Talk:Facilitated communication/Archive1

This is an archive page, last updated 6 July 2024. Please do not make edits to this page.

Archives for this talk page:  , (new)(back)

Topic

I've often wanted to ask RSchlafly who does his typing for him. ~~ CЯacke® 23:48, 7 July 2007 (CDT)

Y'know, as silly as some of his ideas are, I think he may be the brightest CP sysop. He's disagreed with some of Andy's silly mathematical ideas (see their conversation on the Axiom of Choice), and his patents are actually for clever unobvious solutions to real problems. --jtl^talk 00:07, 8 July 2007 (CDT)

Bright? Like Venus at 3am, yeah, I'll give you that. Full moon bright would be pushing it.

I mean, the man has spent three solid months arguing against having Isaac Newton's page star out as "Sir Isaac Newton". A bit to obsessive for mine tastes.

To be fair when he's not on one of his high horses (of which he's got more of than Leno has cars), he seems almost...(dare I say it?)...rational.

He and his brother don't seem to get along so good...must be some sort of family values shit I don't know about. ~~ CЯacke® 00:15, 8 July 2007 (CDT)

PS Like many genii I've known, once you get them out of their little realm of brilliance they're as dumb as the next guy. CЯacke®

Anyone know if public funds go toward this, like ADA requirements, etc? I can't find anything yet.--PalMD^-Goatspeed! 15:07, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

AFAIK I think the FC "movement" peaked about the early to mid nineties. The studies showed that when the facilitator and the "client" were shown the same inputs the results were astounding; if differing inputs were shown almost invariably the results corresponded to what the facilitator saw. I don't have study(ies) right here on hand but that's what I remember seeing at the time I read about them. CЯacke® 17:32, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

I think the Frontline report in ?93 was the death knell. I don't know the extent of its current use.--PalMD^-Goatspeed! 17:34, 9 July 2007 (CDT)

FC may, in general, be useless; but an FC-like effect can occur when people with autism (or movement disorders) get help not from other humans, but from service animals. Apparently, the animal, usually a dog, can provide what amounts to moral support--just enough to allow the person to initiate and control the movement required for them to use a communication device (I assume the presence of a human would be useful, too, though not for actual facilitation). I also know that some people with attention/memory problems will have an aide to constantly redirect them to their communication device so they don't lose track or perseverate on the same letter/word/symbol. Both of these are very different from the Ouija-board effect of classic FC, but may have contributed to the unfortunate idea that FC is "real communication"... which of course shuts off any actual communication the person may be attempting.--65.185.152.236 (talk) 06:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

An example of consequences this can have

See "The Strange Case of Anna Stubblefield" (from the New York Times) --87.179.41.222 (talk) 14:38, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Tl;dr Anna Stubblefield had sex with a disabled man, D.J., who cannot speak or communicate. Stubblefield thought she gained consent through facilitated communication. The trial determined that she had too much influence over the individual for it to be consent. Also, she left her family and kids for this guy..?—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 15:02, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

I read this whole goddamn thing. Fuck you, now I'm sad as shit now.—Hamburguesa con queso con un cara  (talk • stalk) 15:48, 6 April 2017 (UTC)