• Welcome to Autism Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Aspergers Syndrome, Autism, High Functioning Autism and related conditions.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Private Member only forums for more serious discussions that you may wish to not have guests or search engines access to.
    • Your very own blog. Write about anything you like on your own individual blog.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon! Please also check us out @ https://www.twitter.com/aspiescentral

Apple’s autism ad of magical thinking

AGXStarseed

Well-Known Member
(Not written by me. Please click the link at the bottom of the page to read the full article).

The company’s 2017 Webby-nominated ad featured autism pseudoscience



As part of 2016’s Autism Acceptance Month, Apple released an uplifting video called Dillan’s Voice, in which a nonverbal teenager delivers a speech at his graduation, his text turning swiftly to spoken word through his iPad. Before he had the iPad, he says in the video’s voiceover, people thought he didn’t have a mind, that he wasn’t in control. We watch him going for a run as the sun rises, doing pull-ups at the gym, walking alone along a school corridor, his hands flapping, humming occasionally, but it’s a life lived mainly through silence. Then, we move to his middle school graduation ceremony as he steps confidently up to the podium, award medals around his neck. “We are the reality of our thinking lives,” he tells the audience, urging them to open their minds. We hear enthusiastic applause, resounding cheers, the video fades to the Apple logo.

All my life I wanted so badly to connect with people, but they could not understand because I could not communicate. But now you can hear me,” a voiceover reads. “The iPad helps me see not only my words, but to hold onto my thoughts... No more isolation. I can finally speak with the people that love me.”

Dillan’s Voice features something called “assistive technology”: devices and systems that maintain, increase, or improve the functional capabilities of those with differences and disabilities — including voice recognition software, screen readers, adaptive keyboards, and eye tracking devices. Recent years have seen groundbreaking advances in the assistive technology sphere. Individuals are using iPads and third-party apps and devices to make themselves heard, from Sady Paulson directing and editing features using Switch Control on her Mac, to Charlie, aged six, saying “mommy” for the first time using Proloquo2Go on his iPad.

But there was something different about this Apple video: in it, the teen uses Rapid Prompting Method, or RPM, a form of communication that depends on a “facilitator” or “communication partner” standing close by, providing continuous physical and verbal cues. RPM has been labeled pseudoscientific, unethical, and inhumane. Michelle Dawson, an autistic researcher, called it “bad science and bad ethics.” The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) says that “RPM is a technique without any research support.”

Over the next year, Dillan’s Voice generated significant buzz. A single tweet about the video, which does not explicitly discuss RPM, generated over 230 million impressions. It has reached 4.4 million YouTube views. It was featured on the Today Show, highlighted by Mashable, BuzzFeed, The Huffington Post, Forbes, Metro UK, and shared across disability and autism blogs. The there was a follow-up video that also featured RPM, a nomination for a 2017 Webby Award and a series of other Accessibility videos.

This video had reach.

“It is regrettable that this pseudo-scientific method was featured in an Apple promotional video and received worldwide viewing,” says Howard Shane, an associate professor at Harvard Medical School and director of the Autism Language Program and the Center for Communication Enhancement at Boston Children’s Hospital. He adds that it is not supported by research and that its underlying theory is “nonsensical.”


Full Article: Apple’s 2017 Webby-nominated ad featured autism pseudoscience
 
GO DILLION!

RPM has been labeled pseudoscientific, unethical, and inhumane. Michelle Dawson, an autistic researcher, called it “bad science and bad ethics.” The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA) says that “RPM is a technique without any research support.”

I dont know if I misunderstood this lady or not... But if I did get it right... She's a B**** who knows her sorry a** is without a job because of the simple use of a very cool computer program..

How could you openly want to silence people like Dillion... I hope I misunderstood this, but it angered me what she said...
 
Dillion- "I can see the wind, I can hear the flowers, I can feel peoples emotions."

To me thats not magic... Its who we are... I get this kid so much.
 

I watch this video probably at least once a day when I am trapped indoors...
Otherwise I live it in the real outdoors...

I know exactly what Dillion feels at many levels and I try and soak it up on any level that I can, even though I mostly cant begin to explain it as well as he did in ONE sentence...

I find this "magic" in art, old writings, songs, a persons movements, a tree, the way a certain car is shaped, an ocean wave, the movements of fish, and countless other things... but to define it and explain it... I look like a retarded fool... mostly every time.

Maybe "ALL THAT IS" sometimes just wants to keep his secrets buried in us for us to never lose that child like wonder.
 
this makes me happy he can communicate sadly I'm still tormented by my lack of communication.
I understand what The lady means !she's worried he's not really saying what he wants to !but somebody else is just saying what they want with The veneer that he is present!
 
this makes me happy he can communicate sadly I'm still tormented by my lack of communication.
I understand what The lady means !she's worried he's not really saying what he wants to !but somebody else is just saying what they want with The veneer that he is present!

Okay... maybe sort of, but he seems happy with what is said... He can type (it obvious) so he can say "NO" thats not what I want to say...

But I do get what you are saying also : )
 
I knew nothing of the "Rapid Prompting Method" or its inherent scientific and legal controversies prior to reading about this story. Very interesting, but also very disturbing to me. This appears to be one of those situations where science collides with civil liberties considerations.

On one there is the simple concern for utilizing technology and methodology that enables far better communication for autistic people. Where the denial of access to such things is being claimed as a violation of the American Disabilities Act. On the other side is the claim that the methodology and science in question does not adequately explain or confirm that it allows a person to truly use and present their own thoughts and words. Which carries serious considerations of civil rights and legal liability issues in itself.

On the surface this all seems quite obvious. Give it to people who truly need it to better their lives. However in doing so, it leaves the question of whether or not they are truly in control over such a process in doubt. Which legally presents some potentially profound civil rights issues.

In other words I can understand why scientific communities are "spooked" over any proliferation of such methods and technology. At least or until adequate research and development is concluded so all ethical and legal considerations can be satisfied to avoid any costly litigation concerns. And without any firm scientific judgments so far, I can't help but wonder if the courts may be reticent to even entertain such a case without sufficient scientific evidence to aid their decision. Where otherwise positive results might be looked at in a very bad light by jurists if there is no way to firmly show that the thoughts and words are truly those of the autistic person in question and not the NT aiding them.

Seems to me that there is only one thing to do. To establish funding to explore the methodology and science of RPM. Instead of continuing to argue over it, have scientists formally work with it to build that foundation which could decisively either prove or disprove this way of enabling autistic people to communicate where without it, they live a life of silence.

Ironically in the distant past, people with communications issues of this sort simply had no rights. When such legal and ethical considerations would not have been an issue. Even when one person has power of attorney over another, it's still very complicated given the legal concern and respect for the disabled in the US.

http://autisticadvocacy.org/wp-cont...omplaint-Against-Arlington-Public-Schools.pdf

The vexing question of autistic communication and research evidence…
 
Last edited:
I know for certainty on the motor neurone disease forum they are desperate to use eye gaze as there is such a rapid deterioration of muscle strength .
in the UK -health services now give people with motor neurone disease an iPad to use eye gaze, needless to say are not given it on the day of diagnosis , you suffer a bit as usual that's the NHS.
I know in Australia it's even harder.
autistic people who can converse in what would be called understandable English should support this technology !people like Dillon maybe ignored !that's the sad reality of our vain society.
 
I am astounded about all the information about Michelle Dawson and from Michelle Dawson
some contributors in Canada do not believe she is autistic ,she has been an advocate for autism from the records I could see from 2004 .
went to court in Montréal Québec to protest so-called autism therapies ,you can imagine what adversaries spewed out .
 
I am astounded about all the information about Michelle Dawson and from Michelle Dawson
some contributors in Canada do not believe she is autistic ,she has been an advocate for autism from the records I could see from 2004 .
went to court in Montréal Québec to protest so-called autism therapies ,you can imagine what adversaries spewed out .

Clearly she's been tweeting on this subject. While she's on the spectrum herself, I can only imagine any number of autistic people who may be on either side of this issue for numerous reasons.

Though it does seem unusual to see such people "at war" with ASAN itself. Go figure.

Michelle Dawson on Twitter
 
Clearly she's been tweeting on this subject. While she's on the spectrum herself, I can only imagine any number of autistic people who may be on either side of this issue for numerous reasons.

Though it does seem unusual to see such people "at war" with ASAN itself. Go figure.

Michelle Dawson on Twitter


Well, we're all different and with that comes difference of opinions on everything. A lot of us are against groups like Autism Speaks but they likely have members of the Autism community who support them on all or some of their actions/plans.
As such, it doesn't surprise me that some Autistics would be against ASAN on all or some points.
 
Well, we're all different and with that comes difference of opinions on everything. A lot of us are against groups like Autism Speaks but they likely have members of the Autism community who support them on all or some of their actions/plans.
As such, it doesn't surprise me that some Autistics would be against ASAN on all or some points.

It all strikes me as being terribly complicated considering all the different interests and stakes involved.

With the simple ability to communicate at the heart of it all. Complicated by a scientific bureaucracy that insists on empirical proof that presently does not exist. And legal systems which may fundamentally object to such methodologies that may act as a de facto power of attorney whether it legally exists or not. And special interest groups who either defend or oppose RPM on face value alone, forcing the courts to make a decision where they as well do not have enough information to adjudicate on such matters.

Lots of reasons to support or oppose it. So IMO it remains incumbent on the scientific community to formally and categorically determine (with further research) if the methodology is either empirically solid or bankrupt in the participation of a "trained supporter". To conclude beyond the shadow of a doubt whether or not that the thoughts and words transmitted electronically are in fact those of the autistic person rather than the trained supporter.

If left only in the hands of the court, while it might be ruled as a violation of the ADA, RPM may also be construed as a violation of the First Amendment. Where the plaintiff ASAN would win on their most basic point, but potentially lose it all on an even more basic point. That one's freedom of speech cannot be handed so arbitrarily over to a trained supporter based on a methodology and technology alone. ASAN may in fact be gambling over waging such a case in a civil court.

Unfortunately the most basic question won't so easily or neatly fit into a legal and ethical equation. That if your ability to communicate is so impaired, would you be willing to potentially compromise your rights to free speech and actions by technically handing them over to an intermediary given a specific methodology?

I think it's reasonable to conclude that some would, while some wouldn't.
 
Last edited:

New Threads

Top Bottom