However, once developmental pediatricians, clinicians and primary caregivers can learn how to slow down, watch, wait and listen and, in turn, (deepen) dyadic affective attachment we begin to see meaningful social changes in the child’s externalized “presenting behaviors.” For example, when I and colleagues go to or guide others to go half-way to the child’s world, mirror/reflect do what s/he is doing (with reassuring inflected tonal qualities of voice – in accordance to that particular child’s affect style) a preverbal co-narrative “meaning-making process” begins to become viably established (felt from the child’s perspective). We then begin to (creatively add) add meaningful slight (affective) variations. Essentially, what we are doing is beginning to create and extend a new “social co-narrative meaning-making process” – that is, in a manner that is Meaningful and suited to the child underlying affect-emotional processing differences. At this point we begin to see clinically meaningful (measured) simple to increasingly complex two-way reciprocal emotional problem solving. The child begins to separate “ideas” from fixed modalities or perception; language begins to emerge, etc .

Recently published (2012) clinical trials from University of Toronoto (MEHRI foundation) using a social-relationship (DIR/Floortime based approach) has begun to unequivocally demonstrate clinically significant and clinically meaningful manner the resulting neurophysiological accompanied changes (e.g., a deeper synaptic connectivity and synchronization between the prefrontal cortex or the executive functions and the limbic system, the All or nothing responses of the amygdala).

I am making twos points here. Firstly, by primary caregivers and clinicians learning how to learn to slow down and “socially-emotionally connect ” with a child’s underlying neurodevelopmental affective differences we begin to deepen or re-establish the bonds of dyadic reciprocal attachment. We are specifically doing this by attributing (and having primary caregivers attribute) Affect/Meaning to the child’s “current surface behaviors” as they are indeed meaningful to him/her (however, they are otherwise commonly regarded purely on a social neurotypical stereotypical surface; ipso facto, in turn, perceived as “inappropriate”; drilled by ABA, applied behavioral analysis or Cognitive behavioral methods into submission and for “good measure” further imprisoned/lobotomized depending on perceived insult with the administration of psychotropics – and of course tremendous profit!)

Secondly, the classificatory allowance of PDD-NOS and Aspergers as part of (or now one with in DSM-V) as ASD is entirely wrong. In many ways, and it is too long to go into here ,we are severely and egregiously in many cases not all pathologizing genius. Einstein and many artists, poets and technological geniuses would today as children be promptly and dutifully medicated for their “aberrant unbecoming.”