If nonspeaking autistic spellers are the actual composers of their advanced narrative via letter boards held by parents, why are they in day programs?
This is a very fair question. For example, the alleged author of the novel “Upward Bound,” Woody Brown, is nonverbal and has a day program history.
The prose that he allegedly composes is highly sophisticated, suggesting an IQ well over average.
Yet why would anyone with an IQ well over average be satisfied with “day program culture”?
We already know the answer in the case of Woody Brown. Video in slow motion (even normal speed) has clearly shown that he points to random letters on the card held by mother Mary, spelling gibberish.
But what about other nonspeaking autistic spellers in the media, such as Jason Jacoby Lee and Elizabeth Bonker?
Their writing and responses to questions indicate above average intellect. In fact, Jason has allegedly written several commentaries that indicate strong intelligence.
Now, I don’t know if he or Elizabeth, who both point to letters on a plastic card held by their parents, have been in day programs as adults.
But I have yet to read anything about either of them working part-time jobs that don’t require speech.
You’d think that if someone can’t talk but has a high degree of intelligence, they’d want to get a part-time job – even if it’s simple, repetitive work – in the name of being productive.
There are other nonspeaking spellers with autism I’ve read about, who have CRPs – communication regulation partners (new name for facilitators), who, interestingly, don’t have jobs. And there are plenty of jobs that don’t require spoken language.
I’ve been a direct support provider (aka direct support professional, supportive community connector) for special needs adults.
Medicaid funds these programs, and in my state, they are referred to as SCC: supported community connection. The catch-all term is day programs.
A wide range of special needs adults attend these programs, from people who make you think they shouldn’t be in these programs and are taking a spot from someone who actually needs the program, to individuals who are very low functioning, must be kept in line of sight and, in some cases, lack spoken language.
What Goes on in a Day Program
In a bustling city you’ll see day programs in action when you go shopping or run other errands in the community.
In the busy city that I work in, I’ve seen them out and about all the time. It’s pretty much guaranteed.
Common places visited include malls, discount and thrift stores, big box stores, bowling centers, fast food chains, libraries, pottery painting studios and parks. (Some participants will make a purchase, but for most, it’s just looking around.)
It’s a pretty simple way to spend the day. I can’t see someone with the gift of sophisticated, formal writing being drawn to such a simple way to use up five hours a day.
Instead, you’d think – with their high level of thinking – they’d rather be at home reading, working on complex puzzles, watching documentaries or news on TV, studying something of interest, and exploring the Internet, perhaps reading up on different cultures or watching intellectually stimulating videos.
Why would they rather be driven places they don’t want to go (four people in a group will rarely all agree on how to spend five hours) and be made to do things they don’t want to do, such as walk around at a mall, sit for extended periods in the food court, hang at a park, or be repeatedly urged by the provider to make a drawing like everyone else is.
Autonomy can be heavily stripped in a day program. Seems to me that the higher the intelligence of the participant, the more they’ll feel this effect.
The highest functioning, when bored out of their minds with what they see as juvenile activities, will keep busy on their phones.
The lower functioning participants are the most amenable to wherever the provider is taking the group and are more likely to engage in the prescribed activity (e.g., coloring designs on paper bags that will be filled with goodies to be distributed to nursing home residents).
Those with a higher level of cognitive skills are the ones more likely to get quickly bored, take to their phones, or find a like-minded person in the group (if it’s a multi-group venue) to socialize.
It’s a really boring way to spend five hours a day for someone with an IQ well above average.
What do really bright people, who have speech, do on days they don’t work? Few will spend five hours walking around a mall, then walking around at Walmart, followed by the Dollar Store – when they have nothing to buy.
Few will sit for two hours in a food court staring into space, napping or playing with a fidget. It stands to reason that they’d rather be involved in something challenging or stimulating.
Fair question: Why are spellers with the alleged gift of writing or self-advocacy via spelling cards/CRPs in day programs?
Someone with advanced intellect would find this way of existing extremely boring and dull.
So what’s my point, then? It’s this: The fact that sophisticated spellers are in day programs (assuming they are) contradicts the claim that they themselves – and only themselves – are the authors behind their prose.
