ABA and Lessons from History: "Evidence based"

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.researchgate.net/publication ... m_the_1900

I am greatly wearied by the hackneyed and predictable slogan that ABA parents use to justify torture of their children. "But it's evidence based!" Another variant is "But it worked". (So did lobotomy, and sometimes I wonder if some of these parents have had one..)

The "evidence based claim" so often used in this naive, parroted way sweeps away all the ethical, scientific and philosophical evaluations and wider considerations that need to be applied to "evidence". It is axiomatic that evidence is only as good as the research design and the motives of the researchers (scientific or political). Tautological designs are not scientific in any sense. Tautology is a big problem in ABA 'research'.

One of the very first questions I think we need to ask is: "Whose evidence?"

The second perhaps is: "Does it meet the many different kinds of scientific measures of validity, especially construct validity".

The third: "Where is the evidence on these different kinds of validity measures?

The fourth: "Were ethical standards of research met (especially informed, unpressured consent of participants).

The fifth is: "Were UN conventions and other human rights obligations adhered to?"

The sixth is: "How does this evidence compare with other evidence which is in the same general discipline, especially contradictory evidence"

The seventh is: "Is reductionism and assumption operating in a circular manner to produce these evidence-based results".

The eighth is Cicero's question: Cui Bono? Who benefits? Science doesn't exist in a vacuum - it is affected and sometimes infected/corrupted by political influences, the morality of the power imbalance of third parties aligning with researchers against powerless children (parents), cultural and social views, and none more so than the "evidence based" ABA "research".

The ninth: Is this research consistent with WHO guidelines?

There are more however this is just to try and illustrate that "evidence based" is not what it is claimed to be - not even in real science..

Societal morality over practical morality is basically the driving force. The same was said (and at times, continues to be peddled, sadly) about "homosexual treatment". People deep down knew that the "treatments" for being gay were unethical as all hell (1950s-60s), but nobody was going to surrender the core ideas of what society thought was right at the time in exchange for practical morality, of just letting people be, and making progress.

America is dearly sick with its autism problem. The more it attempts to deny it, the more it will grow.

I ask in all seriousness, if not ABA, then what? Do we not attempt to bring the children out of their worlds? Don't we want to teach them the skills necessary to be a productive member of society?

Here's a step by step guide for parents of children with autism - training for parents. Please share it with anyone who thinks and advocates on a "TINA" basis (There Is No Alternative) as justification for putting their children in the hands of ABA practitioners:

http://www.cigna.com/assets/docs/behavi ... b-2014.pdf

Autistic libertarianism. I like the way you're thinking.

Just don't understand why a natural way of behaving is so intolerable to so many.

^Same rhetoric used by women's rights and gay rights. As long as it is antagonistic to society, it cannot be accepted.

I'm torn on this. To put my son into therapies or not? I don't want to change the way that he is. He is a pure soul, and is generally happy. But would he want me to get him help with his meltdowns? Would he want me to try to help him become better in social environments?

He would possibly want you to mentor him yourself, perhaps with the help of peer mentors later on, support and encourage his islands of competence and most of all accept him for who he is, combined with affection, trust, approval. If you are assuming that he wants to be a social person - that's a big judgment to make. Socialising may never be his thing, because it may be he would rather pursue knowledge, self-development, creativity etc or simply prefer life as an introverted person. You are making too big an assumption that NT functioning is automatically right for your son. Do you think that it helps lefthanded people to be forced to use their right hand only? Or to force introverts to be extroverted?

Imagine if Einstein's parents had forced him to turn into a social being instead of letting him find his own strengths! My caregivers wanted me to be a housewife, and tried to impose that as a sole destiny on me. I was by nature an academic! Parents don't always know what is best for their children. Many assume that they do. Children want parents to honour them for their own unique personalities and strengths. You can teach your son the minimum level of social skills everyone needs - manners etc and guide him through difficult of challenging social situations as they arise.

You task is to help this child be his best self - not fit him into a pattern that doesn't fit him.

I think ABA means different things to lot of people. One person may have one view on it and another person may have a different view on it but they both are not on the same page about what ABA is so assumptions are made. One kid may want friends let's say but in order to do that, that kid needs some social skills like turning taking, waiting his turn, being flexible in play by letting other kids decide what they want to play with, not be bossy and dictate everyone around him so the mother tries to teach him those things but another autistic person may have no interest in friends lets say and desires none so that person assumes the mother is forcing therapy on her son and trying to change him because the autistic person thinks her son has no interest in friends and assumes the kid isn't social. Even Temple Grandin thinks all ASD kids need to learn some basic social skills because those are needed in the future for employment and even to have employment that matches their special interest even if they are self employed in the future. I don't think all ABA is abusive and it's not like the 1960's anymore where treatment was abusive and I don't think all ABA is eight hours a day, that seems excessive and I never had therapy 8 hours a day. I am not sure how often my mom worked with me and how long. She had a home to take care of and two other kids. When I first heard of ABA in a book, it sounded like therapy at home so I thought all ABA was like that so it would be baffling when I would see criticism about it. I loved Speech therapy as a kid and I loved my first group therapy I attended and I liked occupational therapy and I remember loving these pictures and telling stories from them so to see hate about it was baffling.

Whenever I see an argument about ABA, I often think people are arguing about different things.

But I loved rewards when I was a kid, that is what gave me a learning attitude. If I said a sound for a word, I got an M&M. I loved getting speech buck in speech therapy to trade in for prizes and I loved earning poker chips in group therapy to trade in for prizes. but the second group therapy had no reward system so I hated that class. I guess not all kids love them and to me it was all a game and I couldn't get enough of it and I wished I had more so I could earn it faster and get prizes quicker.