I think having the label is important, because it allows you to get what they need to be successful in school and in life. And isn’t that the most important thing here, giving our kids what they need as quickly as possible.

There are ways to be direct and say, “I think your child needs to see x doctor” without going outside of your expertise and saying things like “your child won’t ever __”.

(Unless you have a ped who also happens to be psychic- but even then there are too many cases of children doing things they were told they wouldn’t be able to.)

One thing that interested me is that looked to me as if the recommendations for straight-talk came from the “been there/done that” group (the EI parents). It seems to me that this group has the more informed perspective on what one REALLY ends up wanting when the rubber hits the road.

JoyMama—
I totally agree.

I only lately became aware of how very recent the AAP recommendation is for using validated screening tools for developmental delays at early-childhood pediatric well-checks. Our pediatrician’s office was doing this already in 2002 when I had my first child, and I just assumed this was what most clinics would do. It was SO valuable in helping to catch my second child’s delays, very early on. More pediatricians need to be doing this!

Predicting future skills from pre-school delays is silly. But acknowledging said preschool delays, along with the possibility of staying delayed despite increasing skills, or of catching up or passing typical peers, is extremely important. Early delays aren’t set in stone, it’s important to make parents aware of the fact that this is simply not so…

That was the problem, no follow up on what to do next. Luckily having been to the audiologist first we were involved in the Prov Pd speech and language program. And truly by fluke and forth hand listening to someone at a “do” I started making calls and totally fluked and found Community Living and my FSW.

The other problem with the wait and see’s and sugar coated dx’s is when we went back at 3 and he had a few words they changed it to “speech and language delayed with global delays”. The school LOVED this one. “It’s just a learning disability we don’t have to do anything until Gr 3”.

Call it what it is. Call it what will get you supports in school. Use it to get the services you need.

I was offered a re-dx last fall to mild NLD…. thanks but “A mild form of ASD” is the same and with ASD in the dx we keep the services. Without “it’s just a learning disability” bye bye OT and EA/TA.

In the “epic” I wrote to the Fed’s (all parties) and have sent to all of our team members I have written the “what to do next”. I’ve had requests from all (team members not gov’t) – since I wrote on it they couldn’t copy it – to use the “what to do next” section to give to others in their practices. The answer of course was “Yes”.

A diagnosis has implications of what may happen, but the prognosis is distinct from the diagnosis and the important thing to me is the doctor be clear about the difference.

As for the “wait and see” approach, there’s often more than enough waiting during the diagnosis process and more waiting for services to begin once the diagnosis has been procured. With all the emphasis on early intervention being a key factor in skills-building, the “wait and see” approach seems out-dated and counter-productive to me. A better solution for the over-burdened system would be to create literature or other forms of training for parents to use to help children with mild delays on their own and keep the more expensive services to consultation visits. If that doesn’t work, then provide them with trained service providers. I would say it’s better to know and to be able to do something instead of waiting for potential problems to become more severe. A booklet and training video would be cheap enough to produce and distribute and could potentially save whichever government uses it from the need to provide more costly services later.