Part IX – Vision Therapy: The non-debate.
See https://drboulet.com/proof-standards/ for a much more detailed review of some of the main criticism around visual neurorehab, and detailed rebuttal of the criticism. There is a ‘chain of professional irresponsibility’ in much of the American medical commentary regarding vision therapy and the importance of vision in learning. This arises from a few key sources:
- A profit-centered health care model, which sees better margins from medical intervention, compared to behavioural interventions.
- A lack of awareness of the principles of physiological optics and the mountains of research around visual function and learning.
- Public statements made by medical doctors and other professional groups in the United States in particular.
This view of vision in learning and the value of visual neurorehabilitation is thankfully not the only view in the global medical community, and European nations, Japan, some Nordic countries, and some US states have adopted a much more elevated and informed approach to management and prevention of vision related behaviour problems. Sadly, when US medical publications carry sway, whether deservedly or not, or whether commentary is from an informed position or not, the end result is that parents, teachers, and medical doctors are discouraged from paying attention to vision even at a basic level, leaving many children to suffer and struggle needlessly.
The post ‘Proof & Standards’ provides a comparison of some of the critical writing around vision rehab, and serves to highlight the bias in some medical journals against behavioural models of intervention – and this even in the face of strong support for the role of VT in improving people’s health and lives.