Spelling as a form of communication for non-speaking individuals-when it involves physical intervention, like another person holding a spelling board-is widely debated and lacks scientific support. Despite marketing under new names such as "Spelling to Communicate" (S2C), this approach fundamentally resembles facilitated communication (FC), a practice which rigorous studies have shown to be highly problematic and not genuinely authored by the person with disabilities.
Physical prompting-even with a promise of fading or minimal use-still means the process can be inadvertently steered by the facilitator, intentionally or not. Authentic communication requires the individual to independently initiate, select, and confirm their responses, through methods such as eye gaze, independent typing, or unaided pointing. When true independence is absent, spelling or pointing on a board held by another person can easily cross over into the pseudoscience territory of FC, with real risks of misattributed messages and even harm.
Most professional organizations, including the American Speech-Language-Hearing Association (ASHA), explicitly caution against spelling to communicate methods that rely on physical support from others. Evidence-based augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) systems-like communication apps, independent typing, or gaze-based systems-are preferred, as they empower communicators to be genuinely independent, accurate, and safe.
It's crucial for educators, advocates, and families to recognize that rebranding unsupported practices does not make them valid. Families deserve interventions backed by science and respect for autonomy, not approaches that present real dangers under the guise of innovation.
PECS (Picture Exchange Communication System) is a well-established, evidence-based AAC (Augmentative and Alternative Communication) method designed specifically for individuals who do not yet have the prerequisite skills for more advanced or technology-based systems. PECS enables non-speaking individuals to communicate by selecting and exchanging pictures to make requests, answer questions, and engage socially. For individuals with motor and visual impairments-PECS can be used with three dimensional objects or tactile etc. Importantly, it does not rely on physical prompting from another person after initial teaching phases, which safeguards authenticity in communication and reduces facilitator influence.
Research has consistently demonstrated that PECS is effective for increasing independent communication, especially for individuals who are not ready for keyboards, speech-generating devices, or more sophisticated systems. It can be customized for a variety of developmental levels and is often a critical stepping stone, allowing users to gain basic language and social skills before moving on to more complex AAC platforms if appropriate.
For families and professionals seeking safe, validated communication methods for people who need intensive support, AAC such as PECS stands out as a dependable intervention with strong data supporting its efficacy and ethical use often leading to more complex systems and even spoken language.
Families and professionals should use caution and review research and evidence when choosing a communication system.
(949) 287-3686
practicalsolutions.jw@gmail.com
References (This list includes a range of peer-reviewed research, clinical guidelines, and reputable articles that support key points)
Raising Children Network (2024). Facilitated Communication and Autism. https://raisingchildren.net.au
American Speech-Language-Hearing Association. (n.d.). Facilitated Communication. https://www.asha.org
Business Insider (2023). New Spelling Technique May Aid Nonverbal Autistic People. https://businessinsider.com
BPS (2025). Just believe: The strange story of Facilitated Communication. The British Psychological Society. https://bps.org.uk
Safeguarding the communication rights of minimally verbal individuals (2025). Taylor & Francis Online. https://tandfonline.com
