Sufficient Educational Resources Lacking For Children With Autism

There is more demand for educational services for autistic children than there are sufficient resources and programs, PBS NewsHour reports.

PBS legend Robert MacNeil explores the issue on a local level in New York City, where there are over 7,000 autistic students in the city's schools. Just one tenth of them attend PS 176, the only public school specifically for autistic children. Even fewer attend the autistic-only charter school.

The New York Center for Autism Charter School can only accommodate 30 students, each of which get one-on-one attention from a teacher trained to work with autistic students. It is the only school of its kind in the state of New York -- and the spots are awarded to applicants by lottery. While winning a spot can be life-changing, losing is devastating.

While examinations of both schools show the merits of how specific, targeted programs for autistic children can improve their lives, the report begs the question: what about the city's other 6,270 autistic children?

The video is part of NewsHour's "Autism Now," a six-part series on the topic in honor of Autism Awareness Month.

WATCH:

Comments

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

07:07 PM on 04/26/2011

*not exert, Expert.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

07:06 PM on 04/26/2011

BTW, Special Education teachers usually last 3 years in the Special Ed classroom, then move on to gen ed. Then we lucky (Sarcasm intended) parents get to deal with a fresh out of school teacher who knows only what they have learned in a book (You can't learn about autism in a book), so actually, the costs are lower than gen ed because the new teachers are paid a pittance compared to teachers with experience. The gen ed kids get the exert teachers, our kids get the newbies.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

07:02 PM on 04/26/2011

``(E) supporting high-quality, intensive preservice
preparation and professional development for all
personnel who work with children with disabilities in
order to ensure that such personnel have the skills and
knowledge necessary to improve the academic achievement
and functional performance of children with disabilities, including the
use of scientifically based instructional practices, to
the maximum extent possible;
``(F) providing incentives for whole-school
approaches, scientifically based early reading programs,
positive behavioral interventions and supports, and
early intervening services to reduce the need to label
children as disabled in order to address the learning
and behavioral needs of such children;
``(G) focusing resources on teaching and learning
while reducing paperwork and requirements that do not
assist in improving educational results; and
``(H) supporting the development and use of
technology, including assistive technology devices and
assistive technology services, to maximize accessibility
for children with disabilities.
``(6) While States, local educational agencies, and
educational service agencies are primarily responsible for
providing an education for all children with disabilities, it is
in the national interest that the Federal Government have a
supporting role in assisting State and local efforts to educate
children with disabilities in order to improve results for such
children and to ensure equal protection of the law.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

07:00 PM on 04/26/2011

Almost 30 years of research and experience has demonstrated that the education of children with disabilities can be made more effective by--
``(A) having high expectations for such children and
ensuring their access to the general education
curriculum in the regular classroom, to the maximum
extent possible, in order to--
``(i) meet developmental goals and, to the
maximum extent possible, the challenging
expectations that have been established for all
children; and
``(ii) be prepared to lead productive and
independent adult lives, to the maximum extent
possible;
``(B) strengthening the role and responsibility of
parents and ensuring that families of such children have
meaningful opportunities to participate in the education
of their children at school and at home;
``(C) coordinating this title with other local,
educational service agency, State, and Federal school
improvement efforts, including improvement efforts under
the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, in
order to ensure that such children benefit from such
efforts and that special education can become a service
for such children rather than a place where such
children are sent;
``(D) providing appropriate special education and
related services, and aids and supports in the regular
classroom, to such children, whenever appropriate;

[Hlynn]

07:59 PM on 04/25/2011

No, there are not enough resources, but Congress fixed that by instituting unfunded mandates. That means schools have to provide services even if they can't afford to do it. It's also very convenient to label autism as an educational issue so insurance companies don't have to provide coverage--all the burden is on the schools.

I don't understand why there is a charter school only for students with autism. What about LRE (least restrictive environment) laws? Charter schools don't have to comply with them?

We have three students with autism in our sixth grade, now getting ready to move on to middle school. When they came in kindergarten, they regularly attacked us and refused to work. Now they are reading, doing math, writing (far from grade level, but doing more than their parents ever thought they could) and--most wonderful of all--have friends who do not have disabilities and they can also carry on a reciprocal conversation with almost anyone. I don't know how students can learn student behaviors necessary in school if they are only with other students with autism as their only peers.

[obama20082012]

02:49 PM on 04/25/2011

Heck, there aren't enough recourses for non-autistic children! But tax cuts for the rich are much more important than our children, correct Cons?

[LaurieAnn]

03:26 PM on 04/25/2011

That's true obama2008012. All public education is suffering because the wealthy want to keep the wealth for themselves.  It's really about better national priorities and properly funding public education, pre-K through university for all students.

[Xineheard]

04:36 PM on 04/24/2011

Carester,

My younger sister is autistic, and even though I am only at university, I know the rest of my life will be defined by her. It's not a question of fairness. It's a question of what is right.

More money and resources should be given to educate those who need it, especially autistic children. Thank goodness your children are healthy, and I hope your son makes it into MIT, but the sheer amount of stress I have watched my family experience is incomprehensible to anyone not in this situation.

A mother can put a band-aid on her child's scraped leg. She can not heal a broken arm. For that, there are hospitals, and it is not a question of it being "fair" that one child's need is greater than another's. Similarly, a mother can teach her neurotypical child often better than a schoolteacher, but when it comes to autism, there are so many variables, so much to account for, so much stress, so much time, and so much hopelessness, that an educator that knows ABA or other mechanisms of teaching children with autism is a godsend.

I don't mean to lecture, but to provide a glimpse of what it is like for these families. I am neurotypical, and I do not regret for one second that my resources in school were less than my sister's. I can learn on my own, and I did. Now I attend the institution down the street from where your son wants to matriculate.

[carester]

04:49 PM on 04/24/2011

I sympathize with your family. Facing the unexpected, unwanted reality of choices if tough. However, CHOOSING to have a child is a LIFELONG commitment, regardless of the child's health at birth, infancy, and beyond (you know people don't become sick only when they are children, or newborns). The first reality of any, any parent is accepting that no one has a responsiblity to love are care about our children, for they didnot MAKE THE CHOICE to bring them to this world. I will always be my children's mother, even if the commit horrible crimes and become the most hated people on the face of the earth. That won't change my love for them one little bit. it is called unconditional love, and it come mostly from parents. Now, I think that it is right for parents to advocate for their children's needs. However, why just laying out at the feet of the school system? Why can't the health system be an option? Do you really believe that the health system CANNOT provide with the services for your sister? In my opinion, Autism is NOT an educational issue but a health issue. Autistic people not only deal with Autism during the school years. It is a lifelong medical condition. Why can't it be addressed as such? In the meantime, we invest the educational system resources on the FUTURE TAXPAYERS who undoubtly be footing the bill for the liflong social services Autistic individuals will need.

[Xineheard]

05:20 PM on 04/24/2011

I'm glad you asked the question of whether autism is a health or educational issue. The problem is that many doctors have very little idea what is biologically at work with autism. Even my sister's neurologist, who has a son with autism, didn't recognize it in my sister. There's the view it's a gastrointestinal disorder, an immune system malfunction, a methylation problem. DAN (Defeat Autism Now) doctors and autism centers such as Thoughtful House are often not covered by insurance, and supplements and chelation are definitely not.

Thus, there is no hard and fast biological way of treating autism. There's no chemo. There's no magic pill. That's what makes it so insurmountable. The treatment that has proven somewhat effective, however, is educational intervention while the child is at his or her highest learning potential.

The health system failed my sister when they gave her a slew vaccines as a 7-week premature infant. The health system failed my sister for years in that no one diagnosed her while she was still in that optimal window. The health system failed my sister when a surgeon gave my sister antibiotics and anesthetics specifically not for people with autism.

So when you ask if I don't believe in the health system, I'd have to say that at this junction, I do not. I do believe in my sister's current teacher and have seen immense strides in her language capacity. Doctors, however, have not provided this same success.

[LaurieAnn]

02:14 PM on 04/24/2011

Some folks here begrudge the costs of education for students with autism.  Consider this:

*My family contributes towards the costs of school athletics that my child will never access
*My family contributes towards the costs of classrooms for Gifted students that my child will never access
*My family contributes towards the costs of special education programs which are appropriate for other special needs children but not for my child
*My family contributes towards the costs of higher education which my child may never be able to access

So don't think that we aren't paying for support for thousands of other students.  

Also, one poster has talked about her focus on life skills and adaptive skills training for students with autism.  Yes, that is incredibly important.  Those are programs which many students with autism need and can benefit from at a young age.  Yet it is often those very programs that schools and any agencies dealing with autism don't have available.  If these programs become available to students during late childhood, pre-teen and teen years, tens of thousands of young adults with autism could be ready for some level of independence.  Yet where do we parents turn to for assistance with this?

[carester]

02:25 PM on 04/24/2011

Dear LaurieAnn EVERYONE, regardless of parental status, have to contribute to the very same things you just mentioned. My childless friends and family members have to pay property taxes (although no child of them attends any school), pay higher income taxes (because, guess what, not child tax breaks). Those people contribute enormously to public coffers and get nothing in return. However, you and I, probably, contribute comparable the same; however, who do you think receives the most from the system?

[LaurieAnn]

04:01 PM on 04/24/2011

Answer me this.  Would you really like to have a child with autism just so that you can receive more?  

I would trade ever single MORE that you think my son gets to have him be a typically developing child.  

When your children are in university,  that of course EVERYONE pays for EVEN ME, my child will be living at home with me if I am alive and in a group home if I am not.

That isn't more.  That's DIFFERENT.  

[SirenForSanity]

04:07 PM on 04/24/2011

It's called contributing to a civilized society and our future. It is also providing care for people who are victims of the toxic environment our legislators have allowed to poison us all and result in skyrocketing numbers of autistic children. Who else but all the rest of us should, at the very least, lighten the load of those who are bearing the brunt of all of our apathy? Your lack of empathy is embarassing and a major contributor to the problems this country is facing.

[kinger50]

05:32 PM on 04/23/2011

The issue comes down to comparing apples and oranges. Autism is but one category of disability. In my opinion, many of the resources spent in special education are not related to academics at all. Therefore, I agree that students with disabilities should have the same academic resources (money) spent. Then, a separate budget should be allocated for the other services they require. For example, teaching "social skills" is lumped into the education budget yet is not always clearly defined for teachers. While social skills are important, it seems it falls outside of the pervue of traditional academic instruction. I have students in my reading lessons, for example, who are there to interact in a pro-social setting with same aged peers. Do they learn to read? Yes. Do they progress along with same aged, typical peers? No. Social skills are not a tidy academic goal. Therefore it is incorrect to compare resources "spent" on a child with a disability because their needs and learning objectives include a lot of goals that fall outside of "normal" academic instruction. For academic instruction, I think the resources should be the same and other resources should be tracked separately. Then we will know what we are talking about with enough detail to make sense of it.

[GlennWatson]

05:59 PM on 04/23/2011

"For academic instructio­n, I think the resources should be the same and other resources should be tracked separately.">>>>

Then its not the same.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

11:58 PM on 04/22/2011

All of you are forgetting that these are children who DID NOT CHOOSE to be born autistic. Whether environmentally induced or genetically induced, they have just as much right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness as every other person in this country. By saying that they shouldn't be allowed to go to school ($8500/yr) and should be at "daycare" ($1800+/MONTH), you are proving how bigoted and small minded you really are. You do not accept that people are different, and that if all people were neurotypical, a lot of things would not be invented or discovered.
I pray for all the parents out there who have to face the small-mindedness I have seen on this posting area.

[LaurieAnn]

12:25 PM on 04/24/2011

Beautifully said Renee.  My son did not choose to be born with autism severe enough that future employment and independence will be unlikely, especially in an economy where well qualified folks are looking for work.

My husband and I are of course prepared to raise him, care for him and support him for the rest of our lives but it is likely our son will out live us.  What then?  That is the very scary part of raising a child with autism; especially with the harsh views expressed here by some.

[carester]

02:20 PM on 04/24/2011

Dear LaurieAnn. The truth of the matter is that you (as well as me) MADE THE CHOICE to bring a child to this world. When a mature person MAKES THAT CHOICE, he/she is taking a leap of faith, jumping to the unknown. I did it; you did it. No one forced you, I guess, to bear your child. You knew that parenting is a LIFETIME commitment, didn't you know it? Maybe you were not old enough to understand what you were getting yourself into. I knew it. I know it. My children were born completely healthy and lead normal, fulfilling lives, thank God, but I know that it can change at any time (and it is not only limited to health issues), and guess what? Their father and I will have to take that burden on our shoulders and help them deal with whatever life throws at them. That is parenthood, my friend. Other people didn't make our choice. There are people who do not have children, did you know that? Maybe because they want to spare themselves from that LIFETIME commitment. Motherhood has been a blessing to me. I understand why God makes us LOVE OUR CHILDREN so much, because man, this IS pure labor of love :-)

[Jon Farist]

08:15 PM on 04/24/2011

Exactly said, fanned and faved.

[iamnation]

10:31 PM on 04/22/2011

It's a human issue. Depending on your philosophical view on the human race. I for one am a humanist. I believe we should take care of our kind. How a society treats its stereotypically least desirable people reflects a societies worth. I work with children with Autism. They are not stupid, they are not worthless, their priorities are different than yours and their brains work differently. They can teach us a lot.

We can afford to build billion dollar buildings without value and droids sent to klill people in libya but when it comes to investing in the well being of our own people that seems to be blasphemy.

For all these bad mouthers, imagine being a parent of a child you absolutely love and are committed to and being told your son/daughter is worthless because they are autistic. Would you accept that answer? Really disappointing to see some of these responses.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

11:34 PM on 04/22/2011

Thank you to a voice of reason.

[HST]

12:36 AM on 04/23/2011

Fanned and faved.

Nevermind the autistic children, the real long term threat to this country is people that are like the selfish ones on this thread.

They don't belong in a country called the UNITIED States of America.

They belong in a country called the individual states of "I Got Mine".

[GlennWatson]

09:14 PM on 04/22/2011

Great idea. Lets focus our attention and money on kids that will never be productive and take money away form regular kids to do so. Great plan America.

[HST]

12:16 AM on 04/23/2011

I got mine to hell with everyone else huh?

Great idea. Let's focus our money and attention on the elderly and sick who will never be productive and take money away from healthy people to do so.

Never mind American, you're a terrible example of an human being.

[LaurieAnn]

12:23 PM on 04/24/2011

Wow! This is the U.S. that I despise.

[GlennWatson]

01:30 PM on 04/24/2011

Of course it is. People always despise the thing that supports them.

[Mountain Momma]

08:32 PM on 04/22/2011

The headline uses person-first language; why can't the whole article?

Also, children with autism are not hopeless, as some posters seem to think. With appropriate services, many children with autism show growth, some even making enough progress that they no longer can be identified as having ever had autism.

Finally, even though some may never be "normal" (the more appropriate term is neurotypical, as the use of the word normal suggests that children with autism are abnormal, which is really insulting) many children can gain enough daily living skills that as adults they may be able to live in a group home or supported living setting. Would you rather them be institutionalized or become wards of the state when their parents, sadly, invariably die and leave them behind? It's cheaper to spend money NOW on education then spend it on caring for them for a lifetime.

[carester]

08:16 PM on 04/22/2011

This is a tough one. I deeply sympathize with families with special needs children; however, some times one wonders if money invested in the "education" of children who will never be at a normal/or semi-normal level is a wise investment. Is it really worth trying "to educate" a Down Syndrome child, deeply autistic child? I don't know. I think it will be better to find other venues to help them (with more realistic goals in mind). I don't think we are being fair to the school system (and the large population of "typical" students) when we take so much of the resources to "educate" those who are not likely to take advantage of it. I think this should be better address as a public health issue rather than an educational issue. Just my 2 cents :-)

[BobVADemHawk]

08:37 PM on 04/22/2011

You're not the only one who sees the logic of the situation instead of relying on an emotional instinct. Your two cents were well said and well received.

[ericksmom2005]

10:25 PM on 04/22/2011

Both you and the original poster are wrong. The "typical" students dont have to worry about who will care for them if their immediate family is gone. Autistic children DO. MY son is one of them, and I shudder to think that more people like u are out here with your disdain for these children, children who are wonderfully creative, and have made a positive impact in this world, masked behind practicality....its not an emotional instinct to want EVERY CHILD to receive the best education possible in order to survive!

[HST]

12:31 AM on 04/23/2011

" I deeply sympathize with families with special needs children; however, some times one wonders if money invested in the "education­" of children who will never be at a normal/or semi-norma­l level is a wise investment­."

I just hope one of those kids robs your house or destroys your property.

Then we'll see what you think of the lack of investment.


Pay now or pay later -your choice.

[carester]

12:36 AM on 04/23/2011

Is that your opinion of Autistic people? Wow ! ! !

P.S: My house has a security system, autistic or not the police will come.

[FaceReality2]

04:27 PM on 04/22/2011

But there's plenty of money for "defense." The U.S. accounts for 43% of worldwide military spending. Number 2 is China at 7%. European countries: 2.5-3.5%.

[GlennWatson]

09:16 PM on 04/22/2011

You will notice the USA has not been invaded or seriously hurt by enemy countries in the last hundred years like Chain and Europe have.

[Renee Jolene Johnson]

11:40 PM on 04/22/2011

I think you meant CHINA, and I guess you forgot about 9/11. we have been invaded by terrorists that have come in and used our resources to injure/kill our people.

[FaceReality2]

03:57 PM on 04/23/2011

Location, location, location.

We haven't been invaded because we are located too far from people who would have wanted to do so (like the Germans and Japanese). I don't think we have to worry about being invaded by Canada or Mexico.

The idea that we have to spend SEVEN TIMES MORE on the military than #2 China in order to keep from being invaded is laughably preposterous. Nonetheless, I would rather have better health care, education, police, fire, etc. and take the risk on invasion.