Understanding developmental differences without making promises we cannot support.
The debate surrounding retained primitive reflexes and neurodivergence raises important questions. How do we protect parents from exaggerated claims? How do we ensure interventions are evidence-informed? And how do we distinguish between supporting a child’s development and attempting to change who they are?
These are questions that deserve thoughtful, professional discussion.
Primitive reflexes are a recognised part of early neurological development. Their emergence and subsequent regulation form part of the developing nervous system. Research has explored their relationship with motor development, learning and aspects of neurological functioning.
But this does not mean that retained primitive reflexes cause autism, nor that reflex integration is a cure for autism. Such claims go beyond what the evidence currently supports.
Autism is not a reflex disorder.
Autism is a complex neurodevelopmental condition, and autistic children have diverse experiences, abilities and support needs. They should not be subjected to interventions simply because their behaviour or development differs from what others consider typical.
However, there is an important distinction that can be lost in this debate.
A child may be autistic and also experience difficulties with balance, coordination, motor control or other aspects of neuromotor development. Identifying and understanding these difficulties does not invalidate their neurodivergence. Nor does it imply that autism needs to be treated.
The question is whether a particular difficulty is affecting the child’s everyday life and whether appropriate support might help.
Parents deserve honesty, not promises
Parents searching for answers are often navigating an overwhelming amount of information. They deserve transparency about the evidence behind any intervention, its limitations, the qualifications of the practitioner and the outcomes that can realistically be expected.
No practitioner should suggest that a child will be cured, that autism can be eliminated, or that parents are failing their child if they do not pursue a particular programme.
Equally, dismissing an entire area of developmental assessment without considering the individual child does not advance our understanding of neurodevelopment.
Professional credibility rests on being able to distinguish established knowledge from emerging research, hypothesis from evidence, and assessment from diagnosis.
Understanding the child matters more than changing the behaviour
A child who struggles with movement, coordination, sensory demands or classroom participation may need support. The purpose of that support should be to improve their wellbeing, participation and independence, not to make them appear less autistic.
This requires a careful, individualised approach. It also requires practitioners to work within their professional competence and recognise when other assessments or referrals are appropriate.
Neurodiversity should be respected. Developmental difficulties should not be overlooked.
These principles can, and should, coexist.
The conversation about primitive reflexes is unlikely to be advanced by ridicule, exaggerated claims or blanket dismissal. It is advanced by rigorous research, honest communication and a willingness to examine the evidence critically.
Every child deserves to be understood. Not every developmental difference needs to be corrected, but every genuine difficulty deserves to be taken seriously.
That is the distinction we should be making.
Further reading
Leisman, G., Melillo, R., et al. (2022)
Retained Primitive Reflexes and Potential for Intervention in Autistic Spectrum Disorders.
Read the paper – Frontiers in Neurology
This paper explores proposed relationships between retained primitive reflexes and autism, including possible intervention approaches. Its hypotheses should be considered in the context of the wider evidence base.
Further research
Search PubMed for research on primitive reflexes and neurodevelopment
A useful starting point for exploring the published literature and evaluating the evidence for yourself.