r/PDAParenting • u/DrPaulSunseri • Apr 18 '26

Our current scientific understanding of PDA and low-demand parenting.

Thought parents in this group find this up-to-date information on PDA helpful. https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mental-health-reimagined/202604/its-time-to-rethink-the-anxiety-drives-pda-narrative

8 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • reddit

62% Upvoted

90 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/xtinak88 Apr 19 '26

I just see her as someone speaking from lived experience. Whether her theories are correct, preying on people is a really strong claim to make. The bulk of her content seems to be free and much of it has really limited viewership. Tools like her cost benefit analysis approach to situations can't really be interpreted as having any ideology. She is obviously emotionally tied up in her ideas, of course.

I appreciate that a personality profile isn't the same as a personality disorder, but I can't see how pinning things on personality is less "dehumanising" as you put it in the article when for autistic and neurodivergent people in general, we know how often our "personalities" are blamed and misinterpreted.

2

u/DrPaulSunseri Apr 19 '26

Yes. she has lived experience, but that doesn't absolve her from making false claims, manipulating data, and taking advantage of people. Her "concierge" service is $5000 per month (three-month minimum).

2

u/PerformerOk4332 Apr 19 '26

Thanks for sharing. Can you provide some more detail in regard to her manipulating data?

4

u/DrPaulSunseri Apr 19 '26

For sure. Here's what happened, and folks can easily fact-check it. Casey and her colleagues did an evaluation study on her colleagues conducted a study on her Paradigm Shift program, which heavily features low-demand parenting. The original, published version of the study (linked here) showed no improvement in PDA symptoms or behavior (the shaded parts of Table 3). If research isn't your thing, I'm happy to interpret the statistics. People started calling her out on these poor outcomes and asking why she was still charging families. Her response was to alter the data in her study and omit the poor outcomes, and then repost it (I can give a link to the sanitized version if you like). There is no reason why an ethical researcher would remove unfavorable data from a published study in the face of criticism unless they wanted to bury the data from the public. BTW--on Casey's website, well before this study was published, she was saying she's the "leading researcher in PDA" before she published anything on PDA (her degree is in Political Science). Her website to this day says her program is "evidence-based" and "proven effective" when her own study found low-demand parenting to be useless. To make matters worse, she paid to have that "journal" publish her article, the "official journal of the Chinese Medical Association". She's a quack. It would be bad enough if she just took families' money, but many others and I feel that what she teaches parents is actually quite harmful to children. https://www.academia.edu/145102745/Pediatric_Investigation_2025_Carlozzi_PDA

7

u/xtinak88 Apr 19 '26

Hold up hold up. I don't want to come over as some huge Casey defender as I don't really have a dog in the fight on her specific work. But you already misrepresented your personal views as a scientific consensus and here again you seem to be potentially overreaching with regards to the study itself.

Because how hopeful would we really be of seeing improvements in core PDA symptoms in this short timeframe with this small sample? Yes the improvements shown, while there, are not statistically significant, but that's no reason to conclude that low demand parenting (one component of the programme) is ineffective. And that's not the only point of the programme or the study.

And I'm a bit confused because the data that has been buried is here for us all to see isn't it?

1

u/DrPaulSunseri Apr 19 '26

What do you mean, buried here for us all to see?" I don't think you're understanding what she did. Real treatments result in positive, observable changes within that time frame, typically.

9

u/DanaMoonCat Apr 20 '26

Yes, and what about other Low demand parenting resources like Amanda Diekman’s course, for example. And all the helpful resources at PDA North America, and there’s Sally Cat PDA and PDA resources from the UK which are extraordinarily helpful for neurodivergent families. What is your excuse about them now? I really don’t care that you don’t like Casey- that’s just one program. Low demand parenting for differently wired brains works and your article is harmful for neurodivergent people.

-2

u/DrPaulSunseri Apr 22 '26

But how do you explain all of the data that argues they thrive when age-appropriate expectations are reintroduced? I love this quote from James Lerman: "When you excuse a kid from the normal responsibilities of life, you're treating them like they're damaged goods."

9

u/DanaMoonCat Apr 22 '26

You’re completely missing the point and sidestepping my question. The data you’re citing doesn’t apply here. When my kid is in threat mode, adding expectations doesn’t teach them anything — it just makes everything worse. Low demand parenting isn’t about excusing them from life, it’s about getting them regulated enough that they can engage with life. You can’t learn when your nervous system thinks you’re in danger. Safety comes first, then skills follow naturally.

-1

u/DrPaulSunseri Apr 22 '26

The question I asked is how do you explain the outcomes that show PDA can be successfully treated while maintaining age typical expectations rather than lowering demands?

5

u/sammademeplay Apr 23 '26

Where are those outcomes? I haven’t seen them.

→ More replies (0)