via Slate Magazine by Anna B. Reisman on 2/15/11
When my son was a toddler, an ophthalmologist diagnosed him with a form of amblyopia (lazy eye) and recommended an eye patch to improve his overall vision. But, he added, he couldn't promise that my son would ever have normal depth perception. I felt like I'd been kicked in the gut. I threw a few search terms into Google, came upon an offbeat treatment for eye disorders called vision therapy, and soon found a local practitioner, a middle-aged Chinese-American woman with short hair and half-moon glasses whose messy office was filled with eye charts and board games and had tennis balls hanging from the ceiling and who promptly engaged my son in games and eye exercises. Immediately, I knew we were doing the right thing. But when I told the ophthalmologist about the vision therapy, he told me flatly that, at least in my son's case, it was mumbo-jumbo and not to waste my money. Although I'm a physician, the concept of vision therapy made intuitive sense. It was low-risk: Even if it didn't work, we had nothing to lose, other than co-pays and time. If you're the parent of a child with a problem and you have the means to look for answers outside of the box, this is what you do.[more ...] 
No comments:
Post a Comment