> Roughly speaking, there are two categories of autistic children. The therapy is focussed on autistic people who need care 24/7. The therapy doesn't seem to f

> Roughly speaking, there are two categories of autistic children. The therapy is focussed on autistic people who need care 24/7. The therapy doesn't seem to fit autistic children who are verbal but have issues with social skills. > The latter group had some bad experiences with this kind of one-size-fits-all therapy. But the argument is made that the therapy isn't totally inhumane/worthless as it does help 'severe' autism cases. That makes sense, but the article seems to imply that a lot of this therapy is focused on correcting "traits that may be socially stigmatizing but are harmless unto themselves, such as fidgeting, avoiding eye contact, or stereotypic behaviors commonly known as stimming—rocking, hand-flapping, and so forth." I can't imagine that spending a lot of time correcting minor, harmless, socially unacceptable behaviors would be that beneficial for nonverbal people who need 24/7 care, and if it is seen as inhumane or worthless for "autistic children who are verbal but have issues with social skills" perhaps it needs to be revamped to focus on the parts of it that are useful for more severe cases?