I have lived long enough to be able to say, I've reached the midlife point. At this juncture, we have not 'arrived' and we don't know everything but we certainly understand more then we did when we began our adult life journey. Allow me this time to reflect on some of my life and lessons that I have learned over the years. Many of these lessons I bring from people that are no longer living. Through my life I carry on their memory and lessons I experienced from sharing a part of my life with each of them and now I share part of my life with each of you. Because you and I share this time and space, you too, can choose to carry on these observations and life lessons with anyone else you share any part of your life with.
Some of these observations and life lessons I have learned more recently or experienced in a new or different way, and some I learned as a very young child. Many I did not understand at the time, but as time went on and different people shared segments of my life, I gradually understood things more and with a deeper awareness.
One of the greatest lies I remember learning as a very young girl was:
"Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.”
I remember my grandmother teaching me to memorize these words and I know what her intent was in sharing what she probably learned as a young girl. Somehow it did not resonate as truth with what I was feeling at the time. The name calling went on relentlessly during those early school years. Nevertheless, I learned the chant and repeated it to the bullies at school. Through these school age memories of hurtful words exchanged, I learned that ‘doing unto others as they do to you’ was not an acceptable answer when you've been hurt. Two wrongs didn’t make it feel right. This was the first major life lesson learned.
Now, we understand something that few people understood anything about years ago, and that is “emotional pain.” The truth, as I understand it now, is that emotional pain will stay with you far longer than you would like it to. The physical pain of ‘having your bones broke by sticks and stones’ will heal in a relatively short amount of time. The emotional pain and lasting scares that ill spoken words or a hurtful action from someone that we care about leaves on us, carries a far reaching and lasting affect on us. Because we can never take back our words or actions, my desire for each of us is to choose our words and behavior with careful consideration. Realize that once you give away any form of communication to another, you can never retrieve it again. Words and behavior (actions) are never neutral. They carry a specific message. If we find that we have made an inappropriate choice with our communication and later we wish we hadn’t done or said what we did at the time, our only option now is to replace that communication with new and different words or behavior, followed by actions that will facilitate ‘emotional healing’ whenever possible. This reminds me of something I've heard in recent years; “We do not break an old habit, we just replace one behavior with a new and different behavior.” With every interaction, we choose our words and behavior (actions) with others. We do not 'own' language and words but when we exchange words, whether written, sung, or spoken, we must own the message they convey to the hearer from us personally and all of the expression or impact, whether positive or negative, that goes with that exchange.
When we come into a relationship we bring our ‘belongings’ into that relationship and when we leave, we can take our ‘belongings’ with us again. Here I refer to our material possessions. What we leave behind in any relationship is our words and our communication which carry the memories that we will forever associate with that person. For some, this is referred to as baggage. This is the part that does not erode over time and does not get misplaced. Fortunately, it can fade somewhat with new deposits of communication from our current relationships. What message are we leaving each day with the people we interact with?
Some of the ways we communicate to other people is with spoken words, written words, body language, and gestures. Even the impact of unspoken words that should have been shared, such as I love you, I appreciate you in my life, I value our time together, etc. can affect our memory and emotional state for a very long time.
I believe that all of you reading this letter have experienced the power and transformation that comes from hearing words of love, acceptance, and praise from someone that you value in your life.
All of you can think of different ways people have communicated their love to you during the time you've known each other. I would encourage you to try always to share positive and loving words with those in your life. Share words in song form, words in written form, body language, and spoken words with the people you love. Do they know, experience, and feel with all their senses the depth of your love and affection for them? Do they know how much you value the relationship that you share with them? The communication that you share makes up the treasure of priceless memories that they will retain, always. Value each moment, each expression, and each exchange that you share when you are together.
Every moment in time that we share and every form of communication that we engage in is a choice that we make for one another and is a gift of our own choosing that we give away to that person. This gift of time and communication that you give me is part of my thoughts, my feelings, and my heart, which lifts me when I am down. It makes me smile for no particular reason. I value and appreciate our relationship.
Forgiveness: A Personal Decision
All of us have been faced with needing forgiveness from someone and offering forgiveness to someone at one point or another in our lives. For some, this voluntary act seems to come easier than for others. Spiritually, there seems to be scriptural grounds for offering forgiveness. Emotionally, I have heard it said that you are the one who continues to suffer if you choose not to forgive. To this end I can say, from personal experience, that if the continual mental reminder of whatever the offensive act was is the suffering they speak of, I can attest to this truth. Mentally, if you can truly forgive someone and let the experience be part of your past and not your continual present, you are better off most certainly. Physically, the toll it takes on all of us to harbor unforgiveness is unmeasurable and we do know it affects us on every level. The toxins that our body produces surge through our veins when we hold onto hurt and disappointment and can be a tangible feeling of pressure, pain or even heat. We know that harboring unforgiveness is unhealthy for the whole body. Dealing with this issue is different for every person, however.
Is it also possible for those in denial, the offenders, that they feel no need to ask for forgiveness (or even accept it if it is offered voluntarily!) even if they are presented with someone else's feelings of hurt or disappointment? They, themselves, have hardened their heart or closed their mind to the situation and move on without mental or emotional distress. The offended is the one to carry on the 'feelings' resulting from the act bestowed on them by the offender.
Hurt and disappointment comes in many forms. It can be a physical act, a verbal act or even an act of omission! When we expect something from someone and they choose not to give us whatever it is we feel we need from them, feelings of hurt and disappointment overtake us.
The act of forgiving is not an easy choice for most people. The decision to forgive can be wrought with much angst.
When should we forgive? This is another part of the equation that shares much debate among individuals. I recently heard Janis Abrahms Spring PhD. say that she advises acceptance as opposed to forgiveness when the offender is unrepentant. Unless the offender genuinely apologizes, we should not offer forgiveness. I know this position may be different then that held by some Evangelical Christians so it will continue to be debated. One thing I know for a fact: There is a tension between forgiveness and justice that each of us has to resolve by ourselves. Each in our own unique creation may lean closer to justice and others closer to forgiveness.
The balance between justice and forgiveness, whatever the scale is for each of us, is ours alone to figure out and work through.
Ultimately, forgiveness is one of those choices in life that we alone must make for ourselves and we cannot impose it on anyone else if they choose not to offer or accept.
Is it also possible for those in denial, the offenders, that they feel no need to ask for forgiveness (or even accept it if it is offered voluntarily!) even if they are presented with someone else's feelings of hurt or disappointment? They, themselves, have hardened their heart or closed their mind to the situation and move on without mental or emotional distress. The offended is the one to carry on the 'feelings' resulting from the act bestowed on them by the offender.
Hurt and disappointment comes in many forms. It can be a physical act, a verbal act or even an act of omission! When we expect something from someone and they choose not to give us whatever it is we feel we need from them, feelings of hurt and disappointment overtake us.
The act of forgiving is not an easy choice for most people. The decision to forgive can be wrought with much angst.
When should we forgive? This is another part of the equation that shares much debate among individuals. I recently heard Janis Abrahms Spring PhD. say that she advises acceptance as opposed to forgiveness when the offender is unrepentant. Unless the offender genuinely apologizes, we should not offer forgiveness. I know this position may be different then that held by some Evangelical Christians so it will continue to be debated. One thing I know for a fact: There is a tension between forgiveness and justice that each of us has to resolve by ourselves. Each in our own unique creation may lean closer to justice and others closer to forgiveness.
The balance between justice and forgiveness, whatever the scale is for each of us, is ours alone to figure out and work through.
Ultimately, forgiveness is one of those choices in life that we alone must make for ourselves and we cannot impose it on anyone else if they choose not to offer or accept.
Biggest Medical Tragedy of Modern Times
When we think of the current statistics for autism and other types of related diagnoses, I can't help but think of drugs and medications that were prescribed and used at a particular time only later to find that there was a problem associated with them. With two drugs in particular, the effects weren't known until the women who took the medication had children then the problems began to be exposed with those children. Of course, with the women who took these drugs, they too, had medical complications that showed up but it took several decades before the full effect was realized.
There are two drugs that were prescribed/sold and used during the 1950's. One was Thalidomide and the other was DES. Both of these were approved and accepted as safe at the time.
Thalidomide was marketed in Europe, especially in West Germany and Britain, from 1957 to 1961, and was thought to be so safe that it was sold without prescription. In 1961 an extremely high incidence of European babies born with malformed, shortened limbs was correlated with use of Thalidomide by women in their first trimester of pregnancy. Before it was recalled from use, the drug had caused the malformation of about 8,000 children throughout the world. Thalidomide was withdrawn from the market after being found to be the cause of what has been called "the biggest medical tragedy of modern times". It is not known exactly how many worldwide victims of the drug there have been, although estimates range from 10,000 to 20,000.
DES (diethylstilbestrol), a synthetic estrogen, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women in the United States from 1938 to 1971. Although DES is no longer prescribed to pregnant women in the United States due to its health effects, DES exposure continues to affect many lives.
In 1971, DES was linked to clear cell adenocarcinoma in a small number of daughters of women who had used DES during pregnancy. This uncommon cancer of the vagina or cervix is usually diagnosed between age 15 and 25 in DES-exposed daughters. Some cases have been reported in women in their thirties and forties. The risk to women older than age 40 is still unknown, because the women first exposed to DES in utero are just reaching their fifties, and information about their risk has not been gathered.
One other drug that was used and widely debated as to the clinical effectiveness was Bendectin. Bendectin (known as Debendox in the UK and Diclectin in Canada) is a mixture of pyridoxine (Vitamin B6) and doxylamine prescribed to treat nausea and vomiting associated with morning sickness. It was voluntarily removed from the market in 1983 by its manufacturer, Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, following numerous lawsuits alleging that it caused birth defects, although an FDA panel concluded that no association between Bendectin and birth defects had been demonstrated.
The drug continues to be used in Europe under the same name, and no subsequent epidemiological studies have found any teratogenic effect.
(Teratology is the study of abnormalities of physiological development. It is often thought of as the study of birth defects, but it much broader than that, taking in other developmental stages, such as puberty.)
When we consider just these two drugs, Thalidomide and DES, and the problems they caused, known only many years after they were ingested, is it not possible that the current schedule of vaccines OR other drugs or vaccines that the parents of these children have had might play some part in the dramatic rise in numbers of diagnosed children with Autism, Aspergers and other related conditions?
I, for one, cannot accept the rise in shear numbers of vaccines on the schedule now for children and not feel that there is undoubtedly some correlation.
The question is posed and I feel needs a responsible answer: If all children cannot take all medications, why would we presume that all children can have ALL the vaccines with no incident? Whenever there is 'question' about a child's health or condition, pediatricians will hold off on giving vaccines until they know what the child is dealing with. Isn't it possible, that some children will 'present' with symptoms after these toxins are given triggering some possible underlying, previously undiagnosed condition that is now brought to light? How do you know that a child is allergic to bees unless he/she either gets stung by a bee or has specific testing to test for such allergies? How do you know your child has food allergies until he/she is exposed to certain foods either by mouth or testing? How do we know that there is a penicillin reaction until we give the penicillin? If this one size fits all prescription for vaccines is not continued to be challenged, we will continue on this path we're on using this generation for guinea pigs to find out which kids have adverse reactions and which ones don't. The problem with this mindset is that all too often, these children are so 'damaged' that recovering them is near impossible. Aren't the numbers of 1 in 150 alarming to you?
I am not saying that all vaccines should be halted. I am saying that there does need to be more consideration to at least use the alternative vaccine schedule where each family decides with their doctor which vaccines are necessary and at what time. Giving multiple vaccines is another topic of huge debate. It seems reasonable to me, once again, that vaccines should not be given in multiples, they should be spaced out and never containing thermerosil. It seems basic to consider that when toxins are introduced in the form of vaccines, we need to give these babies all the help we can like being older with more brain development when some of these vaccines are offered.
So many of these vaccines are for illnesses that are not life threatening, not life altering, or at least not age appropriate. In the case of one vaccine, Hepatitis B, the following comment was taken from Dr. Sears website on Vaccine Schedules:
Don’t give the Hepatitis B vaccine to newborns in the hospital. Because this shot can cause fever, lethargy, and poor feeding (problems you don’t want to see in a newborn), it’s better to delay this shot for the first two months of life, especially since the disease doesn’t even occur in newborns (it’s a sexually-transmitted disease).
Now, when I read this, I have to ask - Why in the world are infants at any age given a shot for sexually transmitted disease these days?? Is this not just one example of an unnecessary shot for a newborn or infant? Doesn't it make more sense to give a shot for sexually transmitted diseases when the person is nearing the age of becoming sexually active? Just asking.
There are countless other vaccines that should be evaluated and questioned in the same way.
Back in the day (23-34 yrs. ago) when my children were receiving their shots, they got; DPT, polio, and MMR. That's it. The MMR wasn't given until 18 months of age. Now MMR is recommended at 12 months and even a second dose is now suggested. Measles, mumps and rubella are all serious diseases but I had all three diseases as a child, as did many others of my generation, and we suffer no ill effect or problems because of it. This one certainly could be postponed a few months and possibly be given individually rather then as a grouped vaccine.
Could it be that something we did to this generation with relation to drugs and medications is now affecting their children in the same way the drugs of the 1950's affected the offspring of those women? The correlation of drugs and medications on men and their offspring is still being studied. It seems unreasonable to think that with such serious side effects on the children of the women and the women themselves, that there wouldn't be some increased risk for some types of health related problems down the road when we have more data and research on this study group.
There are two drugs that were prescribed/sold and used during the 1950's. One was Thalidomide and the other was DES. Both of these were approved and accepted as safe at the time.
Thalidomide was marketed in Europe, especially in West Germany and Britain, from 1957 to 1961, and was thought to be so safe that it was sold without prescription. In 1961 an extremely high incidence of European babies born with malformed, shortened limbs was correlated with use of Thalidomide by women in their first trimester of pregnancy. Before it was recalled from use, the drug had caused the malformation of about 8,000 children throughout the world. Thalidomide was withdrawn from the market after being found to be the cause of what has been called "the biggest medical tragedy of modern times". It is not known exactly how many worldwide victims of the drug there have been, although estimates range from 10,000 to 20,000.
DES (diethylstilbestrol), a synthetic estrogen, was prescribed to millions of pregnant women in the United States from 1938 to 1971. Although DES is no longer prescribed to pregnant women in the United States due to its health effects, DES exposure continues to affect many lives.
In 1971, DES was linked to clear cell adenocarcinoma in a small number of daughters of women who had used DES during pregnancy. This uncommon cancer of the vagina or cervix is usually diagnosed between age 15 and 25 in DES-exposed daughters. Some cases have been reported in women in their thirties and forties. The risk to women older than age 40 is still unknown, because the women first exposed to DES in utero are just reaching their fifties, and information about their risk has not been gathered.
One other drug that was used and widely debated as to the clinical effectiveness was Bendectin. Bendectin (known as Debendox in the UK and Diclectin in Canada) is a mixture of pyridoxine (Vitamin B6) and doxylamine prescribed to treat nausea and vomiting associated with morning sickness. It was voluntarily removed from the market in 1983 by its manufacturer, Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, following numerous lawsuits alleging that it caused birth defects, although an FDA panel concluded that no association between Bendectin and birth defects had been demonstrated.
The drug continues to be used in Europe under the same name, and no subsequent epidemiological studies have found any teratogenic effect.
(Teratology is the study of abnormalities of physiological development. It is often thought of as the study of birth defects, but it much broader than that, taking in other developmental stages, such as puberty.)
When we consider just these two drugs, Thalidomide and DES, and the problems they caused, known only many years after they were ingested, is it not possible that the current schedule of vaccines OR other drugs or vaccines that the parents of these children have had might play some part in the dramatic rise in numbers of diagnosed children with Autism, Aspergers and other related conditions?
I, for one, cannot accept the rise in shear numbers of vaccines on the schedule now for children and not feel that there is undoubtedly some correlation.
The question is posed and I feel needs a responsible answer: If all children cannot take all medications, why would we presume that all children can have ALL the vaccines with no incident? Whenever there is 'question' about a child's health or condition, pediatricians will hold off on giving vaccines until they know what the child is dealing with. Isn't it possible, that some children will 'present' with symptoms after these toxins are given triggering some possible underlying, previously undiagnosed condition that is now brought to light? How do you know that a child is allergic to bees unless he/she either gets stung by a bee or has specific testing to test for such allergies? How do you know your child has food allergies until he/she is exposed to certain foods either by mouth or testing? How do we know that there is a penicillin reaction until we give the penicillin? If this one size fits all prescription for vaccines is not continued to be challenged, we will continue on this path we're on using this generation for guinea pigs to find out which kids have adverse reactions and which ones don't. The problem with this mindset is that all too often, these children are so 'damaged' that recovering them is near impossible. Aren't the numbers of 1 in 150 alarming to you?
I am not saying that all vaccines should be halted. I am saying that there does need to be more consideration to at least use the alternative vaccine schedule where each family decides with their doctor which vaccines are necessary and at what time. Giving multiple vaccines is another topic of huge debate. It seems reasonable to me, once again, that vaccines should not be given in multiples, they should be spaced out and never containing thermerosil. It seems basic to consider that when toxins are introduced in the form of vaccines, we need to give these babies all the help we can like being older with more brain development when some of these vaccines are offered.
So many of these vaccines are for illnesses that are not life threatening, not life altering, or at least not age appropriate. In the case of one vaccine, Hepatitis B, the following comment was taken from Dr. Sears website on Vaccine Schedules:
Don’t give the Hepatitis B vaccine to newborns in the hospital. Because this shot can cause fever, lethargy, and poor feeding (problems you don’t want to see in a newborn), it’s better to delay this shot for the first two months of life, especially since the disease doesn’t even occur in newborns (it’s a sexually-transmitted disease).
Now, when I read this, I have to ask - Why in the world are infants at any age given a shot for sexually transmitted disease these days?? Is this not just one example of an unnecessary shot for a newborn or infant? Doesn't it make more sense to give a shot for sexually transmitted diseases when the person is nearing the age of becoming sexually active? Just asking.
There are countless other vaccines that should be evaluated and questioned in the same way.
Back in the day (23-34 yrs. ago) when my children were receiving their shots, they got; DPT, polio, and MMR. That's it. The MMR wasn't given until 18 months of age. Now MMR is recommended at 12 months and even a second dose is now suggested. Measles, mumps and rubella are all serious diseases but I had all three diseases as a child, as did many others of my generation, and we suffer no ill effect or problems because of it. This one certainly could be postponed a few months and possibly be given individually rather then as a grouped vaccine.
Could it be that something we did to this generation with relation to drugs and medications is now affecting their children in the same way the drugs of the 1950's affected the offspring of those women? The correlation of drugs and medications on men and their offspring is still being studied. It seems unreasonable to think that with such serious side effects on the children of the women and the women themselves, that there wouldn't be some increased risk for some types of health related problems down the road when we have more data and research on this study group.
We'll continue to explore, research, evaluate, and learn all that we can so we can be the best advocates we can for our children and their children.
I welcome your comments or stories about how your life has been touched or affected in some way by the topics we have discussed.
Our Children - Their Diagnosis
Is it just me or is anyone else concerned about the incredible increase in the numbers of Autistic children being born in this generation?
In an excerpt from an article titled:
The Parent’s Role in Biomedical Treatment for Autism Spectrum Disorders
By Lisa Ackerman in December 2006 - she writes;
In the new millennium, in which doctors are capable of saving thousands of lives using state-of-the-art treatments, the evaluation and treatment of autism appears to be trapped in the Dark Ages. While much progress has been made in the past 20 years through the use of traditional therapies including Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA), speech therapy, occupational therapy, and other key therapies, little has been offered in the way of biomedical intervention and treatments for children on the autism spectrum. This is even more frustrating now that we are in the midst of an epidemic affecting 1 in 150 children.
From the statistics of what I have heard in the last three years, the above numbers are outdated. Even so, if we just consider that 1 in every 150 will be diagnosed is a staggering number to wrap our minds around.
The debate rages over whether vaccines play a part. Does genetics play a part? Does the environment play a part? Perhaps, all of these avenues play a part but we owe it to this generation and to these children to figure out what is causing this rise in diagnosis and what can be done to reverse these numbers in future births.
On Jenny McCarthy's website (http://www.generationrescue.org/),
Generation Rescue, she writes;
Generation Rescue is an international movement of scientists and physicians researching the causes and treatments for autism, ADHD and chronic illness.
She goes on to say in her brochure:
Our children are experiencing epidemics of ADD/ADHD, Asperger’s,
PDD-NOS (see below), and Autism. We believe these neurological disorders
(“NDs”) are environmental illnesses caused by an overload of
heavy metals, live viruses, and bacteria. Proper treatment of our
children, known as “biomedical intervention,” is leading to recovery
for thousands. The cause of this epidemic of NDs is extremely
controversial. We believe the primary causes include the tripling of
vaccines given to children in the last 15 years (mercury, aluminum and
live viruses); maternal toxic load and prenatal vaccines; heavy metals
like mercury in our air, water, and food; and the overuse of antibiotics.
Yale School of Medicine writes:
Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) is a 'sub threshold' condition in which some - but not all - features of autism or another explicitly identified Pervasive Developmental Disorder are identified. PDD-NOS is often incorrectly referred to as simply "PDD." The term PDD refers to the class of conditions to which autism belongs. PDD is NOT itself a diagnosis, while PDD-NOS IS a diagnosis. The term Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS; also referred to as "atypical personality development," "atypical PDD," or "atypical autism") is included in DSM-IV to encompass cases where there is marked impairment of social interaction, communication, and/or stereotyped behavior patterns or interest, but when full features for autism or another explicitly defined PDD are not met.
It should be emphasized that this ''sub threshold'' category is thus defined implicitly, that is, no specific guidelines for diagnosis are provided. While deficits in peer relations and unusual sensitivities are typically noted, social skills are less impaired than in classical autism. The lack of definition(s) for this relatively heterogeneous group of children presents problems for research on this condition. The limited available evidence suggest that children with PDD-NOS probably come to professional attention rather later than is the case with autistic children, and that intellectual deficits are less common.
Is it possible that many other diagnosis, such as those mentioned above, ADD/ADHD, Aspergers, PDD-NOS, and autism are in part products of the same causal effect? Is there really anyone out there that can't say someone in their own family or extended family has been diagnosed with one of these conditions? ADD and ADHD went largely undiagnosed in the baby boomer generation. They had children and many of these children were diagnosed with ADD or ADHD. Now these children are having children and many of them are being diagnosed with Asperger's or autism. We have entire public schools that are being repurposed and used just to bring in the multitude of children that are in the system that need this type of help.
We are just beginning our research and understanding of what and why this has become such a pervasive problem. We welcome your comments, stories, and suggestions on this subject.
In an excerpt from an article titled:
The Parent’s Role in Biomedical Treatment for Autism Spectrum Disorders
By Lisa Ackerman in December 2006 - she writes;
In the new millennium, in which doctors are capable of saving thousands of lives using state-of-the-art treatments, the evaluation and treatment of autism appears to be trapped in the Dark Ages. While much progress has been made in the past 20 years through the use of traditional therapies including Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA), speech therapy, occupational therapy, and other key therapies, little has been offered in the way of biomedical intervention and treatments for children on the autism spectrum. This is even more frustrating now that we are in the midst of an epidemic affecting 1 in 150 children.
From the statistics of what I have heard in the last three years, the above numbers are outdated. Even so, if we just consider that 1 in every 150 will be diagnosed is a staggering number to wrap our minds around.
The debate rages over whether vaccines play a part. Does genetics play a part? Does the environment play a part? Perhaps, all of these avenues play a part but we owe it to this generation and to these children to figure out what is causing this rise in diagnosis and what can be done to reverse these numbers in future births.
On Jenny McCarthy's website (http://www.generationrescue.org/),
Generation Rescue, she writes;
Generation Rescue is an international movement of scientists and physicians researching the causes and treatments for autism, ADHD and chronic illness.
She goes on to say in her brochure:
Our children are experiencing epidemics of ADD/ADHD, Asperger’s,
PDD-NOS (see below), and Autism. We believe these neurological disorders
(“NDs”) are environmental illnesses caused by an overload of
heavy metals, live viruses, and bacteria. Proper treatment of our
children, known as “biomedical intervention,” is leading to recovery
for thousands. The cause of this epidemic of NDs is extremely
controversial. We believe the primary causes include the tripling of
vaccines given to children in the last 15 years (mercury, aluminum and
live viruses); maternal toxic load and prenatal vaccines; heavy metals
like mercury in our air, water, and food; and the overuse of antibiotics.
Yale School of Medicine writes:
Pervasive Developmental Disorder, Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS) is a 'sub threshold' condition in which some - but not all - features of autism or another explicitly identified Pervasive Developmental Disorder are identified. PDD-NOS is often incorrectly referred to as simply "PDD." The term PDD refers to the class of conditions to which autism belongs. PDD is NOT itself a diagnosis, while PDD-NOS IS a diagnosis. The term Pervasive Developmental Disorder - Not Otherwise Specified (PDD-NOS; also referred to as "atypical personality development," "atypical PDD," or "atypical autism") is included in DSM-IV to encompass cases where there is marked impairment of social interaction, communication, and/or stereotyped behavior patterns or interest, but when full features for autism or another explicitly defined PDD are not met.
It should be emphasized that this ''sub threshold'' category is thus defined implicitly, that is, no specific guidelines for diagnosis are provided. While deficits in peer relations and unusual sensitivities are typically noted, social skills are less impaired than in classical autism. The lack of definition(s) for this relatively heterogeneous group of children presents problems for research on this condition. The limited available evidence suggest that children with PDD-NOS probably come to professional attention rather later than is the case with autistic children, and that intellectual deficits are less common.
Is it possible that many other diagnosis, such as those mentioned above, ADD/ADHD, Aspergers, PDD-NOS, and autism are in part products of the same causal effect? Is there really anyone out there that can't say someone in their own family or extended family has been diagnosed with one of these conditions? ADD and ADHD went largely undiagnosed in the baby boomer generation. They had children and many of these children were diagnosed with ADD or ADHD. Now these children are having children and many of them are being diagnosed with Asperger's or autism. We have entire public schools that are being repurposed and used just to bring in the multitude of children that are in the system that need this type of help.
We are just beginning our research and understanding of what and why this has become such a pervasive problem. We welcome your comments, stories, and suggestions on this subject.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
