Autism is not a condition that I have studied and at times
I have been concerned that this Journal may have
published a disproportionate number of studies on a
condition that is relatively rare and primarily determined
by genetic factors, and for these reasons, perhaps of less
relevance to most clinicians. Having read Pat Howlin's
Practitioner Review I realise just how wrong I have been
on both counts! Not only are autism, autism spectrum
disorders, and Asperger syndrome far more common
than I realised (the prevalence estimate of Wing for
autism spectrum disorders of just under 1 per 1000 is
quoted) but it is also clear that the recent research effort
focused on these children has paid dividends in the
development of approaches to treatment for the
disorders. As Howlin emphasises, these advances have
not led to a cure for autism, as claimed by some
proponents of therapies such as holding therapy and
facilitated communication, and even those producing
some change may require an unacceptable burden of
commitment for families, for example the home-based
behavioural programmes of Lovaas and colleagues.
However, as she clearly indicates, we have learned how to
guide the management of challenging behaviour and have
methods both to enhance communication and to reduce
obsessional behaviour in children with autism. A recurrent
theme running through this Practitioner Review is
the value of early intervention with these children. This,
in turn, gives new impetus to both the research concerned
with the basic deficits experienced by children with autism
and the studies on the detection of early signs of the
disorder by, amongst others, Baron-Cohen and
colleagues. An example of the former is the paper in this
issue by Leevers and Harris into the ability of the child
with autism to conceptualise and image “impossible”
entities, for example a man with two heads. This study
showed that the imagination of children with autism is
not as impaired as once thought. Care should be taken
not to interpret poor performance on such tests as
reflecting lack of creativity or imagination when a
problem with understanding the nature of the task or
with certain task demands, such as planning, may be
responsible.