FC-Behind the Glass: In No Way Am I Being Cued
One of the most helpful things FC proponents have done is to provide us with YouTube videos and films of their typing sessions. Short of being able to test these individuals in a controlled setting, these videos give viewers a chance to analyze the facilitators’ behaviors and rule in or rule out visible forms of cuing that may call into question the independence of the typed messages.
The facilitator holds on to the shoulder to provide cuing during a typing session. Pressing down or releasing tension signals when to touch a letter or move the hand to another part of the keyboard.
Today’s video is called “Facilitated Communication-Update on Progress-In No Way Am I Being Cued” and features Tim Chan with his mother, Sara, as facilitator. At the time of the video, the duo had been facilitating for 9 years, which explains the somewhat sophisticated and subtle(ish) cuing that is taking place in the video. In FC terms, “fading” and “independence” comes from moving facilitator support from the wrist to the shoulder, as seen in the video. The description for the video asserts that the touch his mother gives provides only emotional support, but further analysis indicates that this touch is much more meaningful than that in terms of facilitator cuing.
As with the other “Behind the Glass” sessions, the focus for this article is on the facilitator and any behaviors that could suggest cuing and/or control over the typed messages.
The facilitator holds the person’s side to provide cuing during a typing session.
The first thing to notice is how tense the facilitator’s hand and arm are when she holds on to Tim’s shoulder and back. It could be expected that a hand on the shoulder for reassurance would be relaxed to counter any tension the other person is feeling. But, her arm, hand, and fingers are rigid and positioned on his back with a purpose. Additionally, her fingers are in constant motion. These small movements are controlling where Tim’s hand and finger are positioned over the keyboard, left, right, upper keys, middle keys, lower keys. She also shifts her touch from his shoulder, back, side, and leg throughout the typing session. It appears the most successful cuing comes when she has her hand on his back. Remember, the two have practiced facilitating many hours each day for 9 years, so it can be expected that the degree of cuing would get much more subtle as Tim learns to respond to his facilitator’s touch. These movements appear to be more than the ideomotor phenomenon at work. These movements appear to be deliberate and meant to provide physical feedback so Tim can press the “correct” letters on the keyboard.
The facilitator holds the person’s leg to providing cuing during the typing session.
Another thing to notice is that Tim appears to be, non-verbally, asking his mother for reassurance (not the other way around). He touches her face on a couple of occasions and looks at her while typing. He does not seem to have an awareness of when to start or stop a sentence or when the idea he’s purportedly typing out is finished. He relies on her cues to tell him that. This is backwards from legitimate Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AAC) methods, in which the assistant asks the individual using AAC to independently confirm the message being produced. For non-speaking individuals, this could mean sign language, head shakes or nods, or other forms of confirmation. None of this happens with FC. Instead, the facilitator uses hand signals and verbal cues to get him to continue typing.
Tim is looking at his mother/facilitator while typing. She has her eyes on the keyboard.
Ironically, the narrator of the video praises Tim for his “level of communication independence” and asks about people who question whether or not his mom’s hand on his shoulder affects his typing. Not surprisingly, the facilitated response is:
In no way am I being cued it’s hard enough to work out what to say for myself.
Throughout the typing session, however, Tim does not physically look like he is struggling to figure out what he wants to say. He looks relaxed, if sometimes tentative as he touches his mom’s face in between typing sessions. He does not take any time at all to consider the narrator’s question or to begin typing. In fact, he responds almost instantaneously and at the moment his mom prompts him to type. From his body language, at least, it seems unlikely that Tim is struggling during this interview.
From this video, we can learn that facilitator cuing can happen when subtle but intentional pressure is used. Pressure can be applied by pressing down on the shoulder, pushing against the back (e.g., with individual fingers or the whole hand), tugging on clothing (e.g., sweater or shirt sleeve), and pushing against the leg. This pressure, provided by the facilitator in response to a prompt such as the narrator’s questions, can be used to signal
When to start typing on the keyboard
When to continue typing if the person being facilitated stops typing in the middle of a sentence or idea
When to end a typed session
Where to position one’s body, arm, hand or finger in relation to the keyboard
When to press down or release a letter
It is quite possible the facilitator is unaware of how much control she is exerting over the typing sessions. Whether intentional or not, such physical cuing influences letter selection and calls into question the independence of these typed messages.
Hopefully, knowing where to look and how to identify facilitator cuing will help people understand why FC is considered a facilitator-generated technique rather than a legitimate form of AAC, even if the facilitators believe they are in no way providing such cues.