I attended school with Tim as a fellow student and this has been absolutely mind blowing. I literally wept, Tim you are an incredible human being and I so regret not giving you the time of day you so deserved!! Best of luck in all your future endeavours Tim!
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy. do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
An enlightening video. Reminds me that patience is essential for us to understand others in our world when our own world is so full of clips, sound bites and non-priorities that we prioritize. Tim Chan is a brave young man who will make a difference if we pay attention.
Hi Bill, I saw this video for the first time last week and I had the same reaction.It would be great for us to slow down and see the world for what it offers and needs.
Eight years ago, I would have responded like a lot of these naysayer commenters who call this Ouija board pseudoscience. I thought my nonverbal son was cognitively impaired, but I have seen with S2C (Spelling2Communicate) that he is intelligent and has been terribly underestimated all of his 20 years. My husband is like this mom. He always believed our son was intelligent, despite his wild rages and odd behavior. He was right! He can spell long words and express his thoughts using a stencil board now. Hopefully, he will be like this awesome young man someday! 👍 The training takes hours and hours, but it is worth it!
How wonderful that Tim's great mind is not lost to us. This is another story of mother love but also the practical help that parents need to all their children, to reach their potential. Language is power and I look forward to Tim's sharing of his ideas with us.
Loved watching this. I know I need to hear from more people who are non-speaking. Ideally, this means hearing not only about their specifically autism-related experiences but also about their other interests and expertises. We need that. We need to connect with each other. Of course, that also means we have to learn patience and work to make the world more accessible for a wider variety of people. Also? As someone who often does things like scratch/rub my scalp then smell my fingers (though I usually am able to avoid doing so around other people), I could relate to a little bit of what I was seeing. I appreciate that. I'm elsewhere on the spectrum. I don't have the same struggles. But to see someone else engage in similar... I guess it's called sensory-seeking "behavior"?... it's nice.
How very true Ted I will show this to my grandaughter who has autism you are an inspiration Ted you are am author already,God bless you and mum keep dreaming and beleiving
Can mum look away from the keyboard whilst Tim types. Can she rest a hand on his knee instead of his shoulder. Can he type with another person or just mum. Can he type anything independently. So many questions.
I think the reason why Tim is successful while the others are not because the other facilitators are not the non-verbals' family member--thus the only incentive they have on each person's case is that the fame, money and reputation that came from being able to make this innovation works--which seems like an overnight success for them. Tim's mum spent 8 years to make him being able to be like this. That is hard work. And surely there would be no experiment that can handle the financial burden of years of observed facilitated communication with enough samples and standardized exposure and skill of facilitators for each disabled people to create a reliable result. How many hours would Tim's mother spent each day to teach him and accompany him? This is purely the miracle of mother's love.
@@420troll4 If I understand you correctly and you think it's in fact his parents using him as a tool, could you provide evidence for this? I've read a book by him and it seemed fairly genuine, not like something a non-autistic person would be able to easily make up.
@@matejblaha4659 all test ever done with FC have shown that it is false. you could easily test this guy - ask him a question his facilitator doesn't know the answer to.
This is strange. Most of the time I have read that this technique does not work or that it is even harmful. But I wonder why some people instantly believe that no communication means a sad existence? What is it to have a normal life?
the technique of facilitated communication is argued about, but thats more when their wrists are being held and hard to tell whos controlling. Her hand on shoulder though allows us to see that he is in full control of his arm while her pressure reminds his body to focus a lot of energy on typing with that body part
Surely you can't be serious? Imagine spending your whole life in a 'locked-in' world, never being able to tell anyone else what you're experiencing, what you need, and what they mean to you! It would mean never having any influence or control over what happens to you and no agency as a human being. It would be a nightmare.
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy. do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy. do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
I just watched the video "Prisoners of Silence" and it's important to note that most of the people were not even looking at the keyboard. It's impossible to type with one finger without looking as you have no point of reference as they displayed in the documentary. Tim IS looking although he does seem to be off in space some times. There's also something about Tim that I noticed that I didn't see in the other video. He is much more receptive to social cues. He makes lots of eye contact with his mother which is highly unusual for those with Autism. Is it possible Tim is higher functioning on the spectrum and that's why this is working for him so well?
+Notorious Lee He has to be intelligent enough to understand both language and spelling. By researchers' definitions, IQ over 70 is "high functioning". Others use the term differently, but the people I admire consider it useless and dehumanizing. One of the wild claims about FC during the 90s, was that it worked with everybody, and there was no such thing as intellectual disability.
While eye contact can be difficult for people on the spectrum (like me ^.^) it is not something that is always impossible. The idea that non-verbal = low IQ/intelligence is a really, really bad idea. There are many non-verbal autists who are incredibly intelligent, but just need a different way to communicate words. There are many verbal autists who are not very intelligent. It's not a catch all. Also, eye contact with someone you know and trust very well is way, way, way, way, way, way easier than eye contact with people you don't. I have a much simpler time looking my mom or my brother in the eye than I do even friends, and much less someone I don't know. With people I don't know, it can be absolutely impossible or a very scary experience, but then I can go home and look my mom or my kiddos in the eyes. Sometimes I can't look anyone in the eyes. Eye contact is less likely, not necessarily "highly unusual". It's just that allistics use eye contact so much that when autistics don't use it, it throws them off, so even when we (in our minds) use lots of eye contact, it is seen as a lack of to allistics. Also, short spurts are easier. I can maintain eye contact in job interviews (though it's really difficult a lot of times)
Eye contact is something that can be difficult, especially if you are focusing on other information. To clarify, eye contact is an information input. If you are trying to understand a person talking, and you are focusing on the audio information and interpreting that, the visual/social information of eye contact can distract from listening. Eye contact does serve a purpose though. In this video (humbly hazarding to speak for Tim - apologies for the intrusion) I think he is having a non-verbal conversation with his mother. In this instance his anxiety and sensory inputs are distracting from his typing and he turns to her to get reassurance that all is well and that "you've got this" so he feels safe to continue. It would probably be harder to organise words, or listen to verbal input while also making eye contact, but as the function of a look is non-verbal communication and reassurance.. it's one thing at a time, rather than a distraction.
Clever Hans 2014? Can the boy answer to questions that the facilitator has not heard? It is actually quite easy to test whether this is "real" or not. So, why haven't they done it? Is it perhaps because the mom does not let herself to be tested? That's the ordinary case with FC: the people have invested so much emotionally to the trick that they are unable to face the fact that the method is bogus. See in youtube: Prisoners of Silence. v=CzCGux7qD1c
I was wondering the very same thing as I just watched three different videos. I believe Tim to be a little more on the "higher functioning" of the autism spectrum given the fact he responds to social cues and engages in eye contact with his mother. Perhaps FC can work for those who are non-verbally communicative but are somewhat able to communicate non-verbally to some degree. I have seen other reports on Autistic children communicating via typed words with no "facilitation" at all. I do think this is somewhat possible depending on the individual and where exactly they fall on the spectrum.
+Notorious Lee My preliminary reaction was also that this might indicate that FC is not all bogus. But after a while doubts arose, and I asked myself: if this is the case, then why must the mother keep her hand on the shoulder of the boy all the time? It makes no sense: if the boy can understand the questions and can find the right keys as he obviously does, there is no reason why such support should be needed. Now, if you look other videos of Tim carefully, the mother is constantly shifting the position of her hand, pushing the shoulder gently and so on. In short, she is giving cues. Until a double-blind test is made, there is no reason to believe that this is anything but Clever Hans effect, and that the boy is only rather talented reader of the cues that her mother transmits. As for those kids who are able to "communicate" without facilitation, before taking that as an "evidence", I'd like to know about some genuily scientifc research concerning it. Are they really communicating, or might it be the case that they only have memorized strings of letters that the facilitator has teached them prior to the act of "communication"? You see, autists can have astonishingly acute memory, while the modules in their brain resposible for linguistic behavior might be altogether "broken".
There is a reason why the mother has put her hand on the boy's shoulder. You have researched and analysed so many 'negative' sides of FC,but you haven't read or heard(the mother even said in this video) that putting hand shoulder like that gives the boy the sense of where he is,as autistic people have body awareness issues! Ah,the doubter.....always doubts everything except their own stupidity! LOL...
this is a big step from FC where hand over hand leads to argues of authenticity. He has full control of his arm. She can't precisely control him from shoulder, and even nonverbals I work with attest to pressure helping them focus their body. I agree other measures should be taken to ensure authenticity but I dont feel this is a textbook FC example, although Tim does say he started with FC. But I'm sure other's can provide the sensory support pictured here with similar successes if the person is truly able. When you continue to assert doubt it is clear that the way you presume unintelligence is hurtful and really doesn't give someone a chance to prove you otherwise, when complicated sensory and motor processing keeps someone trapped in a body that just barely even follows their commands. It's okay to want to validate other ways, but the assumptions you make contribute to a closed off world that won't even look for the small bright spots when people have found a way that works for them. Dyspraxia involves how the message gets from your brain out of your mouth, language is intact. Communication and motor is the issue. Regarding eye contact with his mom, if you were a special needs teen doing a ted talk, would you be nervous and need support and reassurance? I would. read her lips. usually shes like "its ok, your doing good, come on, lets go, focus, finish typing..."
And how do you explain the growing numbers of nonspeakers able to maintain blogs, publish books, create documentaries, attend university, perform stand-up, etc who credit FC for their ability to learn more independent forms of AAC? Are they all being 'clever hansed' via telepathy or what? But okay, you've seen one biased documentary and clearly know better 🙃
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy. do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
This is facilitated communication, a debunked fad of the 1990s. The method that was also the focus on the superb documentary "Prisoners of Silence." I'm baffled that TED is now promoting pseudoscience. Very disappointing.
I am Tim's age and sat next to him throughout his primary school years and can very much vouch for the fact that he has a deep and brilliant mind, and is very much capable of communicating his words. This is not facilitated communication. Sarah (Tim's mother) clearly is not assisting in the selection of letters and words. Perhaps watch the entire video, and listen carefully to Tim's explanations
+James Cafrey The only thing that is clear is that you have no clue what you are talking about. FC has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. You know nothing of behavioral or cognitive psychology. We have ample theoretical and empirical evidence that explains this phenomenon. That corpus of research clearly indicates facilitator control, even in cases where physical contact does not occur (e.g., holding a letter board in the air for the person to touch; see Sue Rubin, another FC user whose voice has been usurped). I appreciate that you think this is an authentic phenomenon and that you respect Tim (who is deserving of dignity and respect; FC displaces both), but this unequivocally is FC. Check around the web and see for yourself; Tim and his mother both admit using FC (or, what is now being called "supported typing). Tim has "given speeches" at FC conferences. Perhaps you don't know what FC truly is. Do yourself a solid and get into some literature from reliable sources. You may want to start with the American Psychological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA), or the Association for Behavior Analysis International, to name a few. Or you could start here: www.skepdic.com/facilcom.html In any case, I realize you genuinely believe this is real, but consider that you might be wrong and investigate for yourself. Notice the use of fallacy and pseudoscientific explanations from FC proponents, including suggestions that FC cannot be scientifically evaluated/proven, that the method initially claimed only physcial support was needed but now requires "emotional support." Also notice how the language of defenders suggest conspiracy against FC by people like me (I'm a professor at a major american university), who have dedicated their life (literally) to improving the lives of people with disabilities. Notice the strange way that FC survives; consider similarities of this phenomenon with other fads. Apply a skeptical eye and insist on evidence. There are easy ways to confirm/disconfirm FC (ask a question that the facilitator can't hear or doesn't know the answer to; show a picture of an item to the person, but not the facilitator and have them type the label). Many, many of these and similar studies have been conducted and every one indicated the facilitators (a) were the source of messages or (b) the person couldn't type the names of simple objects when the facilitator was unaware what item was shown. Tim and his mother have not undergone any verification of authenticity and refuse when asked. This is true of rapid prompting method as well. In sum, (1) this certainly is FC (2) all evidence indicates that FC is a manifestation of the ideomotor effect (google the fascinating story of Clever Hans, if really curious), (3) facilitators are the unconscious source of the messages (4) FC robs people with disabilities of their own voice by supplanting it with the facilitator's subconscious and (5) extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Cheers, T
Professor T I spent some time with Tim. My conversation with him does not lead me to believe he was facilitated to a response. Regardless of the reality of FC or not, the take away I got was we can't assume "no one is home" because he doesnt commute. In the same way that chimps have a basic communication capability we didnt really understand untill recently.
+Jon Yeo What are you talking about, sir? You observed the ideomotor phenomenon and not communication, but that was proof that you should assume "no one is home"? I'm unclear whether or not you agree this is FC, whether you believe FC is genuine, and whether or not FC is evidence that "someone is home" (whatever that means). Frankly, I find your response quite bizarre. What have you read about FC? I'm happy to pass along some resources, including paywalled journal articles if you are interested.
I'm saying I'm not sure yet. I did experience unassisted communication. Because something is scientifically proven doesn't prove something exists (or not). It's just a validated phenomenon that everyone agrees to. The Aztecs did daily sacrifice to make sure the sun came up. That was an agreed process too at one point. Granted modern science is clearly a better practice but not the be all and end all. Happy to see you resources though. I'm also not sure any communication remains uninfluenced. Take fashion or religion for example.
@@patriciastephens320 The problem with that metaphor is easy enough to pinpoint. Those are all devices that legitimately facilitate a disabled person. This is more akin to sock puppetry.
@@tim72184 you clearly don’t understand why he needs this aid in the first place. an aid can be literally anything, it doesn’t have to be a physical object or piece of equipment.
I attended school with Tim as a fellow student and this has been absolutely mind blowing. I literally wept, Tim you are an incredible human being and I so regret not giving you the time of day you so deserved!! Best of luck in all your future endeavours Tim!
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy.
do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
An enlightening video. Reminds me that patience is essential for us to understand others in our world when our own world is so full of clips, sound bites and non-priorities that we prioritize. Tim Chan is a brave young man who will make a difference if we pay attention.
Hi Bill,
I saw this video for the first time last week and I had the same reaction.It would be great for us to slow down and see the world for what it offers and needs.
going extra mile, this is the joy of motherhood and power of patience. God bless real mothers.
Amazing young man, and incredible mother.
Incredible. What a profound story. His mother absolutely astounds me. What an incredible woman; I am inspired.
Eight years ago, I would have responded like a lot of these naysayer commenters who call this Ouija board pseudoscience. I thought my nonverbal son was cognitively impaired, but I have seen with S2C (Spelling2Communicate) that he is intelligent and has been terribly underestimated all of his 20 years. My husband is like this mom. He always believed our son was intelligent, despite his wild rages and odd behavior. He was right! He can spell long words and express his thoughts using a stencil board now. Hopefully, he will be like this awesome young man someday! 👍 The training takes hours and hours, but it is worth it!
How wonderful that Tim's great mind is not lost to us. This is another story of mother love but also the practical help that parents need to all their children, to reach their potential. Language is power and I look forward to Tim's sharing of his ideas with us.
My deepest appreciation
I salute you mother and son....you are both incredible!
so beautiful to see what a mother's love can achieve
Tim, thank you!!!
Thank you for sharing your story, Tim.
You are very lucky to have an incredible Mother.
God bless you both for giving us an insight into your world x
My respect and good wishes to you....
I would like to see this talk with mum blind-folded.
Beautiful. Thank you both.
Loved watching this. I know I need to hear from more people who are non-speaking. Ideally, this means hearing not only about their specifically autism-related experiences but also about their other interests and expertises. We need that. We need to connect with each other. Of course, that also means we have to learn patience and work to make the world more accessible for a wider variety of people.
Also? As someone who often does things like scratch/rub my scalp then smell my fingers (though I usually am able to avoid doing so around other people), I could relate to a little bit of what I was seeing. I appreciate that. I'm elsewhere on the spectrum. I don't have the same struggles. But to see someone else engage in similar... I guess it's called sensory-seeking "behavior"?... it's nice.
How very true Ted I will show this to my grandaughter who has autism you are an inspiration
Ted you are am author already,God bless you and mum keep dreaming and beleiving
Thank you for this interesting talk. It made me understand how your life is.
I hope you will succeed as an author!
Again; thank you 🙏
Can mum look away from the keyboard whilst Tim types. Can she rest a hand on his knee instead of his shoulder. Can he type with another person or just mum. Can he type anything independently. So many questions.
I think the reason why Tim is successful while the others are not because the other facilitators are not the non-verbals' family member--thus the only incentive they have on each person's case is that the fame, money and reputation that came from being able to make this innovation works--which seems like an overnight success for them. Tim's mum spent 8 years to make him being able to be like this. That is hard work. And surely there would be no experiment that can handle the financial burden of years of observed facilitated communication with enough samples and standardized exposure and skill of facilitators for each disabled people to create a reliable result. How many hours would Tim's mother spent each day to teach him and accompany him? This is purely the miracle of mother's love.
wrong. tests that discredit this nonsense are easy. ask him a question that the facilitator doesn't know the answer to.
@@420troll4 If I understand you correctly and you think it's in fact his parents using him as a tool, could you provide evidence for this? I've read a book by him and it seemed fairly genuine, not like something a non-autistic person would be able to easily make up.
@@matejblaha4659 all test ever done with FC have shown that it is false. you could easily test this guy - ask him a question his facilitator doesn't know the answer to.
This is strange. Most of the time I have read that this technique does not work or that it is even harmful. But I wonder why some people instantly believe that no communication means a sad existence? What is it to have a normal life?
the technique of facilitated communication is argued about, but thats more when their wrists are being held and hard to tell whos controlling. Her hand on shoulder though allows us to see that he is in full control of his arm while her pressure reminds his body to focus a lot of energy on typing with that body part
Surely you can't be serious? Imagine spending your whole life in a 'locked-in' world, never being able to tell anyone else what you're experiencing, what you need, and what they mean to you! It would mean never having any influence or control over what happens to you and no agency as a human being. It would be a nightmare.
It doesn't matter what your "some people" believe. What matters is what the ppl on spectrum believe and how they feel.
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy.
do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
Does Tim ever ask for a cheese burger, or to be taken out somewhere. Does he ever express choices. Is all his communication about communication.
My 16 year old autistic sister is non verbal and still doesn't speak.. I'm still hopeful that one day I'll hear her voice☺️
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy.
do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
Hi, im Kalpana from India my son is autistic 15 year old trying typing.can u tell us through which board he types thank u
I just watched the video "Prisoners of Silence" and it's important to note that most of the people were not even looking at the keyboard. It's impossible to type with one finger without looking as you have no point of reference as they displayed in the documentary. Tim IS looking although he does seem to be off in space some times. There's also something about Tim that I noticed that I didn't see in the other video. He is much more receptive to social cues. He makes lots of eye contact with his mother which is highly unusual for those with Autism. Is it possible Tim is higher functioning on the spectrum and that's why this is working for him so well?
+Notorious Lee He has to be intelligent enough to understand both language and spelling.
By researchers' definitions, IQ over 70 is "high functioning". Others use the term differently, but the people I admire consider it useless and dehumanizing.
One of the wild claims about FC during the 90s, was that it worked with everybody, and there was no such thing as intellectual disability.
+Peter Gee right. It has to be taken on a case by case basis. I don't believe there can be one thing that works for all.
While eye contact can be difficult for people on the spectrum (like me ^.^) it is not something that is always impossible. The idea that non-verbal = low IQ/intelligence is a really, really bad idea. There are many non-verbal autists who are incredibly intelligent, but just need a different way to communicate words. There are many verbal autists who are not very intelligent. It's not a catch all.
Also, eye contact with someone you know and trust very well is way, way, way, way, way, way easier than eye contact with people you don't. I have a much simpler time looking my mom or my brother in the eye than I do even friends, and much less someone I don't know. With people I don't know, it can be absolutely impossible or a very scary experience, but then I can go home and look my mom or my kiddos in the eyes. Sometimes I can't look anyone in the eyes.
Eye contact is less likely, not necessarily "highly unusual". It's just that allistics use eye contact so much that when autistics don't use it, it throws them off, so even when we (in our minds) use lots of eye contact, it is seen as a lack of to allistics. Also, short spurts are easier. I can maintain eye contact in job interviews (though it's really difficult a lot of times)
Eye contact is something that can be difficult, especially if you are focusing on other information. To clarify, eye contact is an information input. If you are trying to understand a person talking, and you are focusing on the audio information and interpreting that, the visual/social information of eye contact can distract from listening. Eye contact does serve a purpose though.
In this video (humbly hazarding to speak for Tim - apologies for the intrusion) I think he is having a non-verbal conversation with his mother. In this instance his anxiety and sensory inputs are distracting from his typing and he turns to her to get reassurance that all is well and that "you've got this" so he feels safe to continue.
It would probably be harder to organise words, or listen to verbal input while also making eye contact, but as the function of a look is non-verbal communication and reassurance.. it's one thing at a time, rather than a distraction.
@@erebus53 actually, i Speak But i need a carer 24/7 due to My extreme suicidal tendencies. Having to be helped to live isn't Bad.
congrats tedx you guys have no integrity or credibility left!
Not fake 👍
El no se ve que tuviera un grado extremo de autismoo
Clever Hans 2014?
Can the boy answer to questions that the facilitator has not heard? It is actually quite easy to test whether this is "real" or not. So, why haven't they done it? Is it perhaps because the mom does not let herself to be tested? That's the ordinary case with FC: the people have invested so much emotionally to the trick that they are unable to face the fact that the method is bogus. See in youtube: Prisoners of Silence. v=CzCGux7qD1c
I was wondering the very same thing as I just watched three different videos. I believe Tim to be a little more on the "higher functioning" of the autism spectrum given the fact he responds to social cues and engages in eye contact with his mother. Perhaps FC can work for those who are non-verbally communicative but are somewhat able to communicate non-verbally to some degree. I have seen other reports on Autistic children communicating via typed words with no "facilitation" at all. I do think this is somewhat possible depending on the individual and where exactly they fall on the spectrum.
+Notorious Lee My preliminary reaction was also that this might indicate that FC is not all bogus. But after a while doubts arose, and I asked myself: if this is the case, then why must the mother keep her hand on the shoulder of the boy all the time? It makes no sense: if the boy can understand the questions and can find the right keys as he obviously does, there is no reason why such support should be needed. Now, if you look other videos of Tim carefully, the mother is constantly shifting the position of her hand, pushing the shoulder gently and so on. In short, she is giving cues. Until a double-blind test is made, there is no reason to believe that this is anything but Clever Hans effect, and that the boy is only rather talented reader of the cues that her mother transmits.
As for those kids who are able to "communicate" without facilitation, before taking that as an "evidence", I'd like to know about some genuily scientifc research concerning it. Are they really communicating, or might it be the case that they only have memorized strings of letters that the facilitator has teached them prior to the act of "communication"? You see, autists can have astonishingly acute memory, while the modules in their brain resposible for linguistic behavior might be altogether "broken".
There is a reason why the mother has put her hand on the boy's shoulder. You have researched and analysed so many 'negative' sides of FC,but you haven't read or heard(the mother even said in this video) that putting hand shoulder like that gives the boy the sense of where he is,as autistic people have body awareness issues!
Ah,the doubter.....always doubts everything except their own stupidity! LOL...
this is a big step from FC where hand over hand leads to argues of authenticity. He has full control of his arm. She can't precisely control him from shoulder, and even nonverbals I work with attest to pressure helping them focus their body. I agree other measures should be taken to ensure authenticity but I dont feel this is a textbook FC example, although Tim does say he started with FC. But I'm sure other's can provide the sensory support pictured here with similar successes if the person is truly able. When you continue to assert doubt it is clear that the way you presume unintelligence is hurtful and really doesn't give someone a chance to prove you otherwise, when complicated sensory and motor processing keeps someone trapped in a body that just barely even follows their commands. It's okay to want to validate other ways, but the assumptions you make contribute to a closed off world that won't even look for the small bright spots when people have found a way that works for them. Dyspraxia involves how the message gets from your brain out of your mouth, language is intact. Communication and motor is the issue. Regarding eye contact with his mom, if you were a special needs teen doing a ted talk, would you be nervous and need support and reassurance? I would. read her lips. usually shes like "its ok, your doing good, come on, lets go, focus, finish typing..."
And how do you explain the growing numbers of nonspeakers able to maintain blogs, publish books, create documentaries, attend university, perform stand-up, etc who credit FC for their ability to learn more independent forms of AAC? Are they all being 'clever hansed' via telepathy or what? But okay, you've seen one biased documentary and clearly know better 🙃
His mother just put her hand in the back of Tim how is this fake communication then?
i wish i could tell these people : FC has been debunked time and time again, and yet gullible people still buy into it. i worked in social services for 20 years,and we had clients who ''did FC'' and its funny too, how not only none of them were ever taught to read and write, but also they could only '' type''with trained facilitators, AND, with each facilitator, the clients literacy, and speaking/ writing style would vary greatly . if this worked, then any arm support by a device or any person would be constant, and their abilities would not fluctuate from person to person. when are people going to wake up? and plus: this is not autonomous ! using an AAC device independent creates autonomy, and there is no doubt that it is the clients words and only his or her words being said, not being manipulated or coached in any way. also, if coordination is really an issue for some, they make eye gaze and dot motion tech to access aac devices, plus big scan and switch button activation and selection, there is no excuse to use a time and time again debunked method and also a method that is tedious and forces a client to be reliant on others instead of having autonomy.
do the research and wake up ! Fc is not the clients typing, it is not their words.
This is facilitated communication, a debunked fad of the 1990s. The method that was also the focus on the superb documentary "Prisoners of Silence." I'm baffled that TED is now promoting pseudoscience. Very disappointing.
I am Tim's age and sat next to him throughout his primary school years and can very much vouch for the fact that he has a deep and brilliant mind, and is very much capable of communicating his words. This is not facilitated communication. Sarah (Tim's mother) clearly is not assisting in the selection of letters and words. Perhaps watch the entire video, and listen carefully to Tim's explanations
+James Cafrey The only thing that is clear is that you have no clue what you are talking about. FC has been thoroughly and repeatedly debunked. You know nothing of behavioral or cognitive psychology. We have ample theoretical and empirical evidence that explains this phenomenon. That corpus of research clearly indicates facilitator control, even in cases where physical contact does not occur (e.g., holding a letter board in the air for the person to touch; see Sue Rubin, another FC user whose voice has been usurped).
I appreciate that you think this is an authentic phenomenon and that you respect Tim (who is deserving of dignity and respect; FC displaces both), but this unequivocally is FC. Check around the web and see for yourself; Tim and his mother both admit using FC (or, what is now being called "supported typing). Tim has "given speeches" at FC conferences. Perhaps you don't know what FC truly is. Do yourself a solid and get into some literature from reliable sources. You may want to start with the American Psychological Association, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Speech and Hearing Association (ASHA), or the Association for Behavior Analysis International, to name a few. Or you could start here: www.skepdic.com/facilcom.html
In any case, I realize you genuinely believe this is real, but consider that you might be wrong and investigate for yourself. Notice the use of fallacy and pseudoscientific explanations from FC proponents, including suggestions that FC cannot be scientifically evaluated/proven, that the method initially claimed only physcial support was needed but now requires "emotional support." Also notice how the language of defenders suggest conspiracy against FC by people like me (I'm a professor at a major american university), who have dedicated their life (literally) to improving the lives of people with disabilities. Notice the strange way that FC survives; consider similarities of this phenomenon with other fads. Apply a skeptical eye and insist on evidence.
There are easy ways to confirm/disconfirm FC (ask a question that the facilitator can't hear or doesn't know the answer to; show a picture of an item to the person, but not the facilitator and have them type the label). Many, many of these and similar studies have been conducted and every one indicated the facilitators (a) were the source of messages or (b) the person couldn't type the names of simple objects when the facilitator was unaware what item was shown. Tim and his mother have not undergone any verification of authenticity and refuse when asked. This is true of rapid prompting method as well.
In sum, (1) this certainly is FC (2) all evidence indicates that FC is a manifestation of the ideomotor effect (google the fascinating story of Clever Hans, if really curious), (3) facilitators are the unconscious source of the messages (4) FC robs people with disabilities of their own voice by supplanting it with the facilitator's subconscious and (5) extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Cheers,
T
Professor T I spent some time with Tim. My conversation with him does not lead me to believe he was facilitated to a response. Regardless of the reality of FC or not, the take away I got was we can't assume "no one is home" because he doesnt commute. In the same way that chimps have a basic communication capability we didnt really understand untill recently.
+Jon Yeo What are you talking about, sir? You observed the ideomotor phenomenon and not communication, but that was proof that you should assume "no one is home"? I'm unclear whether or not you agree this is FC, whether you believe FC is genuine, and whether or not FC is evidence that "someone is home" (whatever that means). Frankly, I find your response quite bizarre. What have you read about FC? I'm happy to pass along some resources, including paywalled journal articles if you are interested.
I'm saying I'm not sure yet.
I did experience unassisted communication.
Because something is scientifically proven doesn't prove something exists (or not). It's just a validated phenomenon that everyone agrees to. The Aztecs did daily sacrifice to make sure the sun came up. That was an agreed process too at one point.
Granted modern science is clearly a better practice but not the be all and end all.
Happy to see you resources though.
I'm also not sure any communication remains uninfluenced. Take fashion or religion for example.
Now, without the hand.
Now without the wheelchair, now without the cane, now without the hearing aide, you are not the judge and we don't care what you think.
@@patriciastephens320 The problem with that metaphor is easy enough to pinpoint. Those are all devices that legitimately facilitate a disabled person. This is more akin to sock puppetry.
@@patriciastephens320 bingo!! You
@Tim72184 You don't Get to decide which aids does someone need.
@@tim72184 you clearly don’t understand why he needs this aid in the first place. an aid can be literally anything, it doesn’t have to be a physical object or piece of equipment.