As a parent navigating the challenges of supporting an adult with severe autism, I took a closer look at AI tools—ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity Pro, and Gemini Deep Research—to see how they could help parents like us. ChatGPT and Claude gave general advice, but Claude caught my attention by sharing relatable fictional case studies. Perplexity Pro provided references, but it felt like you had to dig for the gold. Then there’s Gemini—it delivered tons of info, including research plans and real-world examples, though not always specific to severe autism. While none fully captured the unique challenges we face, Gemini stood out for its sheer amount of helpful content, making it my top pick for research, even with its quirks.
The Search for the Best AI Tool for Helping Parents of Severely Autistic Adults: A Personal Journey
When Sundar Pichai, the CEO of Alphabet—the company behind Google—shared his bold prediction that artificial intelligence would have a more profound impact on humanity than fire, electricity, or even the internet, my curiosity was piqued. AI has been a game-changer in so many industries, but could it truly transform the lives of families with adult children who have severe autism?
That’s what I set out to discover.
You see, my son, now 35 years old, has profound autism. He has an IQ of under 50, is nonverbal, and requires one-on-one care around the clock. Raising him has been one of the greatest challenges of my life, and I’m always on the lookout for resources that could help me—and other parents like me—make the journey a little easier. With AI promising to revolutionize so many aspects of life, I wanted to know if it could do the same for families dealing with severe autism.
I decided to test four of the most well-known AI tools currently on the market: ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity Pro, and Google’s newest offering, Gemini Deep Research. My goal was simple: I wanted to find specific resources—papers, books, podcasts, and programs—that could help parents of severely autistic adults navigate the transition to adulthood.
But the road wasn’t as smooth as I expected.
The First Test: ChatGPT
ChatGPT is the granddaddy of AI tools. It’s been around for a while, and most people have at least heard of it. I started my journey by posing the question to ChatGPT: “I’m writing a book to help parents of a severely autistic adult child transition their child to adulthood. Can you research and find the best papers, the best books, the best podcasts, and the best programs in the world and provide a complete plan to help parents make this transition?”
The response I got was… well, underwhelming. It provided me with about two pages of information, most of which was fairly generic. There was a lot of general advice about autism in general, but very little that specifically addressed the needs of parents with profoundly autistic children. It was the type of information you could find by visiting any autism support website or national organization. It wasn’t anything groundbreaking.
But I wasn’t ready to give up on it just yet.
I decided to give ChatGPT a second chance. I returned with a more specific follow-up prompt, asking it to focus on the unique challenges parents of severely autistic adults face—those with an IQ under 50, who are nonverbal, and require constant care.
To my surprise, ChatGPT responded with an improved answer. It dug a little deeper and even included a list of programs and resources available in my own city, Austin, Texas. While the suggestions were still somewhat broad, I appreciated the localized information and the effort to hone in on my request.
Claude: The Disappointment
Next up was Claude, an AI tool that I had heard good things about, especially in terms of writing and editing. I posed the same question to Claude and received a response that was, frankly, disappointing. The AI started with a disclaimer about not having access to current databases or search capabilities, which immediately set off alarm bells. Instead of giving me a specific plan, it provided a general framework for parents of autistic children, but it still felt impersonal and high-level.
Claude wasn’t much better after my follow-up prompt. Sure, it included three case studies about fictitious individuals who were allegedly severely autistic, but they didn’t seem to match the profile of children who need 24-hour care. These case studies were more about general autism rather than profound autism. The strategies discussed in the case studies—things like respite care and transitioning to group homes—were fine, but they weren’t tailored to the extreme needs of parents who require constant supervision and care.
It was clear Claude wasn’t up to the task, but I kept pushing forward.
Perplexity Pro: A Glimmer of Hope
Perplexity Pro, known for its research prowess, was the next AI tool I tested. I was hopeful, but I quickly found myself let down. The response it generated was thin—only citing one research paper, one podcast, and two programs. I gave it another try, asking it to improve its output, and it did provide a slightly more comprehensive list. But still, there was a lot of digging I had to do myself. Perplexity Pro pointed me to a few relevant sources, but I had to sift through them to uncover the hidden gems of information.
At least Perplexity Pro had some merit in its ability to point me in the right direction. But overall, it didn’t deliver the depth I was hoping for.
Gemini Deep Research: A Revelation
By this point, I had tried three of the top AI tools, and none of them had really met my expectations. I was starting to think that AI might not be ready to tackle this complex issue. But then I tried Google’s newest AI tool—Gemini Deep Research. From the get-go, it was different. Instead of diving straight into answering my query, it came back with an eight-point research plan detailing exactly how it was going to tackle the problem. This impressed me. It wasn’t just giving me random answers; it was outlining a step-by-step process.
I gave Gemini the same prompt I had given the other tools. It took a few minutes, and when it came back with the results, I was stunned. The response was over seven pages long—three or four times longer than anything the other tools had produced. It included links to books, programs, research papers, and more. Some of it was generic, but much of it was specific to the needs of parents caring for profoundly autistic adults. For the first time, I felt like I was getting somewhere.
But there was still a catch.
Despite the volume of information, Gemini still didn’t seem to completely understand the nuances of severe autism. It cited a lot of helpful resources, but it also included information that wasn’t as relevant. I gave it another nudge, asking it to focus more specifically on the needs of individuals with severe autism. This time, it came back with even more detailed information—12 and a half pages’ worth. Again, much of it was helpful, but there were some references that felt more generic than specific.
What really stood out was the inclusion of real-life case studies. Gemini provided six examples of people with severe autism and detailed their challenges and the steps their families took. While some of the case studies weren’t entirely accurate (Susan Boyle, for example, is not someone I would classify as severely autistic), others were closer to what I was hoping to find. It was clear that Gemini had the capacity to dig deeper than the other tools, even if it didn’t always get everything right.
The Conclusion: A Mixed Bag, But a Step Forward
After testing all four tools, I came to a conclusion. None of the AI tools I tested fully grasped the complexities of profound autism. But that doesn’t mean they were useless. Each of them uncovered something new that I hadn’t thought of, and I was able to find some valuable resources I hadn’t come across in my own research.
In the end, Gemini Deep Research emerged as the clear winner. It provided the most comprehensive information, even if some of it was not entirely on point. Still, it was a big improvement over the other tools.
But there’s a bigger takeaway from this experiment: AI is a tool, not a solution. It’s incredibly powerful, but it’s not perfect. It can save time, point you in the right direction, and provide insights, but it’s still up to us to dig deeper, verify the information, and make sure it applies to our specific needs.
As AI continues to evolve, I’m hopeful that it will become even more sophisticated and accurate. For now, though, it’s a valuable ally in the ongoing journey to improve the lives of families caring for severely autistic adults. It won’t replace the human touch, but it can certainly make the journey a little easier.
Transcript
Mike Carr (00:07):
This week we’re going to talk about something that Sunder Phai, who happens to be the CEO of Alphabet, a trillion dollar market cap company said about ai. Here’s the quote. Artificial intelligence will have a more profound impact on humanity than fire, electricity, and the internet. So AI promises to change the world. What about the world of profound autism? Is it going to improve the quality of life of your adult profoundly, severely autistic child of mine who’s 35 years old? That’s what we’re going to answer today. And I’ve done a lot of research on ai. We’re going to look at four of the top AI tools on the market today, and we’re talking about ai, not so much from, oh yeah, I can use AI to power a robot, that my son or daughter’s going to be excited, or I can use AI for education, or I can maybe even use AI instead of a one-on-one colleague.
(01:07):
That’s not what we’re going today. What we’re going with today is something you can use right now immediately, and it doesn’t take a lot of effort. Just a couple prompts. It’s all about research. It’s all about finding resources and tools and programs and techniques that are specific to your need. So that was the challenge that I wanted to put four of the largest leading LLMs, put them up against the test and see how they did. So the first one I tried was chat, GPT, the granddaddy of all of ’em, right? Been around for everyone. Everyone’s wrote chat, GPT. The second one’s, Claude Claude’s, my personal favorite for writing and editing, not as well known as chat GPT, but still a pretty well established LLM. The third one was Perplexity Pro, and that’s also one that has a reputation for doing a really good job at research, giving you lots of good citations.
(01:52):
And the fourth one is actually the newest and the one that I was most excited about. I’d heard some interesting things about it. It’s actually from Google, and it’s called Gemini Advanced 1.5 Pro Deep Research, sort of a mouthful, but it’s basically Gemini Deep research. I started with chat GPT. Here’s the prompt. I gave them this exact prompt. I am writing a book to help parents of a severely autistic adult child transition their child to adulthood. Can you research and find the best papers, the best books, the best podcast and the beds programs in the world, and provide a complete plan to help parents successfully make this transition? So that was the prompt. If you key that in and chat GPT, you’re going to probably get something very similar to what I got, which was about two pages, about two and a third pages, and it was just too generic.
(02:47):
It was just general stuff about autism, very little about severely autistic or profoundly autistic. It was the kind of stuff you could find really going to any of the national associations, the Autistic Society of America. They have transition planned outlines. It was about that level of detail, basically a lot about, yeah, you can do this or that, but not hardly anything about how to do it. And so I was a little disappointed. So I felt that chat, GPT needed to be reprimanded. So I said, chat, GPT, bad boy, bad chat, GPT. And then I gave it a different prompt. I said, the research you compiled doesn’t appear to focus specifically on those with severe, profound or level three autism like I asked you about. I didn’t say that last part. This population is much more difficult to find information and help than the general autistic population.
(03:38):
They typically have an IQ of under 50 or nonverbal and often require one-on-one care. Could you redo your research addressing specifically the much more challenging problems parents of an adult child with severe autism face? And so it came back with about another two pages. It was a little bit better, but it wasn’t that much better in terms of really focusing on severe autism. But one of the things I did, which I thought was really pretty cool, is it knew I was in Austin, Texas. I didn’t tell it this. It definitely knew that from my IP address or something where I was located, and it came back this time with programs and resources in Austin or around the Austin area, and that was pretty cool. Now, I’d heard of most of these, but there were a couple I had not heard about, and the fact that I came up with those and suggested them even though they weren’t specifically for severe autism was pretty cool.
(04:28):
And so I was pretty excited about that. Then I went on over to Claude, and I gave Claude the same exact prompt that I gave chat, GPT, and I was disappointed. It started with what I thought was a bit of a disclaimer. So it started right out of the shoot with I don’t have access to current databases or search capabilities, so I can’t guarantee the completeness or accuracy of specific citations. Then it went on even with more of a cop out. Instead, I’ll focus on providing a structured framework based on well-established principles and areas that parents should focus on. And so it gave me about two pages, about two and a half pages, but it was a very high level framework, sort of like what chat GPT started out with. So I gave it the second prompt. I reprimanded it, and I said, no, I need something that’s a little bit more specific.
(05:18):
I understand that you don’t want to give me too much because you aren’t current and you don’t have all the most recent papers, but can you come back with something a little bit better? And it didn’t do much better, but it did do one thing that was sort of cool. It gave me three case studies, three people that were severely autistic and explained their symptoms and then explained the programs, the steps that those parents took. I thought that’s interesting. So I looked at those. It didn’t give me those initially. It said this was one more question you could answer. And the first thing I start with is, well, these are fake. But it told me that it said, these aren’t real people. These are composites that I made from lots real people that I researched it, blah, blah, blah. Okay. And then it gave me the success strategies.
(06:02):
And this was sort of interesting for Miguel, I think Miguel was 17, this fictitious person started the transition plan at age 16, gradually introduced parents, gradually introduced respite care workers who later became permanent staff, which is what Kay and I did when our son was in that age range, created detailed care protocols for all medical and behavioral needs. We did that too. Very helpful. Used video modeling to familiarize McGill with new environments. Great idea that also worked well for us. Spent 18 months visiting potential group home before selection. We’d spent about two weeks, three weeks traveling the country, and we didn’t find any group homes that were any good, but 18 months maybe, I don’t know. And then implemented a six month transition period with overnight stays increasing gradually. So these three case studies that you had to sort of query it to give you we’re sort of interesting, even though they were fictitious.
(06:52):
So I would say Claude wasn’t as good as chat. GPT surprising in this one area that chat, GPT just didn’t even come up with Complexity Pro, which I’d used in the past for Research Promise. This comprehensive plan, I gave it the same exact query. It was going to give me this comprehensive plan, and this comprehensive plan cited one research paper, one podcast, and two programs. That was it. It’s like, give me a break. So I asked it again to do a little better job, and it came back with some stuff that was a little better. I went out and checked some of the sources that it gave me, and inside those sources, there were references to things that were of value, but required me to do the digging. So Perplexity Pro cited some references that I was able to go out and check further and find things inside of them that were relevant and were something that I was not aware of or I found helpful, but it didn’t highlight that, right?
(07:49):
It is like I had to go do the digging. So it was helpful in finding some of the resources and references to check and citations, but it didn’t fare out the stuff that I wanted. So none of these three had really done what I was hoping for. So I went to Gemini Deep Research. I gave it the same prompt, and it gave me a research plan. I thought, this is sort of interesting. It gave me an eight point research plan, said, this is how I’m going to go answer your questions. I thought, this is sort of interesting, right? Told me step-by-step how I was going to do this and had all these websites I was going to research. This is pretty cool. So I said, go do it. And they said, well, do you want to change anything for us? I said, no, I don’t want to change anything. I want to see what you can do. This is your research plan, not mine. You go do it. It took it a couple minutes and went off and thought and do whatever, did, and computer started smoking. The computer didn’t start smoking, but could have started smoking. They came back with seven and a half pages, oh my God, three times, four times as much as anybody else could come up with and all kinds of references and books and programs. This is great. Started looking at it. Generic autism stuff.
(08:51):
So I gave it the same prompt. I reprimanded it. The research you compiled doesn’t appear to focus specifically on those with severe, profound or level three autism. This population is much more difficult to find information to help for than the general autistic population. Gemini, they typically have an IQ of under 50 or nonverbal and often require one-on-one care. Could you redo your research addressing specifically the much more challenging problems parents and adult child with severe autism face? Now, I was getting a little red in the face at this point, but it did not see that. And so it went off and thought for a few more minutes. Actually, before I did that, it gave me its eight point thing in each of the things it was going to do. It talked about how it’s going to do this for severe autism or profound autism. But the last three, it left that out.
(09:38):
I edited its research plan at this point, and I stuck in there severe autism, severe autism, profound autism. I made sure every one of the eight things it was going to do was specific to the population. And then I turned the thing on and it went out and fought for a while, and it came back with 12 and a half pages this time, more than the seven and a half. Oh my God. So I was pretty darn excited. I looked at all this stuff. Some of the references were generic, some of the references I had not thought of, and they were specific to severe autism. However, some of them were just totally bogus. I wouldn’t say they didn’t exist. They were just of marginal value and weren’t that specific to anything I was interested in. And then it came up with six case studies. So remember Claude came up with three of fictitious people.
(10:28):
Well, Gemini came up with six, and these were real people. It actually gave you the names of the real people. And the first one to start with was Susan Boyle. I thought, I know who Susan Boyle is. I watched her on America’s Got Talent or something. And she’s a Scottish singer who’s got this incredible voice, but she has Asperger’s. And I’m thinking, well, somebody with Asperger’s isn’t really on the low end of the spectrum. At least they’re not considered severely autistic. I mean, they don’t have an IQ of less than 50. They certainly can talk. She can sing and talk. So even though she was a great example of someone who’d been very successful with autism, she was not severely autistic. And the next person was Ann Risi. And she got a master’s in college in social studies and was teaching it. And I’m thinking, well, she’s probably not severely autistic either.
(11:17):
And then the other four I checked out and sort of the same way, these were all real people and it cited who they were and a little bit about their accomplishments, but none of them were severely autistic. So in conclusion, I would say that collectively, because I’ve been researching this stuff for a few weeks for the book I’m working on, they all did find things that I had not found, and they certainly found things in much less time. I mean, I’d spent a couple of weeks and they spent a few minutes. So from a research standpoint, definitely a value. They each found something of value that the other three had not found. So it’s sort of like you can’t just rely upon one. Since all of them sort of came at it from a little different angle and came up with some things that were interesting.
(11:59):
None of them though, even Gemini deep research, really understood the subtleties and the nuances about how profound autism and severe autism is a very different animal than the autism that three-fourths of the autistic folks out there have, right? The folks that can talk, the folks that still have a lot of autistic behaviors and challenges, but they can function much more independently. Whereas profoundly and not severely autistic folks, our son requires one-on-one care from the time he wakes up in the morning, the time he goes to bed. We know other people that require 24 hour care because they have other medical conditions. So it’s just different ballgame. None of the LLMs really understood that. But I would say of you have to do one, you only have time to pick one Gemini Deep Research hands above the other three. I mean, just the sheer volume of stuff.
(12:45):
It produced 12 and a half pages, and this is really good stuff. I mean, it gave you web links, it gave you the names of the organization, it gave you the programs, it cited the research papers, it suggested all this stuff that you then could go out and pick the ones you felt were the most appropriate. Now, some of them were state specific, and it told you that some of them were not. And then you can go into and do some additional research yourself. So it wasn’t like a final answer, but it was pretty interesting and certainly a pleasant surprise, especially after I tried the other three, and I was a little bit disappointed. So I’m sure by the time a few more months go by, AI is probably going to get better. It’s improving at an unbelievably quick pace. So I certainly wouldn’t give up on ai, and I did find this exercise of value and helpful, but you have to check everything.
(13:30):
You have to go out and do a little bit additional research. I would say it saved me a lot of time, but I still had to sort of ferret out the stuff that wasn’t relevant or that I already knew, and then focus on the other things. So in terms of grades, I would’ve given perplexity, pro and claw, probably D’s or D minuses. I’d probably give chat GPT, maybe a C plus or a B minus. But I probably would give Gemini like a maybe a b plus, a minus. It wasn’t an A or an A plus. It was still getting things wrong. It was still citing irrelevant sources, but it was surprisingly good. That’s it for this week. Talk to you again soon. See you.
