John Rosemond and SPD

gryp

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 3:22 pm

Thank you to Barbara for pointing this out to me.

http://www.omaha.com/article/2.....19986

John Rosemond: Sensory disorder or simple defiance?

Quote:

On its website — www.spdfoundation.net — the Sensory Processing Disorder Foundation defines SPD (also known as Sensory Integration Disorder) thus: “A condition that exists when sensory signals don't get organized into appropriate responses.” They go on to liken SPD to “a neurological ‘traffic jam' that prevents certain parts of the brain from receiving the information needed to interpret sensory information correctly. A person with SPD finds it difficult to process and act upon information received through the senses, which creates challenges in performing countless everyday tasks. Motor clumsiness, behavioral problems, anxiety, depression, school failure and other impacts may result if the disorder is not treated effectively.”

Those are not tentative, “we think” statements. They boldly declare the existence of a brain condition called SPD, and they assert its nature. As such, these statements are completely misleading. (The preceding sentence is also declarative.)

The following statements are factual: In the absence of obvious, significant, quantifiable brain deficiency, as would be the case with, say, cerebral palsy, there is no known way of determining that certain otherwise normal children's brains don't organize sensory data appropriately. Therefore, the above statements from SPDF are completely speculative. Therefore, the existence of SPD is completely speculative.

A mother recently tells me that her 4-year-old daughter has been diagnosed (at a prominent hospital clinic) with SPD. (The clinic had recommended therapy, which the parents had not pursued up until asking my advice.) The primary symptom was complaint of her clothes, especially underwear, not feeling right. They itched. They scratched. They felt funny. Almost every morning for the past two years, tantrums have occurred over getting dressed, during which time the father stays in his daughter's room until they find something to wear that feels OK. This trial-and-error process sometimes takes a couple of hours.

Instead of speculating on why this little girl would find certain clothing/fabrics uncomfortable, I focused on what was actually taking place: the child was refusing to get dressed in the morning. That is known as defiance.

I told the parents to strip the little girl's room of everything except essential furniture and clothing. She could sleep with her favorite stuffed animals, but they were to be removed in the morning. All of her toys were henceforth kept in a playroom. Her parents then explained that this was not punishment. Rather, “the doctor” had recommended removing all distractions so she could focus on getting dressed. Furthermore, no one was going to help her get dressed or come to her aid if she had a problem. When she woke up, she had to stay in her room until she was dressed in whatever she wanted to wear. “Take as long as you want,” they said.

Two weeks later, I received the following e-mail from Mom: “The very first morning, (daughter) reminded us to remove her sleep toys so she could get dressed. She then put on underwear and clothes and came out for breakfast. She has done this with no tantrums or requests for help since we began two weeks ago.”

At this writing, it's been five weeks since this girl complained of her clothes not feeling right.

I report. You decide.

Contact the writer: www.rosemond.com

As a mother of a child with severe SPD (and I know there are many others here too), I just wanted to say: Run from Rosemond.

I can't even describe what such a system would do to my son. In short, it would lead him to depression and suicide, no exaggeration.

Vent over.

Barbara

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 3:49 pm

Here's the column re the abusive boyfriend:

Quote:

QUESTION: Our 19-year-old daughter is dating a 19-year-old boy, who, in general, we like. He's not a partier; he doesn't smoke or drink; he's serious about his education; and he has a rational career plan mapped out. Our daughter is also a responsible, level-headed girl. The problem is that the boyfriend's response to almost anything my daughter says is a cut or put-down, a dismissal of her accomplishment or mocking. She says his father does the same thing to him, his brother, and their mother; so to him it's "normal." Our daughter is an upbeat, confident person by nature, but I know a constant stream of negativity will eventually wear down even the most self-assured person. I have tried calling him out on this in a humorous way, to no effect. My husband is restraining himself from giving this kid a poke in the nose! Any suggestions are welcome.

ANSWER: I suggest you obtain a copy of the Feb. 19-20 edition of The Wall Street Journal and read "Where Have All the Good Men Gone?" by Kay Hymowitz. Or, go out and get her the book, "Manning Up: How the Rise of Women Has Turned Men Into Boys," from which the WSJ article is excerpted. It will surely put this problem into a fresh perspective.

Hymowitz's basic premise is that whereas adolescence for males and females was, not so long ago, between 13 and 18, inclusive, that's no longer the case.

Today's girls are growing into women and accepting adult responsibilities much faster and more effectively than are today's boys, for whom adolescence now extends through their 20s and even, for many, into their 30s.

Your daughter's boyfriend is an exception to the rule, obviously. He's not into partying, playing video and online games, proving that he can drink more beer than his friends and still remain conscious, and dressing in oversized, ill-fitting clothes that make him look like a 6-foot toddler. From your description, he's a find. Do everything you can to keep him!

So he has one annoying habit. OK. Can we all overlook this? Can you persuade your husband not to poke him in the nose? Please? For your daughter's sake? I mean, the likelihood of her finding another boy her age who has a coherent plan for the future (as opposed to "I'm planning on winning 'American Idol' and then replacing Jon Bon Jovi as lead singer of Bon Jovi" -- don't laugh ... I've heard pretty much the equivalent more than once) is slim.

This talent for sarcasm is most likely the influence of the "family" sit-coms his generation has consumed, in which the constant stream of put-downs is supposed to be funny. His attempts at bad humor are probably symptomatic of a certain amount of social insecurity. I would forgive him for that. He's simply got some growing up to do. That's forgivable, isn't it?

emphasis added

Ruchel

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 4:52 pm

I would never do a lot (most?) of what he says. He says himself that it won't help someone with a real problem.

But he is right about old school parenting, about overdiagnosing and "trends" in "issues", about couple first, about kids not being such special traumatizable snowflakes, about trying to be a perfect parent, about guilt, about MANY things.

What he says (very watered down) works for my DD, like the tickets leading to lose tv and eventually early bed time, and "oh it means you're tired, go to bed" thing.
Now ok, she is in a different case since she is "gifted" "only". Which is why I wasn't so sure about gifted being in this forum to begin with, but that's another story!

Quote:

I mean, the likelihood of her finding another boy her age who has a coherent plan for the future (as opposed to "I'm planning on winning 'American Idol' and then replacing Jon Bon Jovi as lead singer of Bon Jovi" -- don't laugh ... I've heard pretty much the equivalent more than once) is slim.

I do disagree with that. Maybe though, in certain circles, it is unfortunately true. If the girl doesn't like the "jokes", he has to change or be dumped.

seeker

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 5:37 pm

Ruchel wrote:

Tags are something else. It's physical, they can and do bother a sensitive skin, you can see the marks they leave.

So why are tags "something else?" Sensitive skin can be rubbed by a tag; supersensitive skin can feel rubbed from the wrong underwear.

The guy is missing a major point. He claims the statements describing SPD are "completely speculative" and that there is "no known way of determining" whether this is really happening. Um, hello? What about personal accounts? I can personally tell you that my senses are easily confused and overloaded in just the way SPD is described. Does that not count for anything? Where else would you go with this criterion? There's no such thing as a migraine because I can't see the hammer pounding at your head? Stop falling asleep, who says you're exhausted? Good grief. His reasoning is full of holes.

ora_43

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 5:47 pm

seeker wrote:

Ruchel wrote:

Tags are something else. It's physical, they can and do bother a sensitive skin, you can see the marks they leave.

Personal accounts are good as proof of what people are experiencing, not of what's happening inside the brain and why. It's not speculative to say "my five year old's shirts always bother her," it is speculative to add, "because of a neurological processing disorder."

Not that speculation is always bad, most mental health treatment is based largely on things that can't be proven. For instance, nobody knows what goes wrong in the brain to create schizophrenia, but that doesn't stop us from creating drugs that help (without even being 100% sure why they help).

But it's not good to start talking as if we know things for certain, when we don't. That can close the mind off to considering other possibilities (not such a problem when average laypeople do it, but annoying coming from the experts).

seeker

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 5:50 pm

[quote="Ruchel"]Be it a tag or a rough item of clothing, if it hurts there WILL be a mark on the skin. [quote]

Not true. BTDT.
SPD is an overall disorder, it's not just about clothing textures. If I say my eyes are overloaded with the flashing lights or my ears are overloaded with the sound OR THAT MY SKIN IS HURTING BECAUSE OF THE TEXTURE OF WHAT LOOKS TO YOU LIKE VERY SOFT FLEECE, it's the truth. You can't SEE what I am perceiving due to my messed up senses but to me it is very real. Lower the volume, put on sunglasses, trade the fleece for cotton, and suddenly I can function normally again.

And yes, it used to take me a long time to get dressed in the morning. And my parents thought I was just procrastinating by saying my socks were too itchy to put on. And after a few years of sensory therapy, I can wear almost any socks in the world without thinking twice. But of course that doesn't prove anything because there's no mark.

seeker

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 5:55 pm

ora_43 wrote:

OK, there I agree. You can say that we don't know where and how in the nervous system things are getting messed up. But that doesn't mean SPD doesn't exist and/or isn't a valid diagnosis; it just means that we still can only theorize about why it happens (though some treatment results do support certain theories).

Hence, this part is not only speculation at all: "A person with SPD finds it difficult to process and act upon information received through the senses, which creates challenges in performing countless everyday tasks. Motor clumsiness, behavioral problems, anxiety, depression, school failure and other impacts may result if the disorder is not treated effectively"

I don't agree with everything the SPD foundation puts out, but I am also appalled at how easily this Rosemond dude is trying to pass it off as something kids make up for attention or defiance or whatever.

MaBelleVie

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 6:01 pm

Ruchel wrote:

Be it a tag or a rough item of clothing, if it hurts there WILL be a mark on the skin. BTDT. Many people can't wear some things. When it becomes most or all things, there is either a disorder, or a drama. And I agree that disorders who only pop up in some circles are at best overdiagnosed.

Sleepiness or migraine definitely go with physical symptoms. BTDT again.

You obviously have never experienced SPD firsthand. Lucky for you. Yes, typically processing people will complain when a tag or clothing are so bothersome that they leave a mark. Someone with SPD can feel that way about any tag, or any non-cotton shirt, for example. Why does the sound of fingernails scratching on a chalkboard bother people? It certainly doesn't damage their hearing, so they must be dramatizing or behavioral, right? Same thing.

tzipp

Wed, Mar 16 2011, 6:03 pm

Barbara wrote:

Here's the column re the abusive boyfriend:

Quote:

emphasis added

Oh my LORD.