ABA: Abolishment vs Adaptation Part 1
I have a unique perspective as someone who has all levels of connection to autism, which is one of the many reasons I am so passionate about it. I have family members who are diagnosed, I worked in ABA services for almost 2 years, and I have my own diagnosis of autism. Because of all these identities, I have conflicting opinions on the ABA debate that is currently ongoing on the internet. I’m going to explain both of my alternate opinions and then I will talk about how I have integrated them.
First, my identity as an autistic person will always be more important than my experience having worked in ABA. Also, I would like to acknowledge that I have worked at one ABA center in mid-Michigan and served 3 clients from ages 9 to 16 during that time. I cannot speak on early interventions or ABA with other populations, so I wanted to be extremely transparent about that. As an autistic person, I understand all the way that ABA has been found to be harmful. I wholeheartedly believe that the field as it stands cannot be allowed to continue as the damage to autistic individuals far outweighs any measured improvements in neurotypical definitions of functioning. ABA as a field has an extremely negative history, and it has not been updated to be applicable to all cultures and identities. I believe in the science of behaviorism in the sense that I believe that all behaviors (internal or external) have a function, and that understanding that function will help you understand the person. My agreement with the field of ABA and behaviorism ends there.
As a behavior technician, the person working directly with a child in ABA, I was in charge of collecting data and running programs that were created by my supervisor who supervised our sessions once per week and did evaluations to change behavior plans every 3-6 months depending on client progress. ABA emphasizes the use of Discrete Trial Training, which has the client repeatedly answer questions or complete small tasks in exchange for an immediate reward while the technician collects data on their responses. The strict programming of ABA is one of its fatal flaws because it does not allow for generalizability of any skills that a client gains from this technique. It also creates prompt dependence, where the client waits for the technician to help them with the answer, which cannot be considered learning.
My overall opinion leans more towards reform of the current ABA system for a few reasons. The first, and largest, is that ABA is currently the only therapeutic option for thousands of individuals and families. Because of the monopoly that ABA has on the industry, they are often the only providers in an area and the only ones covered by insurance and Medicaid. Because of this, simply removing ABA as a field would leave these people stranded and uneducated on their other options. Without creating a large enough pool of other therapists, we cannot ethically remove a service that so many people are utilizing. Also, there are a few skills that I believe ABA is great at teaching, when done ethically and correctly. Any skill that involves completing smaller tasks in steps is easy to teach with ABA because it rewards any small amount of progress and emphasizes teaching each step individually.
Obviously, with this being one of the longest posts to date, this is a huge topic. It is a discussion that impacts millions of providers and clients, so being able to have dialogue that acknowledges all sides of the issue is crucial if we are going to make progress. If you are currently an ABA professional who has found themselves here, check out some of my other posts to make sure that you are providing the best care possible to your clients. I will also be continuing this discussion in later posts, as this is not the limit of my opinions!
