Quite a while ago, on March 18, 2012 to be exact, I
posted on this blog a piece called “Attachment Therapy: Where Are the Testimonials
From the Children?” I was hoping to hear from people who had experienced or
observed various kinds of holding therapy as children and to learn what they
remembered about what happened. I have had a few responses over the years, but
not long ago, and again yesterday, I heard from someone who had experienced
Martha Welch’s “holding time” version of this treatment and had seen and heard her autistic brother as he was put
through a brutal form of holding. This correspondent made a suggestion that I
had never thought of (doh!) and led me to look at the Amazon reviews of Welch’s
1989 book “Holding Time”, which recommended daily holding of screaming,
resisting children, both as a treatment for autism and just for ordinary
parenting purposes. Looking over those,
I came upon a reference to a book I had never heard of, which amazingly turned
out to be on the shelf in my town library.
Let
me hear your voice: A family’s triumph over autism was
published in 1993 by Catherine Maurice (I see elsewhere that this name was a
pseudonym, so I am not at all sure how to reach her for further information—like
what happened to her children later). Maurice had a typically-developing son,
followed by a daughter and another son, both of whom began by developing
typically and then showed many signs of the regressive type of autism. Both
also recovered a typical developmental trajectory, a recovery that Maurice
attributed to Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA), a behavior modification program that
has research support.
This beautifully-written book is a candid account of
the actions and feelings of parents dealing with first one, then another
autistic child while trying to keep their daily lives somewhat intact. It
includes an appendix with specific information about the treatment and gradual
changes in each child. As such, it offers a great deal to parents who need some
hope and understanding about how a treatment may proceed.
From my point of view, however, the great value of
Maurice’s book is its exposure of Martha Welch’s proposed treatment for
autistic children. Welch visited Evergreen,
Colorado in the heyday of the town’s existence as home of the attachment
therapy cottage industry. She absorbed the idea of physical restraint and the
power of parental authority to force changes in children as the parent wished
them to occur. However, in creating her own method, Welch added the seductive
element of “mother love” as a cure for childhood mental illness. She proposed
that all holding had to be done by a child’s mother, and indicated that this
was a cure for all emotional problems of concern to parents—including aloofness
or ingratitude in typically-developing children. In instructional videotapes,
Welch presented her son Bram as an example of what could be achieved by daily
holding of a resisting child until he or she relaxed and became accepting and
affectionate. For many years, the great selling point for Welch’s method was
her claim that it cured autistic children, but by 2006 she had altered this to
presenting the treatment, now called Prolonged Parent-Child Embrace (PPCE) as a
therapy for children with Reactive Attachment Disorder and oppositional
behavior; autism was no longer a focus by that time.
Maurice openly admits how she “fell for” Welch’s
approach and explanation of autism. Autism, according to Welch (and her mentors
Elisabeth and Niko Tinbergen, the latter a Nobel laureate), was caused when a
mother and child failed to “bond”. This failure caused the child to be
terrified of the world and of people, whom he or she avoided. Inside each autistic
child, according to this view, is a typically-developing child who is simply
too frightened to speak or look at anyone. Holding therapy forces the child and
mother to bond, the child loses his fears, and voila’, the concealed
development is demonstrated to be there. Welch’s charm and air of authority
convinced Maurice that she must be right, and indeed anyone who watches Welch’s
instructional tapes can see how this attractive, warm, caring person would
appear to answer the needs of any wretched, frightened, exhausted parent who
saw a child deteriorating before their eyes. Of course, from a safe, objective
distance, it is much easier to discern in Welch the deep conviction and
enthusiasm of what Freud called the furor
sanandi – the “lust for curing”.
With respect to holding therapy, Maurice’s story
concentrates on how she and her husband responded to Welch. Catherine initially
saw Welch as the savior she was looking for, although from the beginning she
was concerned about the idea that something had happened to prevent a bond
between her daughter and her self. Welch suggested that such an event could
occur when a baby of a few months overheard her mother say something negative,
or even when an unborn baby was in some way exposed to its mother’s thoughts
and opinions. Catherine Maurice doubted this to begin with, and over the months
began to question Welch’s views more seriously (although even after she broke
with Welch, she seemed to feel that holding did something positive). Her
husband was not pleased with Welch from the start, wanted information about the
outcomes of the treatment which he did not get, but decided to go along with
his wife’s wishes.
Speaking of encountering another mother who was
devoted to Welch, Maurice noted: “In this woman, as in other holding therapy
disciples, I was beginning to see something I didn’t like—something I
recognized in myself: blind faith, idealization of human individual, unwillingness to admit we
can make mistakes about what is right for our children….Before my relationship with
Dr. Welch ended, I was to understand what it might be like to be seduced and
drawn into a cult. To those who are frightened enough and desperate enough, it
becomes harder and harder to hold onto sense and intelligence, reason and
objectivity. Cast into an unknown land, uncertain of our bearings, we parents
at the Mothering Center took enormous solace from the calm assurances, the
sweet promises, of our savior.” However, over time Maurice realized that
although she could see the positive results of the ABA treatment her daughter
was also receiving, Welch consistently told her how harmful it was. She also
came to understand that she had never seen any of the “cured” children Welch
claimed to have come out of holding therapy. One case, published in Life magazine rather than in a
professional journal, did not seem to Maurice to have had anything like the
successful outcome claimed for it.
Maurice and her
daughter visited a group in which holding therapy was being done by mothers
with autistic children and were terrified by the screaming and the shouts of
mothers “expressing” their rage that the children were not paying attention to
them. Among other things, she saw a mother restraining her severely impaired
three-year-old son; when the child accidentally bumped his head, the mother
asked for ice, and an aide told her, “Mary… that bump is insignificant compared
to the damage you will do if you don’t get a resolution from this child” – a resolution
being a change in the child’s behavior from screaming resistance to cuddling. The
aide went on to say that the reason she could not “get a resolution” was that
her husband was not supportive enough. All these things were concerning to
Maurice, but the final straw was that when she was asked to speak about holding
for a BBC production on the treatment, her attempt at a balanced presentation,
speaking of the various treatments that were being used for her daughter, was
edited so that only holding was recommended.
Maurice’s discussion of her attraction to Welch’s
method and her gradual loss of faith is a real, though sympathetic, object
lesson to parents who find themselves devoted to an “alternative psychotherapy”.
The impact of the misguided treatment on her family may have been as serious as
the challenges presented by autistic children. At the time this book was
written, Maurice’s children were still too young for their thoughts and
memories to be articulated very well, so we really do not know how they
experienced Welch’s treatment or any other treatment they received. I know
Maurice has continued her concerns about autism, because, still using her
pseudonym, she more recently co-edited a book with two well-known professionals
in the field. Could she tell us now how her grown-up children are doing? Could
the children tell us what they remember or think about their experiences? I
wish she, and they, would round off the understanding she supplied in her 1993
book with that additional information.
Some autists feel that ABA therapy was abusive. What do you think about that?
ReplyDeleteWhen aversives are used in ABA, it certainly can be done abusively. In addition, Ivar Lovaas, the developer of ABA, stopped using them after a few years because he felt they were ineffective. Except for one or two holdouts, I would say that aversives are hardly ever used today except when the alternative of allowing the child to self-injure seems much worse. Even in cases of self-injury, there is much work going on to develop effective methods that do not use aversives.
ReplyDeleteAll that being said, it is of course possible to use any treatment technique in at least an emotionally abusive way, by shouting at the child, behaving in an intimidating way, and handling the child roughly. It's also true that even when the therapist is by no means abusive, autistic children may cry and resist in the first sessions. However, they subsequently become engaged with the treatment and seem happy to participate. How many sessions of crying should make us define this treatment as abusive? I am not at all sure. I know it's all too easy to compare uncomfortable psychological treatment to uncomfortable medical treatment, and by analogy to say that if uncomfortable chemotherapy is worthwhile when it cures cancer, uncomfortable [fill in the blank] psychological treatment is equally worthwhile. Whether that conclusion is correct or not really depends on all the details-- how uncomfortable, how long, and how effectively does it correct the original problem?
I do not know how to answer these broader questions and would like to hear other people's opinions.