In research into typical parent-child dynamics, Bronfenbrenner (1979) identifies parent- child shared time continues as an important factor in adolescent development. Research suggests that whilst there is a decrease in general social interaction of typical early teens with their parents over time, it appears that 1:1 dyadic time with parents shows some increase in early and middle adolescence. Thus, indicating that typical adolescents continue to rely upon their parents for closeness and support which allows them to
maintain a connectedness whilst also developing independence and autonomy (Lam et al., 2012, Larson et al., 1996). Zimmermann (2016) emphasises the importance of good
parent-child communication in supporting the adolescent transition from childhood to adulthood, it is also indicated that challenges in communication can impact this positive dynamic (Steinberg, 2001, Harper and Cooley, 2007, Shire et al., 2015). Situated within the flux and dynamic of family life, communication can become difficult for the autistic child or sibling to access. Bessette et al. (2016) studied severe childhood autism and family experience. Through questionnaires, interviews, observations and fieldnotes; one of six themes identified suggested that profound communication deficits resulted in families
where the child did not engage, the parents become tired and frustrated and “…finally give up”. The research found families facing profound communication challenges, as children had few words and; “...most preferred to generally isolate themselves from others”. The authors concluded that the families experienced “isolation from the child” (Bessette et al. 2016 p. 589).
Shire et al. (2015) acknowledge that parents are in the unique position to influence their autistic children over decades where others (teachers, therapists, peers) will likely come and go (Shire et al., 2015). Woodman et al (2015) provide an analysis of the role of positive family relationships where a young person/adult has autism suggesting the positive outcomes this can offer for the young person. The study advocates that future research should consider experimental designs to evaluate interventions aimed at improving parent-child relationships and increasing positivity in their relationships
(Woodman et al., 2015). Furthermore, Woodman et al. (2015) acknowledge that general literature indicates positive maternal affect and quality of parent-child interaction levels are predictive of child functioning, and support adjustment into young adulthood. Their study considers the impact of higher levels of maternal praise (based on maternal speech samples) and higher quality mother-child relationships on adolescents and adults with autism. Positive aspects of the family environment are linked with positive change in autism symptoms and behaviours in families with adolescents and adults with autism. The authors suggest that family behaviours will influence the functioning of individuals with autism from early toddlerhood through to adulthood.
There is clear acknowledgement that the family communication environment is a vital aspect of positive support for early adolescent development. Yet, despite the awareness of the core features of autism specifying a difference in communication and social interaction
and the difficulties and challenges which appear to pervade family interactions, there is little research into the wider social and communicative environment of the family. Therefore, families are offered little access to information and understanding in how to support and maintain communication and connectedness through this important phase in a young person’s development. It is in the small-scale studies that we find interest in the intimate and unique social interactions and communications in the family. Acknowledging the context of family life and engagement, Kuo et al. (2015) provide evidence that
adolescents with autism who watched television with parents reported more positive
parent–child relationships, where parents and young people shared this social time. This is an example of long-term, situated, lived family context providing opportunity to support social communication and development.
Cullen and Barlow (2002) in their study ‘Kiss, Cuddle, Squeeze…’ acknowledge that family communication is not solely a matter of verbal communication and that touch, body
language and facial expression are forms of communication which have significant
importance within the family relationships (Cullen and Barlow, 2002). This paper explores the impact of a Touch Therapy Programme for parents of children aged 3 - 13 years with autism. In pre-post interviews, parents reported feeling closer, understanding their child better and being able to find a closeness which allowed them to support their child to relax, and in some cases to be able to use non-verbal messages to ask for massage to help them reduce anxiety. Cullen and Barlow stress at many points, and from the parent
narrative, that successful physical communication interaction must be on the child’s terms. This awareness of the child as a partner in the interaction reflects the principles of
engagement in Cullen and Barlow’s intervention draws on such approaches to facilitate connection and interaction. Cullen and Barlow’s small study provides only limited evidence from a small sample, yet the authors indicate that further studies of parent–child dyads are warranted. Indeed, there is limited research which explores this family interaction as young people reach middle childhood and early adolescence and to support family members to offer appropriate and tolerable interactions appropriate to the child’s emotional and physical states.
What is continuously evident in the literature relating to communication, intervention and family social interaction and engagement is the limited contribution and perspectives from autistic authors and advocates (Milton, 2013). Perspectives of what communication is and what it means for an autistic and how this plays out in family interactions remains a little researched area. Principle diagnostic markers identify pervasive differences and difficulties in communication yet there continues to be a marked gap in the research which asks autistics to contribute to understanding of communication, what holds meaning for them, and how this impacts communication within families. Yergeau, (2018), Baggs, (2007) and Milton (2013) describe their social and non-verbal communicative approaches and
behaviours which are often dismissed and rejected as empty or chaotic. Rather than exploring communication from an objective, medicalised position which assumes
incapacity, there is a critical need to engage the situated experience of families who live with autistic communication. In so doing we can begin to understand the relevance of previously dismissed and rejected behaviours in family communication. As previously indicated, family communication is vital in supporting development and transition to adulthood (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, Larson et al., 1996, Lam et al., 2012, Zimmermann 2016) yet the altered communication landscape in families of autistic young people can result in barriers and misunderstanding and potentially severe isolation. Decades of
previous research has undermined the vital role that parents and families play in
supporting growth, development and wellbeing in their autistic young people (Waltz, 2013, Ryan and Runswick-Cole, 2008, 2009, Runswick-Cole and Ryan, 2019) demonstrating the need to invest in research which values and invests in family communication.