Is Autism a “Public Health Crisis?”. Introduction
In 2005, the Legislative Blue Ribbon Commission on Autism was established based on a resolution authored by then President Pro Tem of the California Senate, Don Perata. The Commission’s goal was to directly impact the needs of children and adults with autism spectrum disorders (ASD) in the state by bringing together a group representing parents of children with autism, public and private sectors, educators, physicians, and public health officials. At its first meeting in September, 2006, three Task Forces were established. They were:
A primary goal of the Commission was to investigate and make recommendations towards alleviating apparent gaps in the diagnosis, assessment, treatment, and support of persons with ASD and their families. In September, 2007, the Commission released its report. The report was to provide specific policy recommendations, shape and directly influence services to persons with (ASD) and their families throughout California. The Blue Ribbon Commission’s report also closely mirrored discussions and challenges occurring around the country with regards to how services are identified and prioritized for persons with ASD and their families. The report written by the Commission on Autism is available on their website (California Blue Ribbon Commission Report on Autism, 2007). The Commission’s work was intended to stimulate a broader discussion and review of the evolving area of assessment and intervention for persons with ASD. Thus far, that wider conversation, to include an emphasis on the report’s many strengths as well as specific concerns and challenges relevant to both California and the country, has apparently not occurred. The fact that this report represents so much time and effort in its unique attempt to directly address autism, and the lives of persons with autism, is, at the same time, both positive and unsettling. The increased attention to autism is positive as the number of children and adults diagnosed with autism has increased exponentially in communities across California and the United States (Croen et al., 2008; Rice, 2007). Such a singular focus on the category of autism, however, risks reduced attention to why these numbers have increased as well as to children and adults with a wider range of related developmental and learning needs. Presenting autism, and needed resources, as dramatically different from other special needs may disempower professionals and non-professionals from using their training, resources, and experience to support children identified as ASD.
As otherwise skilled and knowledgeable professionals, from educators to social service workers, become convinced that they are less able to support children with autism and their families based on their ostensibly distinct needs, the predicted service ‘crisis’ may become a self fulfilling prophecy.