The BBC approached five different academic experts on facilitated communication worldwide to speak about the technique. All declined.
At least 30 medical associations worldwide oppose facilitated communication. Many, such as the UK’s National Autistic Society, warn that it’s “ineffective” and able to cause “significant harm.”
Other opponents include the UK’s National Institute for Health and Care Excellence, The American Psychological Association, the American Academy of Paediatrics and Speech Pathology Australia.
These organisations cite peer-reviewed evidence indicating the technique is discredited pseudoscience and have flagged the risks it poses to disabled people, their families, and facilitators themselves, because of potential false allegations.
Clinical psychologist Adrienne Perry has warned the non-verbal person “is made a 'screen' for a facilitator's hostilities, hopes, beliefs or suspicions”.
For speech trainer Janyce Boynton - who did her facilitated communication training at the University of Maine - the discovery was shocking.
She’d been facilitating the communication of a 16-year-old non-verbal autistic girl, who’d accused her father and brother of sexual abuse via Ms Boynton’s facilitation. Prof Shane was called in to do a double-blind test with pictures.
“It turned out, even though I believed in facilitated communication, I was the author of all the answers,” Ms Boynton tells the BBC. “It was irrefutable. You just didn't realise it.”
It left her feeling “terrible, confused and devastated”.
“I believe most facilitators are sincere,” she says. “They want to believe it’s true.”
When electricity is passed through this ribbon-like implant it can coil around a fragile nerve
