Communication, AAC and Being Heard as an Adult with Cerebral Palsy

Ask adults with cerebral palsy about the hardest part of daily life and a surprising number won’t say transfers, or pain, or fatigue.

They’ll say being talked over. Being addressed through whoever they came with. Watching someone decide, in the first four seconds, that slow speech means slow thinking. Having a waiter ask their support worker what they’d like.

Communication affects more of a life than almost any other domain, and it’s the one where the gap between what’s possible and what actually happens is widest. The technology exists. The strategies are well understood. And yet a great many adults with CP are using systems specified a decade ago, supported by workers who were never properly trained, in a world that keeps assuming they aren’t in there.

This guide is about closing that gap. It covers how communication is affected in CP, keeping AAC systems current as an adult, how support workers should be trained, what happens in hospital, and the competence assumption that underlies all of it.

How CP affects communication

Cerebral palsy affects communication through motor control, not through intelligence. That distinction is the whole foundation of this guide.

Dysarthria is the most common pattern — the muscles used for speech are affected, so speech may be slow, effortful, imprecise or quiet. The person knows exactly what they want to say. Getting it out is a motor task, and that motor task is affected like any other.

Anarthria is where speech isn’t functionally available at all, again for motor reasons.

Breath support affects volume and phrase length. Someone may manage three words per breath rather than a sentence.

Facial and oral motor involvement can affect the expressions that normally carry meaning alongside words, which means a person’s face may not reflect what they’re feeling. People misread this constantly.

Co-occurring language or cognitive difficulties exist for some people with CP and not others. The crucial point is that they are a separate question from speech. Some people with severely affected speech have entirely typical language and cognition. Some don’t. You cannot tell which from listening.

The classification system for this is CFCS — the Communication Function Classification System — which measures how effectively someone sends and receives messages by any means, including AAC. Not how clear their speech is. A fluent AAC user can be CFCS Level I.

AAC: the basics for adults

Augmentative and Alternative Communication covers everything used to supplement or replace speech.

Unaided systems use only the body — gestures, facial expression, signing, eye pointing, yes/no signals. Fast, always available, and limited in vocabulary.

Low-tech aided systems use physical materials — communication boards, books, alphabet charts, partner-assisted scanning. Reliable, cheap, never run out of battery. Every high-tech user should also have a low-tech backup, because devices fail.

High-tech systems are speech-generating devices and apps — accessed by touch, switch, head pointer or eye gaze. Eye gaze technology in particular has transformed access for people with significant motor involvement.

Most people use a combination, choosing based on context. Someone might use speech with family, a device at work, and eye pointing when they’re tired. That’s not inconsistency; that’s competent multi-modal communication.

The adult AAC problem

Here’s what goes wrong specifically for adults, and it’s remarkably consistent.

The system is from childhood. Many adults are using a device, vocabulary set or board that was specified when they were at school. Adult vocabulary differs enormously from a child’s — work language, relationship language, swearing, sarcasm, the ability to say something sharp. An adult limited to a child’s vocabulary is being infantilised by their own equipment.

Nobody reviews it. School-based speech pathology ended at eighteen. Unless someone actively arranges review, the system fossilises. Meanwhile the technology improves every year.

It gets abandoned after a change. A new device arrives, nobody trains the people around the person, it’s slower than the old one for the first month, and it ends up in a cupboard. Device abandonment is a well-documented problem and it’s nearly always a training and support failure rather than a technology failure.

Maintenance falls through the cracks. Charging, software updates, mount repairs, vocabulary programming. In a supported living arrangement this should be someone’s explicit job. Frequently it’s nobody’s.

The environment doesn’t support it. A device is useless on a shelf, out of reach, or not mounted to the wheelchair. The most common practical barrier to AAC use is physical access to the device.

What a current AAC review involves

Worth arranging every couple of years, or sooner if anything has changed:

• Is the access method still the best available? Motor function changes, and so does technology.
• Is the vocabulary appropriate for this person’s actual adult life?
• Is the device physically accessible throughout the day, including in bed and on transport?
• Is it being maintained, charged and updated?
• Are the people around the person competent with it?
• Is there a functioning low-tech backup?

NDIS funding for AAC sits across Capital Supports for the device and Capacity Building for speech pathology assessment and training. The training component is the one most often left out of funding requests, and it’s the one that determines whether a device gets used.

Training the people around you

A device without trained communication partners is an expensive ornament. This is the part that gets skipped and it is at least as important as the technology.

Everyone needs training, not just one worker. Every support worker on the roster, plus family, plus ideally anyone the person sees regularly. A communication system that only works when one particular worker is on shift isn’t a communication system.

New staff need it before they start, not eventually. In a supported living house with any turnover, this needs to be part of induction rather than something arranged when someone gets around to it.

Training is behaviour, not information. Knowing how a device works is not the same as being a good communication partner. The behaviours that matter:

• Wait. The single most important one. Formulating a message on a device can take a long time, and most people fill the silence or guess. Waiting — ten, twenty, thirty seconds — is uncomfortable and it is the job.
• Don’t finish sentences. Even when you’re sure you know. Being right isn’t the point; the person’s own words are.
• Ask open questions sometimes. A diet of yes/no questions is efficient and it reduces someone to answering rather than speaking.
• Address the person, not their companion. Always. Including when the answer comes slowly.
• Confirm rather than assume. “Did you mean X?” is a reasonable check. Proceeding on a guess is not.
• Make sure the device is within reach. Before you leave the room. Every time.

The competence assumption

This deserves its own section because it causes more harm than any technical problem.

People routinely infer cognitive ability from speech. It is a deeply ingrained habit and it is wrong often enough to be dangerous. Many adults with cerebral palsy have entirely typical cognition and spend their lives being spoken to slowly and loudly, having decisions made around them, and being treated as though they aren’t fully present.

The professional principle is the least dangerous assumption: where you can’t be certain of someone’s level of understanding, assume competence, because the cost of wrongly assuming competence is low and the cost of wrongly assuming incompetence is enormous — a life of being underestimated, excluded from decisions, and not given the opportunity to demonstrate otherwise.

In practice this means:

• Speak to adults as adults, in adult language, at normal volume
• Explain what’s happening and why, even if you’re unsure how much is understood
• Give time for a response before moving on
• Never discuss someone in front of them as though they’re absent
• Assume what’s said in the room is heard and understood

This applies in medical settings especially, where the pattern of directing questions to a companion is close to universal and where the consequences — treatment decisions made without the person’s input — are most serious.

Choosing and funding a system

If you’re arranging AAC as an adult, roughly how it works.

Assessment comes first, and it should be thorough. A speech pathologist experienced in AAC assesses access method — touch, switch, head pointer, eye gaze — alongside language, vision, positioning and the environments the system needs to work in. A device chosen without a proper access assessment is the most common reason a system fails.

Trial before committing. Most suppliers will provide devices for trial, and some assessment services hold a loan bank. Trialling in real environments, not a clinic, reveals things no assessment catches — whether the mount works in the car, whether the screen is readable outdoors, whether the access method survives fatigue at the end of a day.

Positioning and AAC are the same problem. Access to a device depends entirely on posture and how the device is mounted. An eye-gaze system that works when someone is well-positioned at 9am may be unusable once they’ve slid forward by 2pm. The OT doing seating and the speech pathologist doing AAC need to talk to each other.

Funding splits across two parts of an NDIS plan. The device itself generally sits in Capital Supports as assistive technology, with higher-cost items requiring assessment and quotes. The assessment, programming, training and ongoing review sit in Capacity Building under improved daily living.

That second half is the one most often left out of funding requests, and it’s the one that determines whether the device gets used. A request for a device with no training funding attached is a request for an expensive object. Make sure the request explicitly covers speech pathology time for setup, vocabulary programming, communication partner training for support workers and family, and periodic review.

Expect the first months to be slow. New systems are slower than old ones before they’re faster. This is normal and it is also the window in which most abandonment happens. Budget support and patience for it.

The social side

Something clinical guides rarely address, and adults with CP raise constantly.

Communication takes time, and time is social currency. In a fast conversation — a group of people, a pub, a work meeting — a slower communicator gets talked over not usually through malice but through pace. By the time a sentence is ready, the topic has moved.

Strategies people use: pre-programming phrases for predictable situations; having a trusted person flag that you have something to say; choosing contexts where pace is more forgiving; and being direct about it — a programmed line like “I have something to add, give me a moment” does real work in a meeting.

Phone and text changed things significantly. For many adults with CP, text-based communication removed the speed pressure entirely and opened up relationships and work that were previously difficult. Email, messaging, video calls with chat. It’s worth making sure the AAC system integrates with a phone and computer rather than being a standalone device.

Humour and swearing matter. Vocabulary sets built for children often lack the ability to be funny, sarcastic, flirtatious or rude. These are not extras — they’re how adults build relationships. An AAC system that can only make polite requests produces a person who can only be polite, and that is its own kind of silencing. Ask for them explicitly in vocabulary programming.

Social isolation is the risk underneath all of this. NDIA data shows 52% of participants with CP aged 15 and over were actively involved in a community, cultural or religious group in the previous year — which means nearly half weren’t. Communication difficulty is a substantial driver. Support that treats connection as a legitimate goal, rather than a bonus after the personal care is done, is support that addresses it.

Communication in hospital

A specific and serious problem, and one families should plan for in advance.

When an adult with CP who uses AAC is admitted to hospital, several things tend to happen at once. The device may not come with them, or may not be mounted accessibly from a hospital bed. Hospital staff don’t know their communication system. Familiar support workers may not be present. And the person is unwell, which reduces capacity to work around all of it.

The result is someone who communicates effectively at home becoming functionally unable to communicate at exactly the moment communication matters most — reporting pain, consenting to treatment, saying what’s wrong.

Two things help enormously.

A communication passport. A short document, one or two pages, that travels with the person. What communication methods they use. How they indicate yes and no. How long to wait. Common signals and what they mean. How they express pain. Who to contact. Laminate it, attach it to the chair, and give a copy to the ward on admission.

Knowing that NDIS support can continue in hospital. This is widely misunderstood. Under the agreed division of responsibility between health and the NDIS, supports for complex communication needs continue to be NDIS-funded while a participant is in hospital. Hospitals aren’t required to replicate specialist disability support, and for someone who communicates through a familiar worker, a stranger attempting to interpret is a genuine clinical risk.

If someone you support is admitted and their communication support has been withdrawn, that’s worth raising with the support coordinator and the ward immediately. Our hospital discharge guides cover the health and NDIS boundary in detail.

Communication in supported living

If you’re choosing a provider, this is where to press hardest.

How will workers learn this person’s communication? Specifically. Is there a communication passport or dictionary? Who maintains it? Is it current?

Is AAC training part of induction? For every worker, before they’re rostered alone.

Who is responsible for the device? Charging, mounting, updates, repairs, and knowing who to call when something breaks.

What happens with agency staff? An unfamiliar worker with no communication training is the most common scenario in which someone with CP is effectively silenced for a shift.

How do you ensure the person is consulted? About their own daily life, their own support, the house. Watch what happens during the visit: does the staff member address the person or the family member who came with them?

How are complaints and concerns raised by someone who doesn’t speak? This is a safeguarding question as much as a communication one. A person who cannot easily report a problem is a person at elevated risk, which is why communication competence across the staff team is a safety issue rather than a nicety.

Building a communication passport

Worth doing once properly, then keeping current. One or two pages, laminated, attached to the wheelchair or kept in a bag, with digital copies shared with the people who need them.

What to include:

• Name, and what the person likes to be called
• How I communicate — speech, device, board, gestures, or a combination, and in which situations
• How I say yes and no — the single most important line on the page, and the one hospital staff need first
• How long to wait — stated explicitly, with a number. “Please allow up to 30 seconds for me to respond.”
• Signals and what they mean — a particular movement, sound or expression and its meaning
• How I show pain or distress — critical in medical settings, and frequently misread
• What helps — positioning the device, reducing background noise, speaking at normal volume, facing me
• What doesn’t help — finishing my sentences, asking my companion, raising your voice
• Who to contact — family, support coordinator, provider

Keep the tone first-person. A passport written as “James communicates using…” reads as a document about someone; one written as “I communicate using…” reads as the person speaking, which is the point.

Review it annually and after any change in communication, equipment or support arrangements.

For adults with CP

A few things from people who’ve navigated this.

Push for a current system. If your device or vocabulary is from school, you’re entitled to a review. Ask your GP or support coordinator for a speech pathology referral and get the funding into your plan.

Train the people around you yourself, where you can. Nobody understands your system like you do. Many AAC users develop a short explanation they give new people — how long to wait, what they’ll do if they need more time. Having that ready saves repeating the same frustrations.

Carry a backup. Devices fail, batteries die, mounts break. A low-tech board in a bag has rescued more conversations than any amount of technology.

Make the passport, even if it feels unnecessary. You’ll be glad of it in an emergency department at 2am.

You’re allowed to be direct about being talked over. A pre-programmed phrase along the lines of “Please talk to me, not to them” is used by a lot of AAC users and it works. It is not rude. It’s a correction.

---

We support adults with cerebral palsy across NSW in supported independent living homes, with communication training built into worker induction rather than arranged afterwards. Our companion guides cover what changes in adulthood, the classification systems and the transition to adult services. Call 1300 271 824.

General information only, current at the time of writing. AAC assessment, prescription and training should be undertaken by a qualified speech pathologist. NDIS funding categories and the health and NDIS division of responsibility are set by the NDIA and the Commonwealth, states and territories, and change periodically. This guide is not clinical advice. In an emergency, call 000.