Earlier online I came across something which truly puzzles me. I’m on several AAC-related groups on facebook, and I keep coming across discussions about the apparent backlash against facilitated communication. Given the nature of FC, a few doubters are to be expected: questions about who is doing the communicating, the disabled person or the person helping them, are bound to crop up. Yet what struck me is the vehemence of the objections. A growing number of people view it with utter contempt, as if it was something politically or morally wrong. They actively oppose it and are calling for it’s practice to be stopped. That utterly baffles me; it’s like objecting to the use of wheelchairs or communication aids. It goes further than debating it’s effectiveness or validity, and frames FC as something evil. In so doing, it denies out of hand the possibility that people who need FC are intelligent enough to communicate. I find that ridiculous; you might as well say the same of me or Lyn! I really don’t get it; and let’s not forget while these academic debates are going on, many severely disabled people will be left totally unable to express themselves.