funding into one area of focus would draw the attention of the school board and would be addressed.

"You know what autism is? I'll tell you what autism is in ninety-nine percent of the cases."

Savage has told his audience (including me, since I've been listening to the show to gather an accurate list of advertisers) that the ninety-nine percent figure was hyperbole, and that children with "real" autism should get all of the funding and services they need. Now, had he accompanied this spin with an apology, saying that his attack was irresponsible and had no basis in fact, and he wouldn't still be going on about how the autism spectrum is fiction, I may have simply left him alone and forgotten about him. I have heard enough from him during "Right Wing World" segments on the Stephanie Miller Show to know that I wouldn't want to listen to his show (and I still don't, but I'm keeping on his sponsors until he has none or they've all responded). However, placing the spin into the context of his previous remarks, Savage is being disingenuous here. He followed "I'd rather treat people in America who have cancer" and "I'd rather treat people in America who have diabetes" with "Now you want me to tell you my opinion on autism, since I'm not talking about autism? A fraud, a racket." How does this juxtaposition NOT imply that he doesn't want to see autism funded through tax dollars? I'm talking about cancer, I'm talking about diabetes, but I'm not talking about autism. That's what he said.

Additionally, Savage claims in his spin-fest that the larger discussion was about drug companies and overdiagnosis of conditions. Now, I missed everything that came before he began to talk about Secretary Paulson, but unless the previous discussion was about how AIDS is also a fraud, a racket, and a largely misdiagnosed condition, I don't see how I can take the spin as anything but a bald-faced lie.

In any case, even if the new figure he's using, allegedly quoting (I can't find the original source) a Dr. Camarata from Vanderbilt University, that sixty percent of autism cases are misdiagnosed, is accurate, it would be difficult for someone whose child was misdiagnosed to get past the screening process at my child's school.

I looked up Dr. Camarata, and I noticed a link for TRIAD, or Treatment and Research Institute for Autism Spectrum Disorder. On their Common Questions About Autism Page, it says that autism occurs in 1 in 166 individiuals. Nowhere on the page does is say that sixty percent of cases are misdiagnosed. I emailed Dr. Stephen Camarata to see what he thinks of his name being used on Savage's show in the way it is being used, asking him to susbstantiate or refute the claim. I am awaiting a response.

"It's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is."

So...throwing out the ninety-nine percent as hyperbole and using the new figure Michael Savage now uses, sixty percent of children who have been diagnosed with autism simply have bad parents. He has made the claim, based, I'm sure, on the writing of Thomas Sowell, that the cases where autism is misdiagnosed include children with high IQs and late talkers. It very well could be that this sort of misdiagnosis would have been made quite often before more was known about autism, but there's much more to the observational diagnosis of autism than late talking and evidence of exceptional intelligence. There's more to it than simply having OCD behaviors, which can be part of autism. There's inappropriate play, lack of pretend play, lack of theory of mind/empathy...there is a range of symptoms that, when taken together, result in a correct diagnosis of autism.

The example Savage has been using quite often is Albert Einstein, who was notably a late talker. From many reports, Einstein was told to cut out the act, was called a dummy by his parents, and had a similar childhood to the one Savage recommends for all children. Did it make him speak any sooner? No. Setting aside a diagnosis of autism that Einstein may have faced today, did the parenting method Savage recommends work for Einstein?

Now, going back to whether Einstein would have been diagnosed with autism (there are several people out there who claim that he very well may have had Apergers): the claim Savage makes is that there would be no Einstein today, because he would have been labeled autistic and thrown into an institution. The reality is that during Einstein's childhood, it was much more common to institutionalize people with mental disabilities than it is today, so that argument doesn't hold water.

Also, what is the worst that would have happened if Einstein had received the treatments recommended for autism today? He certainly wouldn't have lost his IQ, would have he? He would have received speech, occupational, physical, and social therapy, all without medication, and he might have had less of a difficult time with his parents and teachers. Would it have caused him not to have gone into physics? Who knows? The theories of general and special relativity probably would have come later anyway; there certainly are scientists who are living today who understand them--they had to in order to build on the theories. Just because a name is a household name (who doesn't know Stephen Hawking? But my understanding is that there are other physicists out there more capable than he) doesn't mean that nobody could ever be as intelligent or capable.

"What do you mean, they scream and they're silent?"

Savage continues to be ignorant about the symptoms of autism, never really defining what he means by "real" autism. Screaming and silence are certainly not the only characteristics of autism. In fact, with Asperger's, the children talk early and incessantly. They have other specific symptoms; I'm sure it's the Asperger's children Savage dismisses as being in the "high IQ" category. In his eyes, they don't really have autism; that's part of his spin.

Let's just say for a moment that everyone with Asperger's just has a really high IQ, and isn't on the autism spectrum. Should they not get any sort of therapy? As someone with a high IQ, I can tell you that going through school without peers of any kind was really, really tough--until I decided to hide my intelligence as much as possible during my high school years. It simply wasn't respected. Really smart kids are often the social outcasts, labeled nerds and regarded as arrogant. Funding programs so high IQ children can have peers in their classes wouldn't be such a bad idea, as far as I'm concerned.

Getting back to reality, people with Aspergers certainly can have high IQs, but there are other symptoms. When I was looking for what could be going on with my daughter, I ran across several professional screening tools for Aspergers. Three of the symptoms that always appeared together were early, precocious talking, physical clumsiness, and social awkwardness. Along with the early precocious talking was the inability of the child to comprehend the speech; it would be scripted, memorized, and only understood later in life. Along with these symptoms had to be the presence of symptoms from each of six categories. I can't remember everything from the list, but it included clues like hand flapping, lack of empathy, lack of eye contact, and several other symptoms that look like autism. That's why Asperger's is on the spectrum.

I will repeat what my friend Angie suggested: take the spectrum people consider "normal", then throw autism on top of it. To me, this statement is a profound way of looking at the autism spectrum. The children may have low, average, or high IQs, but they all have similarities, as well. They are as individual as any other group of children, but they have that one thing or set of things in common.

I know it's not a requirement in order to be a radio personality, but wouldn't it be logical to research a subject before talking about it, especially after making an attack on people who are intimately familiar with it? Savage admitted to lining things up as a child and being obsessed with counting tiles on the bathroom floor, and asked if he would be diagnosed with autism because of that behavior. That's not necessarily autism. OCD behaviors are common on the autism spectrum, but OCD behaviors alone mean that you have obsessive compulive disorder; they don't mean that you have autism.

Maybe Savage is insecure about being labeled as having autism or Aspergers, and that's why he's so irate about the issue. Whatever his problem is (and I'm talking about his insecurity and/or anger issues, not the possibility of him having ASD), he's hurting parents and children by saying that there's one group with a real disability that requires intense treatment, and another group where the problem is bad parenting, but couldn't possibly be a disorder mistaken for autism that also would require treatment. He's still calling the autism spectrum a fraud thrust on the public by drug companies and the medical profession.

"They don't have a father around to tell them, 'Don't act like a moron. You'll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don't sit there screaming and crying, idiot."

Savage has since had an "expert" by the name of Dr. Peter Breggin, who resurrected the long-abandoned stereotype of the "refrigerator mother". Leo Kanner, who defined autism, labeled "cold, unfeeling" mothers as its cause. Breggin's assertion is that all of autism is the result of bad parenting. Michael Savage asked him directly if he believed autism exists, and his answer indicated that he suspected it didn't. If we need any further confirmation, we can turn to his book, Toxic Psychiatry. In chapter 12, which is entitled, "Abandoning Reponsibility For Our Children: A Critique of Hyperactivity, Attention Deficit Disorder, Learning Disabilities, Dyslexia, Autism, And Other Diagnoses", Breggin quotes research that links all childhood psychiatric disorders with child abuse and neglect. He goes one to talk about how Leo Kanner described autism as having to do with childhood upbringing--in 1948. Quite a lot of research has been done on autism since 1948! The chapter reads similarly to the quackery of people who denounce other science: the prevailing "ideology" keeps any papers that challenge it out of the peer-reviewed journals. That's why the quacks publish books--their professional peers don't have control over the publication of a book, nor can they stop it from being popular among people outside of the profession.

Apparently, Breggin hasn't updated his research on autism since he published the book in 1994. The American Journal of Human Genetics published an article in 2001 on genetic markers and autism. They found that chromosomes 5, X, and 19 were different in children with autism. Interepreting the findings is complex, but they would seem to suggest that autism has a genetic component. Also, with the multiple questionaires parents of children with autism must invariably fill out when seeking therapy, evidence of abuse and neglect would certainly be caught. A "refrigerator mother" would certainly be unable to talk about every detail of her child's behavior, because she wouldn't be paying attention, now would she?

I resent Breggin's resurrection of the "refrigerator mother" and the insinuation--no, accusation--that autism is the result of child abuse and neglect. My daughter has never, ever lacked affection. She has become quite affectionate with people she knows, but it had to come over time--and it wasn't for lack of trying on our part. I've never had a problem holding her, but I'm one of the very few in her life who hasn't. My wife certainly has no problems getting a hug or a kiss, either. We've never laid a malicious hand on her, either, and wouldn't think of it.

Savage attacked single mothers here, and insulted loving fathers who do take part in raising their children. Never mind that what he's suggesting is that we fathers verbally abuse the children we are around to raise. Discipline doesn't have to involve calling our children morons, putzes, and idiots. There is nothing constructive in this approach, nor is there anything in Savage's statement that would qualify as real discipline. Where is the correction?

Oh, and I can also tell you from experience that hurling insults at your child with autism will result in scripting (if your child is verbal at all), and you'll regret it. I have never verbally abused my child, but she did once wake me up at around 4:30 AM with a blow to my head with her electric guitar (she loves musical instruments, and even sleeps with them). I yelled the worst possible expletive I could yell before I knew what was happening, and she hasn't stopped repeating it. I've even tried to get her to replace it with something that sounds similar (e.g., fudge), but it hasn't worked. My wife once slipped and called her a "crybaby", and now she says it anytime she doesn't get her way.

Road rage is also not good around children with autism who happen to be verbal.

In contrast to my child, my niece learned to say "Bullshit!" when she was two. More accurately, my brother told her to say it, and she started repeating it with glee. I took her aside after seeing that her mother was getting quite embarasssed, and I told her to say "Bullpuckey!" It sounded a lot cuter, actually--but the point is that a parent/caregiver can do this sort of thing with a neurotypical child. Not so with a child who has autism.

"Autism! Everybody has an illness."

This statement comes back to Savage's insecurity about his own childhood behaviors being on the list of red flags for autism, not understanding, as I've illustrated, that it's a combination of symptoms and not one here or there that results in a correct autism diagnosis. Of course, that's if you buy into his spin. It could also go back to his original labeling of autism as "a fraud, a racket."

"If I behaved like a fool, my father called me a fool. And he said to me, 'Don't behave like a fool.' The worst thing he said: 'Don't behave like a fool. Don't be anybody's dummy. Don't sound like an idiot. Don't act like a girl. Don't cry.' That's what I was raised with. That's what you should raise your children with. Stop with the sensitivity training. You're turning your son into a girl, and your turning your nation into a nation of losers and beaten men."

Poor Michael Savage, always acting like a foolish girl as a child, crying his poor little eyes out.

Okay, that might have been a cheap shot, but he deserves it. It's too bad he didn't take his father's advice about not sounding like an idiot.

What if your kid is a girl? I have a daughter. Is she supposed to stop acting like a girl, whatever that means at age 4? Or is it that Savage is only concerned with boys? Or maybe only girls have this thing Michael Savage calls "real" autism, without ever defining it.

I could never take this guy seriously if he didn't have a radio show carried by 300-plus stations (some have dropped him since July 16th). He truly is a reflection of his father's child-rearing methods, though, because he makes a living insulting anyone with whom he disagrees without regard for intellectual dilligence, fact, empathy, or nuance, nor does he ever seem to suggest practical solutions for problems--he just complains about them.

"That's why we have the politicians we have."

Bad parenting is why we have bad politicians? Maybe, but I think that's a separate issue from autism. If 1 in 166 (or 1 in 150, whatever the current accurate number is; I'm using the TRIAD number because it's the most recent I came across) children have autism, that's hardly a majority of people, so it's not much of a voting bloc. That's just a weird conclusion to draw there, Savage.

Finally, we have the apologists for Savage. These people are the reason why I'm going after the sponsors. The apologists have painted him as everything but a simple entertainer to a full-fledged hero of children with autism, and it's making me sick, quite frankly. Here are the things I've been hearing and reading:

"He's just an entertainer."

No, people take him seriously, and say that he speaks the truth. He makes this claim himself. Furthermore, I have to wonder what sort of people are entertained by hearing that liberalism is a mental disorder, autism is a fraud and racket, homsexuals are perveted pigs who should die of AIDS, dissent should be met with arrest for sedition, Obama is a closet Muslim socialist, and the euthanasia of Terri Schiavo was the same as the beginning of the Holocaust. I suppose if no one took him seriously, or if his rants were taken as satire, which is Stephen Colbert's format, then it would be different.

"He wasn't talking about kids who really have autism."

That's what he claims, but that's after he made the claim that autism is a fraud and a racket, leaving a little loophole of one percent who have legitimate disorders. What he's done since is dismiss the autism spectrum, bring on an expert whose work suggests that he believes all of autism is the result of child abuse and neglect, and leave "real" autism undefined. He hasn't done a thing to educate his audience on what constitutes autism. Instead, his focus has been on how he has been persecuted, taken out of context, and maligned by the media and progressive groups--and how he's so heroic for bringing autism to the forefront of public dialogue.

No, Savage, you're no hero. Autism awareness has been growing without you. What you did was turn autism into a misdiagnosis, and you continue to do so by never defining "real" autism (if you say it exists, then you have to know what it is, right?), never educating your audience in any meaningful way on the subject. That's why you have to go.

"Media Matters is just trying to get rid of him before the election."

Media Matters has been pointing out what Savage has been saying for quite some time now. It's not like they made up something untrue about him, either; they simply passed on what he said to the American public. Now, he wants to shoot the messenger. He calls them Stalinists and fascists, which simply aren't compatible political worldviews; he calls them perverted, childless men. Also, to listen to Savage, you'd think Media Matters was the only group coming after him.

I'm coming after you, Michael, and so are a bunch of other parents (I certainly couldn't do it alone). There was no call for what you said, you're unapologetic about it, and we're now having to defend ourselves against your ignorant apologist listeners. I've already spoken to three apologists this week--one who was a listener and two who simply heard about the controversy and thought it had been blown out of proportion. Everyone has an opinion, and when you added fuel to the fire of ignorance, you made it harder for those of us who have children with autism, who are struggling to pay for therapy and struggling to help others understand our children, to gain and maintain acceptance in society.

"There are more important issues."

My child is pretty much at the top of my list of important issues. I want her to have a functional future.

Savage has thrown out references to obscure court cases that haven't been publicized, where someone is already going through the justice system, or has gone through it and the system failed (in his mind, anyway). It's a diversionary tactic, and it's really stupid. You can protest a court all you want; a jury is going to be influenced by the evidence presented in a case, both forensic and testimonial, and by the arguments of the attorneys. We don't try people in the court of public opinion. That's a good thing. We don't want to live under ignorant mob rule. Media sensationalism and political/special interest opinion would destroy anyone's right to a fair trial. Think about the O.J. Simpson case: how difficult was it for the court to find jurors who didn't have knowledge about the case or a firm opinion on it? Activism doesn't belong in the justice system; impartiality and objectivity should be the standard.

I've heard more from Savage apologists, but I think I'm going to end this extraordinarily long post here. My next piece will be more positive and inspirational, I think. I've been indirectly introduced to an extraordinary young man who has been advocating for his younger sister who has autism. The story of his family turns everything Michael Savage has said on its ear, and it moved and humbled me so much, I absolutely have to share it.

Till next time.

Just how ridiculous is Michael Savage, anyway?

I just had one thought that came from Savage's show last night. Before some of the segments of his show, they play clips from past shows (Please remember that I am only listening to this garbage to make sure my list of sponsors is accurate, and will never debate him point-by-point). One of those clips involved Terri Schiavo. Savage compared pulling the feeding tube from Terri Schiavo to the beginning of the Holocaust, linking liberals to Nazis in the process.

However one feels about the whole Schiavo ordeal, how could anyone in their right mind compare a euthanasia issue with the wholesale slaughter of millions of people to fulfill the sick fantasy of racial and cultural purity?

I guess if you listen to his show from the perspective of anticipating what ridiculously outlandish thing he is going to say next, it might be entertaining. I just find it disgusting.

Savage keeps saying that his rant about autism was taken out of context. I say that there is no context into which you could put his words to make them any less incendiary, and his subsequent shows have done nothing to make me feel any differently--he still denounces the concept of the autism spectrum as something made up by greedy pharmaceutical companies and doctors, casting suspicion on families whose children have the diagnosis of autism. He's saying that he's defending the defenseless, the children who really have autism, but he's actually hurting them--us, in the case of my family--by labeling autism a misdiagnosis in most cases.

In the time my wife has been on autism message boards (since Caitlin, our daughter, was two) and in the short time I've been on them myself, we have found that the autism community is quite skeptical of doctors (as just about anyone who has dealt with the health care industry will be--I really must talk about my back sometime and the six-month circus that occured before I had any sort of treatment). I encourage such skepticism; therapy for autism isn't cheap. I just dropped nearly $1600 down on classes that meet three days a week for a couple hours each day so my child can receive therapy from professionals. Savage probably would call this therapy a racket, too, but I've seen the progress my daughter has made in this time. She's really learning how to interact properly in social situations in a way that is fun for her. Her clarity of speech is improving. It was a real sacrifice in my current situation to spend that money, but the best research demonstrates conclusively that children diagnosed with autism respond best to early intervention. The longer parents wait, the more difficult it becomes to get the child to respond to therapy.

There is a physiological reason why early intervention works. Anyone who has studied childhood brain physiology (I know, it's a hobby for us all!) and mental development knows that when we are children, we have the ability to form more connections between synapses, known as dendrites. This physiology is the reason why we learn language best before the age of ten--the more connections we make early on, the easier it is to maintain them later. For the child with autism, the earlier the diagnosis, the more malleable the brain will be, and more likely it is that the brain can be "rewired" a bit to get around the issues associated with autism.

With the kind of therapy we're providing for our daughter, even if she didn't have autism, she'd benefit from the social interaction and the mental stimulation. The people who have been involved in her therapy at The Abilities Center in Walled Lake and at the Bussey Center in the Southfield School District have always want to involve the parents, as well; they send us information on what they're doing with Caitlin and how we can help.

I encourage skepticism; I denounce derision. The former is a quality rational, protective, loving parents have where there children are concerned; the latter is a quality Michael Savage has.

My exchange with Home Depot

Home Depot has denied and denounced advertising on Michael Savage's show. Since I heard a Home Depot commercial on his show with my own ears on July 18th on WDTK out of Ferndale, Michigan, I had to follow up. The following is my exchange with the Home Depot representative:

___________

Hi Greg –
The Home Depot does not currently advertise on The Michael Savage Show, nor do we have any kind of sponsorship in place with the program.

We strive to ensure that the programs we support through advertising reflect our core values. Feedback from customers like you plays a large role in helping us to maintain these standards, and this is why already have selected not to be an advertiser on this show.

Again, we do not advertise with this program and any suggestion of such support is false.


Thanks -

Sarah Molinari Corporate Communications Manager The Home Depot

___________


Hi Sarah Molinari,

If I had not heard the commercial on July 18th with my own ears, I would not have written my message. Geico and Prison Fellowship Ministries were not aware of their advertising airing during the Michael Savage show, and neither was Chattem (makes of Gold Bond). As the good representative of Chattem explained, her company buys in local markets, and not directly from shows. If Home Depot buys advertising time on radio stations the same way, it is quite possible for your commercials to air during the Michael Savage show without your knowledge. Again, I urge you to speak to anyone associated with Salem Communications or Talk Radio Network to let them know that you do not want your commercials aired during Savage's show.

I did not hear a Home Depot commercial during last night's broadcast. If I hear another Home Depot commercial, I will let you know. It definitely aired on July 18th sometime between 10 PM and 1 AM on WDTK out of Ferndale, Michigan.

Sincerely,Greg Reich

______________

Thanks Greg –

We have had reports of some NY area customers who claim to have heard an ad last week – is that also where you’re located? If not let me know where so we can check with that station too. We have confirmed that we did not purchase air time for any such time slot in NY (or elsewhere). You see we support many AM radio stations and weekend home improvement programs that run on these stations. Sometimes an ad will run in error during other programming, which we suspect may have been the case here.

Thanks for letting us know -

Sarah Molinari Corporate Communications Manager The Home Depot

___________