Psychological Assessment and Communication

Facilitated communication is widely under scrutiny and doubt owing to the fact that one cannot ascertain the authorship of the typed messages. FC, as it is commonly known, is designed to assist a person with autism to communicate by use of a message board or even an electronic device. The procedure involves a facilitator supporting the hand or other body organ of the affected person with the intention of assisting them to point to letters or type on a provided display to formulate messages.

The intention of the physical contact is to provide support for the body organs and give stabilization and to enable them to slow down. It is also meant to assist such a person draw away from the keyboard before choosing the next letter. Rosemary Crossley is credited for introducing the method for the first time in the 70s in Australia. It was first used to handle people with cerebral palsy problems. The 1980s saw the method applied to people with autism.

The approach was especially popularised and made use of commonly in the USA by one Douglas Biklin in the early days of the 90s. The central objective of FC is to enable individuals to communicate independently. Anecdotal and descriptive reports show that the messages that emanate from those using FC have indicated unexpected levels of literacy and communication skills at a high level. Most of the learners have been observed to apply standard grammar rules.

More intriguing is the fact that these learners do not show as much language characteristics displayed by typical autistic children including pronoun reversal and echolalia (Supporting school age students on the autism spectrum, 2014). The proponents of Facilitated communication hold the view that communication problems experienced by autistic people are limited to movement disorder. Thus they are not cognitive or intellectual. If physical stability and emotional support is provided, it is hinted that any physical difficulties connected to expression will be solved.

This means that if these conditions are addressed, the affected people can communicate effectively. The facilitation provided under FC occurs in a form of hierarchy. Hand holding with the index finger isolated is placed at the top of the procedure. The next points of support include wrist support, forearm, and elbow support. Touching the shoulder and pressure are left for the latter stages of the hierarchy of support. Several authors and proponents of FC have outlined details and worries with regard to FC.

They point put the need for the facilitator to be more proactive and responsive as the intention of movement by the client. They say that there is the risk of such facilitators responding to their own triggers and beliefs and creating a perception (Supporting school age students on the autism spectrum, 2014). Positive communication results have been observed in descriptive reports and case studies per case. There have also been remarkable communication outcomes. There have also been great abilities observed on the learners under observation.

Studies that have tried to explore experimental options have proven beyond doubt that FC is still ineffective and that the communication that emanates is influenced consciously or subconsciously by the facilitators. Facilitated communication is an intervention that remains controversial and unsupported by research. It is therefore not recognized in most formal settings as an option for intervening appropriately for those with communication difficulties including autistic people. The American Psychological Association and the American Speech Language Hearing Association have expressed their take on FC.

They, generally, conclude that FC is still an unproved communication procedure that remains devoid of scientific research backing. There is still little evidence to support Facilitated Communication. Instead, there is plenty of contraindicative evidence to what the outcomes of FC have been claimed to be. Thus, Facilitated Communication is not one of the recommended communicative interventions recommended (Supporting school age students on the autism spectrum, 2014). There are many specific activities that raise the immediate risks that a person with autism or serious mental retardation faces in modern society.

One of these is.