FEAT DAILY NEWSLETTER      Sacramento, California      http://www.feat.org

“Healing Autism: No Finer a Cause on the Planet”

February 18, 2002      News Archive Search  www.feat.org/search/news.asp

 

** WEEKLY DIGEST OF FEAT NEWSLETTER AVAILABLE **

Get Only One Email Per Week

Go here, put in e-address and select “Digest”:

http://www.feat.org/scripts/wa.exe?SUBED1=featnews&A=1

 

 

Also: Abnormal Measles Serology and Autoimmunity in Autistic Children

 

The Ghost of Autism Future: The Ogre of Adult Autism Today

What is to become of our children as adults?  The most disturbing part of this question for many young parents today usually centers on who will take good care of the son/daughter after parents are gone. Some of us are so caught up in early intervention treatments and the quest for cures that we fail to invest wisely in longer-term scenarios possible, if not probable.  It seems difficult to imagine the future because it holds so many unknowns, or does it?  It is not middle age when our adult children become seriously vulnerable.  It is the day they become legal adults.  We need not look far to see what is in store for our children.  We need only to visit the life conditions of today’s autistic adults, and the news is not good.

The leading edge of today’s autism baby boom began in the early nineties and has yet to peak.  This population tsunami is now entering adolescence.  At the end of a decade, baring the discovery of a cure, these children will be entering legal adulthood only to find the neglect of very few support services.

Parents have 10 years to put into place the reforms our children will need as adults if there is any hope for them to live as independently as possible, as they deserve to live.  Reforms must start happening now, and that means it starts with advocating for today’s adult autism population.  The National Crisis in Adult Services for Individuals with Autism report, adopted last year by the Autism Society of America provides an outline for the beginnings of such a project.  The report effectively enunciates what is to be done and why it has to be done.  But it does not tell us is how to get there.  That is why we’ve been “called here to attend this meeting”. This is the call to action.  The Ghost of Autism Future is really the Ogre of Autism today and we must, and can, fix this.

The Report will be serialized in three parts over the next week, but is also available now in its entirety at the website: http://www.autismservices.com/articles.html PDF version on the ASA website: http://www.autism-society.org/society/adult_services.pdf  (While you’re there, check out the new Advocate Magazine, it alone is worth joining the ASA http://www.autism-society.org/membership/Advocate/advocate.html)

Congratulations to Ruth Sullivan and company for this timely and excellent

work.  More on the credits later. -LS

 

 

 

 

A CALL TO ACTION

Adopted July 17, 2001 by ASA Board of Directors

Summary

The critical shortage of services for adults with autism is a daily hardship for tens of thousands of families in the U.S. who struggle to provide a meaningful and productive life for their loved one who has aged-out of school.  Since 1975 when the Education for All Handicapped Act (now Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, I.D.E.A.) mandated a free and appropriate education for children with disabilities, parents took for granted their child had a firm and Congressionally mandated right to services.  Many are stunned to learn that when their child leaves school, the mandate for services ceases.

There is now a national crisis in services to adults with developmental disabilities, especially residential services, and especially to those with autism.  The most critical issue is woefully inadequate funding.  We cannot allow another generation of our adult children to go without the vital services that any humane society knows is necessary for a life of dignity and worth.

This paper presents some strong recommendations and a call to action.

Introduction

Only slightly more than two decades ago these aged-out-of-school adult dependent children would have been cared for by a stay-at-home mother or other female relative.  Today, however, these traditional caretakers are in the work force, contributing to the current norm of the two-income household.  This trend has now merged with another: the expectation of parents whose children have been in special education all their school lives (through age 22) that society will also assist them with adult services as was done, since 1975, with educational services.  Their children had a Congressionally mandated right to public education, and a strongly worded legislative support of a right to file grievances if parents felt they were not getting a free and appropriate public education.

These students leaving school no longer have a mandated right to services.  Their parents now face several different and complicated systems, such as vocational rehabilitation, public and private agencies providing a variety of funding and services, the latter typically not addressing the needs of their children.  Even more daunting is the intricate and cumbersome Medicaid system which is usually their only hope for assistance.  Some lucky families will have a good case manager whose case load allows more help than a few phone calls.  In almost all cases, meaningful case management services come only if an individual can get funding from a Medicaid Waiver slot.  (More on this later.)

 

 

2

But for individuals with autism, it is not a matter of only referral.  Often there is no appropriate program (especially residential) to refer to anywhere nearby, or even in a contiguous state.

There are roughly 25 agencies in the U.S. who have highly specialized programs (especially residential) for adults with autism.  These community agencies  are committed to serving this population, but inadequate Medicaid reimbursement rates and resulting low salaries cause high staff turnover rates.  Providing quality services is a daily struggle.   Expanding to include more clients is difficult to impossible. Agencies  report a constant stream of calls from parents crying (sometimes literally) for help for their child.

Unlike the nation’s educational system, where daily, hands-on special education services are provided by teachers with university degrees in the field, no equilavent professional, hands-on staff with preservice training is readily available in the autism field.  Those few degreed staff have typically started working at an autism agency during their college years and stayed on after graduation until they can find a better paying job or move up in the agency.

A few universities around the U.S. offer one course in autism.  Only five, at this writing, offer more than one, such as “Introduction to Autism,” “Classroom Strategies in Autism.”   One state, West Virginia, offers a summer course for autism mentors (autism classroom aides).  No undergraduate degree in autism is yet available, to the knowledge of this author.

As though things are not bad enough, all indications are that the prevalence of autism is on the rise.  The California Developmental Services System recently reported (Kleffman, S. 2001) that during the 88 days from January 4, 2001 to April 3, 2001, 760 new children were professionally diagnosed with DSM IV* autism.  These new cases represent an increase of 107 more children than reported in the previous record high for a  quarter.  The report states that:

Autism now accounts for an unbelievable 37% of all the new cases coming into the California Developmental Services System...These reports do not include any autism spectrum disorder such as PDD, NOS, Asperger’s, Rett, Fragile X ...[usually stated as PDD-NOS]

 

 

·        The Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is published by the American

Psychiatric

Association and has become the standard document to define autism and other mental                  disorders. This is their fourth edition.

 

Until the early 1990s, autism was said to be a rare disorder, approximately 4 per 10,000.  The Autism Society of America (ASA) is now using the figure of 1 per 500.

This growing number of individuals with a devastating and crippling disorder is no less than a public health crisis which needs immediate and serious attention at the highest levels of government and society.

Historical Background

Before we can propose a solution to the problems, it is important to understand how much has been accomplished in the past and what the present situation looks like.

Throughout the country, adult services for individuals with developmental disabilities (DD) are funded mainly by the Medicaid* Home and Community-Based (HCB) Waiver program, which provides federal funds to states, with a state match.  The ratio of match depends on the economy of each state.  In West Virginia, for instance, the match is less than 25 cents in state funds for every one dollar of federal funds.  In New York, the match is 50 cents state funds to one dollar federal funds.

The term “Waiver” came about in 1981 when the HCB Waiver was authorized by Congress as the result of a strong and nationwide movement for community-based services.   This legislation followed a decade-long series of high profile and successful class-action court cases against mental institutions, beginning with the impact of Wyatt V. Stickney (1972), in Alabama.  A patient named Wyatt died after attendants deliberately inserted so much fluid (via enemas) into his intestines that they ruptured.  The case alerted the nation to the ongoing and egregious violations of civil liberties taking place in many state (and other) mental facilities.  This effort was also supported by the tireless advocacy of parents and their professional colleagues in the field of developmental disabilities, as well as many young lawyers who threw themselves into winning these landmark court cases.

Prior to the 1980s, state and federal funds for individuals with DD went

only to state

institutions (mainly state “hospitals”  for mentally ill or impaired).  If a

family requested

 

 

 

·        Medicaid is Title XIX of the Federal Social Security Act.

 

 

 

assistance, their only choice was placing their loved one in a state institution.  There were almost no community services except a few private schools or day programs for individuals with mental retardation.  The staff were not trained or experienced in working with the unusual (and often severe) behaviors and highly challenging learning styles of people with an autism diagnosis.  Spaces were limited and anyone presenting with a diagnosis of autism was often not welcomed, or refused admission.

In 1974 a directory of services was published by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) entitled U.S. Facilities and Programs for Children with Severe Mental Illnesses – A Directory, 1974. (See References.)  The following excerpts from the preface demonstrate the state of affairs (p. v):

There is a rising social consciousness about the strange, tragic and

severely handicapping mental illness [autism was then still classified as a

mental illness] of early childhood.  But there are still pitifully few

services (and still fewer appropriate services) available anywhere at any

price.

and

Although the growing list of facilities is heartening, we caution parents to read the entries carefully.  If, for instance, a child’s label is autistic, he may not be eligible—even in many state mental hospitals with a children’ s unit; or, even if eligible, there might be a quota for children with this diagnosis.

The 1977 edition of the directory noted (p. v):

The major change is for a happy reason.  Public school programs are proliferating...While it is true there are...few such programs in the country, the sudden growth from zero a few years ago to 40 new classes this year in Ohio alone is exciting.

And importantly,

Unfortunately, there is yet no official way to evaluate the programs in this directory.  Parents (and a growing number of caring professionals) are still very much on their own to make judgments about the quality of a specific facility.

This last issue—evaluating a facility—will be discussed later in this paper.

 

 

>> DO SOMETHING ABOUT AUTISM NOW <<

Subscribe, Read, then Forward the FEAT Daily Newsletter.

To Subscribe go to    www.feat.org/FEATnews     No Cost!

 

 

 

 

When federal Medicaid monies became available to serve people with DD in institutions, many states “Medicaided” these hospitals* by setting up services which would meet the new federal guidelines.  No longer would these funds support only custodial care. “Active treatment” became a top criterion for programs.  There was a new designation called Intermediate Care Facility for the Mentally Retarded (ICF/MR).  Before that, federal funding to states had been provided for individuals without mental retardation in skilled nursing facilities, called Intermediate Care Facility/Skilled Nursing Facility (ICF/SNF).  The main criteria for services was that without them the individual was at risk of institutionalization.

Much of the bias one hears, even today, against ICFs and group homes, was generated by the development in the 1980s of large ICFs/MR, (congregate settings) housing several hundred or more residents.  Some, called “group homes,” housed 20 or more.  These days an increasing number of providers already operate small (three person) group homes, but the stigma is hard to shake.

Because these ICFs/MR were first set up at state hospitals and are (or were) in large institutions, they were based on a medical model, which typically have on-staff physicians and nurses, occupational therapists, physical therapists, sometimes even dentists.  This explains the requirement in Medicaid’s Home and Community Based Waiver program to have these professionals attending Individualized Program Plan (IPP) meetings and signing the sign-off sheet as though they were down the hall and available for meetings.  In a truly community-based program, clients are served by health professionals in the same way as people without disabilities are served—at professionals’ private offices, scattered around our communities.

In order for a state to receive federal HCB Waiver funds, it must provide the federal Health Care Finance Administration (HCFA) with an acceptable state plan.  These plans vary from state to state, so it is important that families, professionals and advocates know what is in their own state plan, which is public information.  Once HCFA approves the plan, the state must apply for a renewal periodically (e.g., every 3-5 years).  Amendments can be requested at any time.

As the community integration movement grew, Congress was asked to waive some of the Medicaid funds going only to state institutions so that services could begin in community-based settings.  That Waiver legislation passed in 1981 and the program has grown exponentially since then.  In fact, nine states—Alaska, Hawaii, New Mexico, West Virginia, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode Island, District of Columbia, Minnesota—have closed down all their institutions for people with DD (Braddock, 1998), almost always as a result of successful consumer-driven class action court cases.  Community integration is firmly in place and seems here to stay.

·        The term “hospital” was deemed a more politically correct term than “asylum” or “home for incurables,” as was common before c. 1950.

 

At first the HCB Waiver was available only to individuals who were in institutions so they could return to their communities.  The first group to receive these funds were patients with “breathing problems.”  Later, people with physical disabilities were included.  In 1987, the funds were opened to people with mental retardation, and shortly thereafter to all with developmental disabilities, whether or not they had ever been in an institution.  Again, the main criterion for eligibility was risk of institutionalization if they did not get these services.  Also, an individual must require the intensity of training and support that is received in an ICF/MR setting.

Today the major funding source for DD services in community-based settings comes from the Medicaid HCB Waiver program.  Depending on a state’s plan, the funding is based on consumer medical needs (not family income), provides individual case management, promotes choice, mandates careful documentation, provides most medical costs (via a Medicaid card), covers residential costs as well as in-home training and/or respite, and makes parents/guardians an equal member of the Interdisciplinary Team (IDT), which develops the Individualized Program Plan (IPP).

BUT, unlike the mandatory services under I.D.E.A.*, the Waiver is funded for only a limited number of eligible individuals, so eligibility does not provide entitlement.

States now have embarrassingly long waiting lists, and too often, little or no reasonable movement toward additional Waiver slots for funding the needed services.  One state recently froze all ICF/MR and Waiver funding for several years, which spawned a class-action court case against it.  The state’s Department of Health and Human Resources and many other states are in litigation, a major issue being entitlement and lack of movement of people off waiting lists into community services.

Advocates in some states boast having closed all their DD institutions, and though that was a historic, good, and important accomplishment, many of these advocates dropped out of the picture after their victory and did not keep pressures on legislatures and state agencies to provide permanent and adequate funding for community services.  With the safety net of institutions gone (such as they were/are), these and other states often have no real crisis services.  When a family can no longer handle their relative at home (for example, because of no or inappropriate services, divorce, death of a spouse, illness, old age), negative behavior escalates, people and property get damaged, the use of psychotropic drugs increases and, not uncommonly, physical restraints are used.  At this stage, clients—especially those with autism—are too often abused and injured.  Some have died.

TO BE CONTINUED

[The full report is at this website: http://www.autismservices.com/articles.html ]

·        The original legislation in 1975 was titled “Education for All Handicapped Act.”

In 1991, the name was changed to “Individuals with Disabilities Education Act,                       (I.D.E.A).”

 

 

>> DO SOMETHING ABOUT AUTISM NOW <<

Subscribe, Read, then Forward the FEAT Daily Newsletter.

To Subscribe go to    www.feat.org/FEATnews     No Cost!

 

 

 

 

* * *

 

Abnormal Measles Serology and Autoimmunity in Autistic Children

Abstract 702

Vijendra K Singh

Courtney Nelson

Utah State University,

Logan, UT

[Not yet available online.]

Immune factors such as autoimmunity may play a causal role in autism.  We recently showed that many autistic children have autoantibodies to brain myelin basic protein (MBP) as well as elevated levels of measles virus antibodies. To extend this research further, we conducted a serological study of measles virus (MV), mumps virus (MuV), rubella virus (RV), cytomegalovirus (CMV), human herpesvirus-6 (HHV-6), measles-mumps-rubella (MMR), diptheria-pertussis-tetanus (DPT), diptheria-tetanus (DT) and hepatitis B (Hep B) and studied correlations with MBP autoantibodies.

Antibodies were assayed in sera of autistic children (n=125) and normal children (n=92) by ELISA or immunoblotting methods. We found that autistic children have significantly (p=0.001) higher than normal levels of MV and MMR antibodies whereas the antibody levels of MuV, RV, CMV, HHV-6, DPT, DT or Hep B did not significantly differ between autistic and normal children.

Immunoblotting analysis showed the presence of an unusual MMR antibody in 60% (75 of 125) of autistic children, but none of the 92 normal children had this antibody. Moreover, by using MMR blots and monoclonal antibodies, we found that the specific increase of MV antibodies or MMR antibodies was related to measles hemagglutinin antigen (MV-HA), but not to mumps or rubella viral proteins, of the MMR vaccine. In addition, over 90% of MMR antibody-positive autistic sera were also positive for MBP autoantibodies, suggesting a causal association between MMR and brain autoimmunity in autism.

Stemming from this evidence, we suggest that an “atypical” measles infection in the absence of a rash but with neurological symptoms might be etiologically linked to autoimmunity in autism. (Supported by grants from the James Dougherty Jr Foundation, Unanue Foundation, Lettner Jr Foundation, Autism Autoimmunity Project and Autism Research Institute)

Journal of Allergy Clin Immunol 109 (1):S232, 2002   (January).

 

 

 

APRIL 21, 2002 - 12 Noon to 5pm

THIRD NATIONAL AUTISM AWARENESS RALLY:

“The Power of ONE! I.D.E.A.”

FREE and OPEN TO THE PUBLIC

www.unlockingautism.org

 

Lenny Schafer, Editor@feat.org    CALENDAR EVENTS@feat.org Michelle Guppy

Catherine Johnson PhD    Ron Sleith    Kay Stammers    Edward Decelie

UNSUBSCRIBE: FEATNews-signoff-request@LIST.FEAT.ORG

 

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE.  THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.