Karen Savlov

[goddessoflubbock]

Has anyone heard of her? She is (according to her twitter bio) a marriage and family therapist, a psychoanalyst, and she specializes in ASD's.

She's a loon. (That's my personal, unbiased, unvarnished opinion). LOL Her twitter name is autismthoughts in case anyone is interested.

Her blog is at http://www.wonderingaboutautism.com (which I'll doublecheck and fix if I got the link wrong.

I admittedly only read a small part of her blog, from the Arpil 23rd post on autistic behaviors. I had to stop as I had just eaten.

Ms. Savlov (located in Los Angeles, BTW) opines that children are autistic because they never made an attachment to a caregiver. Hmmm, it begins to sound a lot like refrigerator mother syndrome all over again.

The ONLY point I've agreed with her on so far is that it's a big mistake parents make in trying to stop all their child's behaviors to make them seem "normal", rather than working on coping skills, etc.

Here's a gem: (paraphrased)
She was working with a 3 year old boy, presumably non-verbal, who she says never played with his toys the "right way". The boy was sitting picking at his lip and she said something like I see you touching your mouth would you like to speak with me? The boy suddenly picks up the toy and plays with it appropriately there on out. (Queue angelic music and diffuse light from above).

This happened she explained because she listened to him, validated him, all but darn well cured him. She's the autism whisperer. Can I get an amen?

Sorry for all the sarcasm but this lady got under my skin.

Several people have asked her about female auties and (gasp!)her work with adults with ASD's, but she's not responded.

Also, Ms. Savlov talks a lot about what does and doesn't motivate a person with autism, about this concept of almost being a 3rd person, of learning to use one's self in productive and meaningful ways.

I can't speak to that, don't know how that thought process/functionality happens. It also makes me wonder how she learned it - I've read a ton and never read what she's describing - did she get a 1-on-1 insider chat with someone who has autism but could explain their processes clearly to her? Not sure on that one.

[ruth]

Have to disagree with you on this one, Goddess. I think Karen is freaking brilliant. Thank you for hooking me up with a like mind. (Have I just admitted to being freaking brilliant. I didn't meant to. But I won't deny it. ) I intend to read every last word of her blogs and see if she has anything published in book form. I got chills reading much of what she has to say. But as I have already stated, I am a strong believer in the power of the unconscious on our thoughts and behavior.

She reveals to me a very loving, dedicated and out of the box thinker and her attachment ideas strike a deeply resonant chord, compatible with and harmonious to my instinctual and intuitive self concepts. I really love her statement about the therapist/parent actualizing along with the autist in a mutual learn,teach and attach relationship.

In my opinion and from my experience, being taken seriously, especially for an autistic person, be it child or adult, is the greatest gift anyone could give to another. Does all of this fall into the category of a "cure." I'm not really prepared at this point to say. I lean more to the side of no cure is the best cure, and by that I mean, I don't think autism is a "thing" to be cured, so cure to me it is a clumsy word I would prefer to reserve for physiological medicine or healing.

I don't think autists need to be healed. I don't profess to know what autists need as a whole or as a group. A group of autists seems a paradox as autists are so inherently and blissfully singular. I understand that the term "blissfully singular" could be a flak catcher, but I suspect that more autists experience bliss than non-autists, if they are left alone to experience it, allowed to experience it, that is.

On an individual level, my best guess as to what autists need would be: recognition, acceptance, appreciation and love for who they are as they are, which love, appreciation, acceptance and recognition would then be available for recognition and self employment in a kind of perpetual motion (or emotion ) or as a chain of action and reaction. Therapy to install and promote Integration, Actualization, Realization of the self within the self with the goal or never-ending result (as opposed to end result) being genuine and rewarding relationships to and with others, even if the others be relatively few, would seem the best way to go from my point of view. I believe this is the theory or point of view Karen Savlov professes to as well.

[oscilor]

This is the link to the blog: http://www.wonderingaboutautism.blogspot.com/

"use your knowledge of autism to inform how you use yourself with the child,"

Ugh, not my thing at all. I wouldn't want some stranger using themselves with me and certainly not with my child (if I had a child).

"Interpret all behaviors of the child, i.e. “are you hitting me because you want to be close to me?” "

Think again Karen, there could be another explanation.

[goddessoflubbock]

Thanks Oscilor, I just now got back to update that but you've taken care of it

As I said in my first post I can't speak to what goes on in the autistic mind, as far as sense of self and her agency theory.

The things I do know about tho, I disagree with her on.

She casts this broad stroke of generalization across all on the spectrum - if you are non-verbal you only communicate through your perseverations. I know this to be untrue.

I also happened to go a rather unorthodox route with my son - reading everything I could find, talking to everyone who seemed knowledgable, (coming to Gestalt was sooooo beneficial!) throwing out what I eventually learned was junk or didn't sit right with my gut, and working from there. And I realize that I may be supremely lucky that things fell into place as they did.

I guess I see my mission as trying to cut down on the amount of crap there is out there to wade through, for the next mom like me.

[Sophist]

ruth, I would just be hesitant to lay attachment issues at the feet of your autism. It is possible you know to have a crappy childhood AND be autistic.

With my work, attachment issues are definitely not going to cause the development of the autistic neuroanatomy. --It ain't gonna help either of course!

I know you have an extreme fondness of Freudianism, and I would imagine Ms. Savlov is sincerely trying to help her clients. But taking a Psychoanalytic approach to sensory issues isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

[ruth]

ruth, I would just be hesitant to lay attachment issues at the feet of your autism. It is possible you know to have a crappy childhood AND be autistic.

Is Ms. Savlov saying that attachment issues are the cause of autism? I didn't see that anywhere in her words. I don't see her blaming parents, mothers or fathers, for their child's autism either, but it's certainly possible that she has taken that stand and I'm simply not aware of it. I take her view to be that attachment issues are a significant component and major issue with autistics but not "the" cause of their autism. If those issues are resolved the person is still going to remain autistic but better equipped to thrive and participate in the world around them. Yes, of course, it is possible to have a crappy childhood AND be autistic, as much as it is possible to have a happy childhood AND be autistic. No argument there from me.

With my work, attachment issues are definitely not going to cause the development of the autistic neuroanatomy. --It ain't gonna help either of course!

Of course not. But in my opinion, and obviously Ms. Savlov's, attachment issues are the chief emotional and behavioral manifestations of autistic neuroanatomy. Yes. Exactly. These issues ain't gonna help but the resolution of these issues may. It's not that far out any more to believe that behavior can change thought and anatomy, why should it be absurd to think it can change neuroanatomy?

I know you have an extreme fondness of Freudianism, and I would imagine Ms. Savlov is sincerely trying to help her clients. But taking a Psychoanalytic approach to sensory issues isn't going to get anyone anywhere.

Actually I'm more of a Jungian, but I never like to throw old hats away, you never know when you might need them. I don't agree of course, that psychoanalytic approach cannot relieve and greatly benefit sensory issues. The mind can heal itself. The mind is able to heal itself. I will always believe that. But, I will agree that not everyone can be served by the psychoanalytic approach.

[ruth]

I have been thinking that it would be a great idea to invite Karen Savlov to interact with us and clarify some of her ideas so that we can get a better understanding of her work. Do I need permission to do this? Would there be any objections? Does anyone else think this would be a good idea?

I am going to be away from the computer for a while. Sophist, I am sending you a pm with the proposed invitation for you to check out and edit if you feel that would be necessary to be in compliance with our rules and regulations here.

Also, it won't put my nose out of joint if I get a thumbs down on this idea. I just personally think it would be a great experience for us to see and understand exactly where Karen stands on issues that concern the autistic community and be able to hear our views as well and answer any questions that we might have regarding her work.

I am having a period of idea explosion.

[Sophist]

I'd like to hear comments from other members before giving a thumbs up. She's of course able to join regardless. But considering the tone coming from most of the members in this thread (myself included) I would be concerned that Ms. Savlov would receive a less than warm welcome which could potentially cause her to become defensive, ending in arguments rather than any true communication.

If others would be supportive in sending her an invitation, then I say go for it.

[ruth]

I'd like to hear comments from other members before giving a thumbs up. She's of course able to join regardless. But considering the tone coming from most of the members in this thread (myself included) I would be concerned that Ms. Savlov would receive a less than warm welcome which could potentially cause her to become defensive, ending in arguments rather than any true communication.

If others would be supportive in sending her an invitation, then I say go for it.

I understand completely but I think it's unfortunate to dismiss a person's life work because you don't agree with it. I don't see it as a right / wrong situation, but a sharing of theories, approaches, results. And I do see, now that you've brought it to light, how the scenario you describe could actually take place, regrettably. I don't agree with most of the major religions of the world, but I love learning about them and respect their leaders, practitioners and followers, as long as they're not devil worshipers. Maybe autism is becoming or has already become a kind of religion, in the sense that people, autists et al, are so highly passionate about and dedicated to their various and conflicting beliefs and practices, and all with good or honorable intent, but believing that their God is the best or only God, that defenses and divisions have been constructed and ideas that differ from one's own are seen as opposing forces to be deflected and/or squashed. The holy wars of autism are bound to break out whenever the subject of Autism arises. And that sucks. But, it is understandable.

[goddessoflubbock]

If Ms Pavlov has read my prior tweets, she already knows about Gestalt. I have a lot of autism-related followers (go figure!)and have recommended the site to them. My twitters are public.

She and I have been chatting and it is frustrating. She will state the opposite of what she has said in her blog, to seem agreeable I think. Then when I asked her if she only treated low functioning, Kanner-esque kids, she came back saying I called HER Kanner-esque.

Lastly - we were talking about communication and I mentioned Amanda Baggs. Savlov says she's never heard of her, like she's just some friend of mine.

I would've at least done a quick google to save face before saying I'd never heard of someone. Just my .02

[ruth]

If Ms Pavlov has read my prior tweets, she already knows about Gestalt. I have a lot of autism-related followers (go figure!)and have recommended the site to them. My twitters are public.

She and I have been chatting and it is frustrating. She will state the opposite of what she has said in her blog, to seem agreeable I think. Then when I asked her if she only treated low functioning, Kanner-esque kids, she came back saying I called HER Kanner-esque.

Lastly - we were talking about communication and I mentioned Amanda Baggs. Savlov says she's never heard of her, like she's just some friend of mine.

I would've at least done a quick google to save face before saying I'd never heard of someone. Just my .02

What you describe, Goddess, does sound quite frustrating. Hmmm, wonder what's going on with that?

Who is Amanda Baggs?

[show] Spoiler:

[show] Spoiler:

Don't hit me.

[Sophist]

Amanda Baggs has been featured on CNN iirc (or one of those networks). She is a nonverbal autistic who's had quite a range of experiences concerning the healthcare system. She's an avid supporter of neurodiversity and argues against functioning labels of "high" versus "low". Whenever someone tries to tell an aspie "You're too high functioning to know what my child is going through, autism and Asperger's are totally different", most will point to Amanda who is nonverbal, brilliant, but would more classically fit the stereotype of "disabled"-- and she avidly promotes neurodiversity rather than cure.

Here's her blog if interested: http://ballastexistenz.autistics.org/

[goddessoflubbock]

Ms Savlov states she "specializes" in ASD's.

I cannot get from her how she came to this specialty. Was it through training? A seminar? Finding many of her clients were already on the spectrum? Or did she just keep reading these statistics, 1 in 166, 1 in 150, and decide to jump on the $$ bandwagon? (Clearly I see the glass half empty most days..)

And if she's a specialist, why does her blog feel so wishy-washy, lacking in authority? The name, first of all - "Wondering about autism" - she's the specialist why isn't it Facts about Autism, Treatment Methodology of the Autistic, something a little more commanding.

I will tell you even in a 140 character tweet she manages to sound very psychoanalytical.

[oscilor]

Amanda also writes a lot about power relations in the psychiatric system. I have had similar experiences of institutionalisation and forced treatment and share her views on this.

For people who are in a position of dependency on people like psychologists and psychiatrists, the various theories are not harmless ideas, but can have a serious effect on the persons survival. We do not have the priviledge to sit around discussing them like it is a parlour game (sorry I am badly paraphrasing Amanda here) that is of no consequence to us.

You may find it a fascinating intellectual exercise to discuss theories of religion, but would you feel that way if you were expected to do so as a victim of religious persecution who was struggling for basic life necessities?

I don't have any pet theories of autism or any other psych condition and I don't regard autism as a religion, but as an administrative category by which I get certain benefits so I can survive.
I have been frequently institutionalised and had treatment forced on me because of some psych theory and also been told I am not open minded if I happen to respond in the "wrong" way. It is not a case of neutral discussing of theories when I am ( or have been) locked up every night and have no control over my life, while the psych person who is "helping" me can go home to their smug family life at the end of the day with their well paid salary, car and house, feeling superior. If they are wrong, they can shrug their shoulders and move on to the next theory, while it is the patients/guinea pigs who put up with the consequences.

I do not want to get into a debate, because I am still very much preoccupied with securing a niche for myself in this world but wanted to explain what is behind my hostility.

[goddessoflubbock]

Oscilor, I completely understand what you are saying.

I've taken some time to read many of Ms Savlov's blogs, and she does have a forceful methodology. A keep at it no matter how the patient reacts, until you get the response you want.

She talks about helping a patient with autism who is depressed. I cannot even quantify what I think of her methods or perspective on that.

Regarding attachments, my older daughter was found by one doctor to have attachment disorder. With 20/20 hindsight, I agree. It happened to be a difficult delivery (although I was unconcious for the difficult part) but almost losing her made me feel closer to her, to bond more - if possible - which clearly failed on her side somewhere.

She was who she was, regardless.

As for Ms. Savlov not receiving a warm welcome...well, uh, she's been talking to ME on twitter