ABA and Lessons from History: "Evidence based"

Post Reply New Topic

What does IBI stand for?

And again, the author takes about a 50-page flight of fancy toward the end of his book where Noah starts learning full words and short sentences and starts making a series of medium strides even starting a romantic relationship and setting a date for marriage---and then it all crashes back down to Earth when we learn he is still in an institution, albeit one probably quite a bit more decent than the above. On an amazon book review, someone wrote that this is the most manipulative book ever. So, be warned. I think the book works and has important information. But all the same, the author, who is Noah's brother, does include this long flight of fancy toward the end.

Does the brother think that is all okay for what they are doing to his brother or is he horrified about it? Did the brother get better and then just relapsed?

Have you ever been aware of issues with "evidence based" claims from a scientific point of view? There are very many concerns in science about the glib use of, and reliance on, those two words. You are benefiting from ABA, you are NT, you
misrepresent the relationship of behaviourism and its history to ABA, and I wonder why you are posting this on WP now? Perhaps this is your contribution to Light it Up Blue April 2? Visiting from Autism Speaks by any chance? Try Walking in Red for a change.

Generally speaking, I am in favor of basing conclusions on evidence, but when the phrase "evidence based" is used to promote practices for which there is, in fact, little or no evidence of beneficial effect, then the phrase seems more like controlling device, reminiscent of cult indoctrination.

I suspect this phrase will ultimately be useful and these people will be "hoist by their own petard" when real evidence shows that they are full of it.

No, his brother Noah largely stayed his same autistic self. And apparently, he never got good at even saying single words.

And Karl felt deeply about what was happening to his brother. It felt like an unfolding injustice and he didn't know what to do about it. In retrospect, it might have been real good if he had had someone he could talk with about this and who might carry some of the burden on their shoulders, and maybe even suggest some doable responses, rather than his parents who were already run ragged and were school-demanding when they weren't worn out. rather than being middle-of-the-road on school, something like this. Karl was the older brother, Noah the younger brother. At this point they were both teenagers, and so it was a difficult situation all the way around.

Maybe if they had tried to teach Noah sign language, or typing on a non-glare keyboard. Or more broadly, teachers who can light-touch a variety of activities, using modest and matter-of-fact rewards as well as the intrinsic interest of the activity. This instead of becoming fixated on one activity which *must* work and *will* work due to the glories of behaviorism.

I wish to respectfully disagree. This person has shared that they are dyslexic, dyscalculic, and dysgraphic, and in their words, had a s**t ton of problems in school.

And plus, he or she seems reasonably open-minded toward stimming. So, I'd much rather have someone with these traits working with kids on the spectrum rather than someone super hardcore about one particular theoretical approach.

By all means (respectfully disagree). My main "bone of contention" is the spurious claim 'evidence based' being used as a glib slogan, promotional rhetoric, and one question we might ponder is who, in particular, is making this claim as a glib slogan? We know who; Autism Speaks.

I have addressed some of the underlying problems with this claim elsewhere; and I don't want to deliver a lecture about this. Suffice to say however that it is difficult to detect rhetorical tactics unless you are deeply acquainted with the underlying substance of claims of empirical authority. Also, scientists (even unbiased ones) are human; they are not objective machines who conduct perfect experiments with perfect conclusions. When science becomes muddled with politics - especially autism politics - "scientific truth" is often determined by completely nonscientific factors. Taking an ABA course doesn't make anyone an expert on the context in which the claims are made; they have made themselves part of that context! I could go on all day about issues to do with the incredibility of the AS evidence-based slogan (but won't for the sake of WP members).

In addition to the real problems of political dimensions of scientific consensus forming, there is the problem of "truthy" claims dressed in "sciency" garb to obfuscate the nature of their projects. Two well known examples of this are scientologists with their ersatz "technical devices" and NLP with those three wonderful words "neuro," "linguistic," and "programming" --that sounds like a whole lotta science right there! But it's 50% hokum, 50% bunkum.

Yes and yes. The eye movement "evidence" is another example of evidence-based abuse. I think your scientology analogy is good also.

[sarcasm]
Are you like most parents with an autistic child? You want the autism out of your child but none of the treatments work. You've tried everything-- DBT, ABA, exorcism, even the witch doctor down the street, but to no success, the demon just won't come out. Don't fret there IS hope! We here at Psychobabble Incorporated have invented a new treatment: ABA+. What is ABA+? It's like ABA but we've simply taken away the reward system. Instead we chain your child in a room and flash bright lights, play loud music, and rub ticklish materials all over their body until they stop the behavior you, the parent, deem bad. It's a revolutionary new evidence based method that has a 100% success rate-- your child will either stop the behavior you find annoying or they die in the room so you don't have to deal with them anymore. The best part is if your insurance doesn't cover treatment Autism Speaks will! Call now before the demon spawns and infects your other children, you, and your spouse.
[/sarcasm]

IBI stands for Intensive Behaviour Therapy - eg more than 20 hours a week of ABA.

I understand your anger. Historically ABA was, and still remains to be in most arenas to be abusive. I am not quite NT. One of the reasons why I am in this field is because the educational system has failed me. Yet, on my own time, I have found my way out of the depths. I continue to struggle with the social scene, continue to struggle as a student and with my every day life. It may not be the same as autism, but I know what it is like to be different and different to be ridiculed by teachers. And if it makes you feel any better I was once recommended to a highly special education boarding school. Thank god my parents had brain to not allow that.

I am actually against autism speaks and I support ASAN. I am posting on the Wrong planet forums because I am genuinely interested in knowing the autistic perspective. I want to learn the experiences of the people. I want to know what works for autistic people. Only then can we use behaviourism to educate autistics. After all, it's a basic human right to have an education.

ABA is evidence based in so far as they record data, monitor changes and highlight how the behaviour changed. Yes, ABA does use this in a manipulative way, to be "we're the best therapy approach". But guess what, without the ABA backing itself as evidence-based no organization would help parents pay for "treatment" or as I prefer to say an education. So we have an approach, it sucks, but it has a good foundation (we know human behaviour and verbal behavior via relation frame theory) and is recognized. Shunning ABA won't do anything since they will remain, its a big institution. It's about changing ABA which matters. Yes abusive culture within ABA clinics is pervasive. But if you look at the modern research, we are going away from the DTT model and into something a bit more child self-guided.

As I've said, the problem of ABA is that therapists aren't seeing the educational value of the ABA tools. The tools are misused. ABA has no neurodiversity model for behaviours and so, normalization therapy occurs. If the development of a neurodiversity model occurs, knowledge of stimming is brought to light, eye-contact problems is brought to light, and the emotional side of therapy is brought to light. ABA is a new science, it sucks, but the understanding of behaviour is there. The understanding of verbal and conceptual behavior is there (relational frame theory). It's not that ABA is bad. It's the application that is BAD.


Without the institution of ABA, and societal recognizing the importance of ABA, and insurances paying for the ABA education.

How else do you want autistics to be educated? How else do you expect the parents to pay for 1-1 teacher-student ratio?


To sum up. The intensive behavioural therapy (IBI) associated with ABA practices is horrible. Why? Because there are no neurodiverse accounts, and people don't know what to do other than normalizing children. Parents also pressure normalization. We must also educate parents about the neurodiverse perspective. Whats good about ABA? We know very well how humans learn. And we know how humans form concepts (via relational frame theory). You can make it work. We just need people to understand and accept autistic people. That's a societal issue.

Before I address your post, please explain what you mean when you use of the term "autistics", as used by you in your assertion "how else can we educate autistics?".

I want to have a clear understanding of what the terminology means to [b]you before I respond.[/b]

PS: TINA cuts no ice with me. (There Is No Alternative). This is the hymn sheet that the ABA promoters continuously sing from. However I will address that later once you have clarified what "autistics" are from your perpective and understanding.

In this context, I would define the term loosely to someone with a different cognitive style, and different way of thinking. Someone who cannot be accepted within traditional education (not because they shouldn't but because the system does not help them - related to accommodations, teacher ignorance...).

More generally, someone who is on the autism spectrum.

And by the statement, I didn't intend any alarm. I just assume you believe education is a basic human right for everyone (correct me if I'm wrong). I am simply asking YOU. If not helping the ABA community evolve into a neurodiverse and accepting educational industry. What do YOU suggest to provide an acceptable education? Clearly the public system fails.

PS. I don't understand your TINA reference.

Please further clarify for me: you are saying that anyone who can be educated in the 'normal' system isn't autistic according to your understanding and definition?