What information do professionals have?

This might be one for the Moderators to look into, but I wonder if others have insight on this.

I've had several conversations recently with professionals dealing with adults on the spectrum who've just spouted the triad of impairments, or who've said its all in the triad of impairments.

With all the literature on theories about autism and various interpretations, and approaches to treatment, I could quite understand professionals looking for the easiest synthesis to hand.  But what is to hand? Is it just too easy to read up on the triad and related summaries? Or is there nothing else to hand for professionals to use.

The Triad of Impairments, as far as I can see, is of no more value than for diagnosing children. It has little relevance to the everyday lives and experiences of adults, and is hardly appropriate to helping professionals understand adult needs.

It doesn't explain a lot of issues facing adults.

But just what are the main texts used by professionals? And how useful are these texts for supporting adults?

Parents
  • I was thinking, as you do,, Tongue Out

     

    POLICY MAKING INTO LAW(act of parliament)~ Interest rings via canvas.... individual/public/special/inner/letters of interest/government equals policy and act of parliament,, and here is the interesting bit... this creates at the end of the day A DEMAND OF DEBT to be paid by society via government promise to pay the demand of the bearer, in this case the Autism Act.  

    I am the bearer(off autism) and I demand !

    Demand is automatic debt,, when an act of parliament bill is policy it demands a debt of the government by promise of debt to pay,, hence in the Autism Act, there is a debt demand or a cost to society which is promised to be paid or the government is open to risk of legal challenge at the courts for compensation.

    I keep saying this,, WILL THE NAS TAKE AUTISM ACT FAILURE TEST CASES TO COURT, although the organisation is in the ring system and with the main ring of governement, for the good of government it should be challenging the government under the demand of debt via the Autism Act. Why have the act in the first place if the debt of the demand(autism service and protection) is not made policy on the ground ?

    I feel that I am speaking double dutch ? Does this make sense ?

Reply
  • I was thinking, as you do,, Tongue Out

     

    POLICY MAKING INTO LAW(act of parliament)~ Interest rings via canvas.... individual/public/special/inner/letters of interest/government equals policy and act of parliament,, and here is the interesting bit... this creates at the end of the day A DEMAND OF DEBT to be paid by society via government promise to pay the demand of the bearer, in this case the Autism Act.  

    I am the bearer(off autism) and I demand !

    Demand is automatic debt,, when an act of parliament bill is policy it demands a debt of the government by promise of debt to pay,, hence in the Autism Act, there is a debt demand or a cost to society which is promised to be paid or the government is open to risk of legal challenge at the courts for compensation.

    I keep saying this,, WILL THE NAS TAKE AUTISM ACT FAILURE TEST CASES TO COURT, although the organisation is in the ring system and with the main ring of governement, for the good of government it should be challenging the government under the demand of debt via the Autism Act. Why have the act in the first place if the debt of the demand(autism service and protection) is not made policy on the ground ?

    I feel that I am speaking double dutch ? Does this make sense ?

Children
No Data