My response to the Slate Article

Three frustrating things for me about the Slate article "Facilitated Communication is a Cult that Won't Die" by David Auerbach:

First, when interviewed, I offered to connect him to Hope and he declined, saying he didn't have the time or resources (um, Skype?). I don't think he bothered to even meet any people who used FC. 

The second frustration is that, given his computer tech background, I spent a good deal of the interview talking about brain-computer interface, which I do think may ultimately render this debate moot, or maybe just complexify it further, but at least provide another avenue for communication access. No mention in the article.

The third frustration is that he has an autistic brother, who happens to be able to speak, and I asked: "Didn't he notice times when his brother lost his words?" He acknowledged there were communication differences. I hope his brother gives him hell for that sloppy, sensationalist article.

Of course, all the errors, misattributions, misinformation and half-truths didn't help either. As friends have told me, he had his story before starting to interview and simply ignored whatever conflicted with his agenda.