Friday, June 30, 2017

ABA Leaks reviews TasiaM (April 12, 2013) "Changing the child vs. helping the child" post in blog "Life his way, thriving with autism."

[Edit note: Even this rough draft is unfinished, but I'm quitting the writing session now and publishing it now so as not to lose it for certain. DA]

 TasiaM (April 12, 2013). Changing the child vs. helping the child. In Life his Way blog, Thriving with Autism blog.

Cleverly Tasia doesn't call any of the misguided "therapies" s/he criticizes "ABA therapy," which is an oxymoron anyway, a contradiction of terms, since therapy is not something that demands, which ABa always does. It even "treats for escape" from their asinine "demands."

Of course, s/he's describing a list of more than one so-called "therapies" done by practitioners whom we at ABA Leaks call pseudo-professionals, in accordance with how s/he pens this excellent post. Besides, ABA bully behavior Controllers constantly pretend to ignore us, their proudly-identified CounterControllers, to a fault, as they are pinning themselves into their own corner this way, strategically. They still refuse to include ABA-provoked trauma reports in their so-called "data," as far as we know, which is why they're clearly a pseudoscience.

Anyhow, read in block quotes below how well Tasia, an autism parent, accepts young people's non-verbal autism and eagerly learns, one bit at a time, how their actions do indeed communicate, which is a method ABA sometimes knows exists, yet still argues against, quite ineffectively, even though non-punitive Positive Behavior Support (PBS) leaders LaVigna, BCBA, and Donnellan (1986) tried to teach highly-punitive ABA how behavior is communication, but to no avail. See Corey Robertson (May 4, 2017), so-called "BehaviorGuy" of Facebook, say, "All behavior serves a function- but don't believe that 'all behavior is communication' - that's a bit simplistic. Tantrums occur when they are effective." Robertson does not cite any source that says "all behavior is communication." Lavigna and Donnellan (1986, p. 22) said, "Many behaviors exhibited by human beings may appear to be devoid of any meaning - random, "bizarre" behavior without function and serving no social purpose (e.g., Rapp, Deitz, and Spier, 1974). Yet, the results of other behavioral and related studies indicate that behaviors such as stereotypic responding, aggression, self-injury, echolalia [repetitive speech], property destruction, and similar examples often [italics added] serve definite and sometimes quite complex [italics added] communicative and social interactive functions (Edward Carr, 1977, 1983; Carr, Newsom, and Binkhoff, 1976; Prizant, 1978; Frankel, 1982Lovaas, 1982; Lovaas et el., 1965; Schuler and Goetz, 1981)." Nobody in PBS, so it seems, said "all behavior is communication," as Robertson asserts, so ABA is once again the pot calling the kettle black. Just like ABA is the pseudoscience that masquerades as a science and attacks non-ABA interventions as "pseudoscience," here we see popular ABA lobbyist Robertson simplifying the communicative aspects of behavior and accusing somebody, and he or she doesn't say whom, of being too "simplistic."

Altieri (November 3, 2015) showed how "aversives-addicted ABA electro-shockers are on trial against PBS non-punishers (theoretically, because PBS punishes in practice).

Altieri (June 28, 2016) wrote, "the 'data' is in. Every Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) pseudo-professional cult member completely supports or is complicit to ABA's extremely painful electric skin shock 'torture.' Establishing argument: ABA is very different from Positive Behavior Support (PBS) despite some overlap. PBS theory rules out all ABA punitive techniques as unnecessary and therefore unethical. PBS practice does indeed punish despite its theoretical claims to the contrary."

On the other hand, Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB) CEO James Carr and Sidener (2002) claimed non-punitive PBS is a part of highly-punitive ABA. They made the astounding statement that "we hope it is clear from our arguments that PBS can easily be characterized as a service-delivery framework within the broader discipline of applied behavior analysis. However, although some professionals and researchers agree with this characterization, our personal experience is that it constitutes the minority perspective (p. 251)."

This is most unbelievable and surprising because James Carr and Sidener (2002, p. 246-247) also said,

PBS promotes the use of procedures based on positive reinforcement as opposed to punishment (Horner, Dunlap, and Koegel, 1990 [sic - Correct citation is Horner et al., 1990.]; Sisson, 1992; Sugai et al., 1999). In fact, the importance of positive intervention strategies is one of the main factors that prompted the development of PBS (Sugai et al.). However, Van Houten et al. (1988) have long asserted this emphasis to be important to applied behavior analysis. The authors stated, "consistent with the philosophy of least restrictive yet effective treatment, exposure of an individual to restrictive procedures is unacceptable unless it can be shown that such procedures are necessary to produce safe and clinically significant behavior change" (p. 113).

This entire crew in Van Houten et al. (1988) has supported extremely painful electric skin shock, what the United Nations calls a place of "torture (M√©ndez, 2013, p. 85)." 1). Ronald Van Houten, Rotenberg Center skin shockers board member board member;


Click on Tasia (April 12, 2013) to read all the post. Tasia tells her autism mother and father peers how to accept autism nonverbal ways of communicating and then turn to the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) to advocate to systems-wide accommodations for the autistic way. On the other hand, ABA Leaks has found that the Behavior Analyst Certification Board never requires and college coursework in Disability Studies, so they no very little about the "reasonable accommodations" the ADA requires of them all, but to no avail, of course, once again. Since ABA is all about coercion into normalcy and obedience trainings, electric grid floor Skinner Box lab rat torture and Doggie style, diabetic eating habit, candy morsels paired with clickers:

Something I keep in mind when considering therapies and the like: do I want this for my child, or do I want this for others? Life skills benefit the child and can be taught without any implication that the child is “lesser” for not having them. Social skills are another story and that’s where acceptance comes more into play. Example: autistic kids are often not allowed to stim. Stimming (flapping, rocking, pacing, fidgeting) is an important tool for self-regulation. Stopping his stims does not benefit the child in any way; in fact, it hurts him and is counter-productive. (Self-injurious stims are another matter, but those can be redirected instead of suppressed.)
But conventional thinking says that stimming is bad so they try to make it go away. Why is it bad? Because it makes other people uncomfortable. This is what most social therapies are about: teaching the autistic child to behave in such a way that makes everyone else feel comfortable. Teaching him to do and say and even think the “right” things. (Yes, social training does actually tell them what they should be thinking.)
 This is the sort of thing that the acceptance movement protests. Autism has its own culture and assuming positive intent is central to it. While my autistic friends are direct and blunt, and they really can’t be any other way, they are generally not hurtful. It’s my responsibility to not read emotion into their words that isn’t there. Acceptance means that I take them as they are, rather than insisting that they change the way they talk to me. It means I don’t tell them to stop flapping because it’s distracting; instead I find my own ways to stay focused (and it works great that in autistic culture, I can look away without being called rude!). It means I understand that they are working hard every day to process the world and I don’t ask them to work even harder just to make me feel comfortable. Actually, as long as I am accepting, I feel perfectly comfortable. Of course we all want to maximize our kids’ potential. When we work toward that goal with acceptance, we see autism as simply a part of who they are, not something to be trained out of them.

1 comment :

Copyright and disclaimers

Reward and Consent , © is January 15, 2007 to the current date. All rights reserved (and stuff like that). E-mail me for permission to reproduce in part or in full. Please link to and cite passages quoted or paraphrased from here.

Reward and Con
sent is not responsible for links on the site. For example, I use keywords "Operant Conditioning" in the YouTube search field for the videos displayed below the archives on the left. Google selects the videos and the results change from time to time. Please email me if anything is not educational and germane to the subject and I will reevaluate the search.

I am an advocate for people with disabilities certified to teach special education with a Master of Arts in Teaching. I am not a Licensed Psychologist or a Board Certified Behavior Analyst. When in doubt, seek the advice of an MD, a PhD, or a BCBA. My ability to analyze the ethics of ABA stems from the fact that I am disabled and ABA interventions are often done to people like me, which I voluntarily accept, but only when I alone am the person granting consent, and not a parent, sibling, guardian, or institution.