Re: The Myth of Autism -March 2002

[Guest guest]

thank you and yes could you please e-mail me the text.

martha

--- " marc@... " <marc@...> wrote:

> Below is the text of Dr. Goldberg's latest version

> of 'The Myth of Autism'

> If you would like a copy in Word.doc format, please

> e-mail me @

> marc@...

>

> Thanks

>

> J. Goldberg, M.D., F.A.A.P.

> 5620 WILBUR AVENUE, SUITE 318

> TARZANA, CALIFORNIA 91356

> TELEPHONE (818) 343 - 1010

> FAX (818) 343 - 6585

> Email – office@...

> On the web: www.neuroimmunedr.com

> ADHD/ADD - LEARNING DISABILITIES

> IMMUNE DYSFUNCTION

> CFS/CFIDS

> AUTISM

>

>

>

> " The Myth of Autism "

>

>

> In Leo Kanner's now classic 1943 paper he outlined

> the behavior pattern,

> present from early in life,

> which he named 'early infantile autism'. Prior to

> this, there were, in the

> literature, occasional accounts

> of individual children whose behavior fitted the

> picture Kanner later

> described. Kanner described only

> the autistic children referred to his clinic and,

> later on, those attending

> a particular special school

> (Kanner,1973). He made no estimates of the numbers

> in the general

> population, but thought that his

> syndrome was rare.

>

> Later on Kanner and Eisenberg (1956) discussed

> Kanner's original conception

> of autism and the five

> features he considered to be diagnostic. These

> were, a profound lack of

> affective contact with other

> people; an anxiously obsessive desire for the

> preservation of sameness in

> the child's routines and

> environment; a fascination for objects, which are

> handled with skill in fine

> motor movements (an

> area of actual weakness in many of the children

> being diagnosed today);

> mutism or a kind of

> language that does not seem intended for

> inter-personal communication; good

> cognitive potential

> shown in feats of memory or skills on performance

> tests, especially the

> Séguin form board. Kanner

> also emphasized onset from birth or before 30

> months.

>

> In the same paper, Kanner and Eisenberg modified the

> diagnostic criteria by

> selecting two as essential.

> These were:

> 1. a profound lack of affective contact

> 2. repetitive, ritualistic behavior, which must be

> of an elaborate kind.

> They considered that, if these two features were

> present, the rest of the

> typical clinical picture would

> also be found

>

> THEN: 1 – 2 children / 10,000

>

> NOW: 1 child / 500, with much higher numbers being

> quoted routinely

>

> So, how can so many children now have such a

> previously rare disorder? How

> can a rare, almost

> unheard of " severe mental dysfunction " become

> something every pediatrician

> is seeing, something

> every parent is concerned about? How can we now

> have this rare misfortune

> become an

> epiphenomena threatening to overwhelm our school and

> social systems, while

> destroying families

> across this country, and around the world?

>

> To understand this, one needs to go back to the

> beginning. Per above,

> Kanner (1943) described a

> disorder by its " behavioral " features. Needless to

> say, " behavioral "

> dysfunction can be caused by

> many factors, NOT just the idea of a developmental

> or psychiatric

> dysfunction, as held forth, for so

> many years. Think of it, an idea, literally now

> dictum, held forth over

> decades, with ONLY a

> " behavioral " pattern for diagnosis, not one

> objective or consistent

> physiologic dysfunction or finding

> required to prove or disprove this " disorder /

> diagnosis, " (but " somehow "

> all these children have it FOR

> LIFE). In fact, over the years, to this day, health

> professionals have had

> no idea what causes this

> disorder. Explanations have ranged from childhood

> schizophrenia to bad

> parenting to " something "

> biologic, all with the underlying concept that

> " something " must have

> happened " developmentally. "

> Somehow (mechanism unknown) the brain was

> " miswired, " these children were

> not okay, COULD NOT

> be okay (but with NO idea of what was happening, WHY

> it happened, even HOW

> it happened).

> Graduating medical school (UCLA) I was told that IF

> I saw one Autistic child

> in my entire lifetime of

> practice it would be " one too many. " Over the last

> 10 – 15 years that is

> sadly no longer true for myself

> or many other pediatricians. How can this be?

> Scientifically (logic not

> myth) how can this be possible?

>

> Since " developmental " disorders were NOT considered

> " medical " disorders,

> medical doctors were not

> the primary physicians consulted or involved with

> their management.

> Likewise, the brain was

> essentially a " Black Box, " with essentially no real

> evidence allowing study

> or insight into what was really

> happening with this or most " neurological " or

> " psychological disorders. If

> there was NO definable

> objective reason for what was happening, " it must be

> psychological " seemed

> the standard cry of

> medicine. Therefore, as Psychologists and

> Psychiatrists rapidly expanded

> the above definition to

> include all the children appearing with " spectrum "

> dysfunction, the first

> large mistake was made.

> Suddenly (mid - late 80's / early 90's) there were a

> lot of children

> appearing that did NOT fit " classic "

> Autism. This should have created appropriate

> questions and initiated

> scientific, medical investigations.

> " What's going on? Why are we suddenly seeing so

> many dysfunctional

> children? Maybe something is

> wrong here? MAYBE this is not Autism? Instead,

> literally the " definition "

> just kept being expanded,

> modified, and ALL the new children were just put

> into a variation of the OLD

> basket. It is very likely,

> children and society itself would be way ahead IF

> instead of expanding the

> " basket " enlarging the

> alphabet soup of Autism (PDD, Aspergers, Autistic

> spectrum, LKS variant,

> etc.), experts had said,

> maybe this is NOT Autism, maybe we have another

> problem (with some

> " Autistic " like symptoms)

> occurring. Instead they (the " experts " ) just kept

> expanding the definition,

> expanding the " basket " but

> NEVER asked the critical question, do these children

> even belong in this

> basket? How many parents

> (often against their own belief) presently are being

> told their children

> have this strange disorder (or are

> on the spectrum) and they must learn to live with

> it, accept it? How many

> parents think their children

> even come close to meeting Kanner's main criteria " a

> profound lack of

> affective contact and elaborate

> repetitive, ritualistic behavior? "

>

=== message truncated ===

__________________________________________________