In recent years, the voices of some consumers of Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA) have been calling for change. While many behavior analysts have begun to make changes in response to these criticisms, we can and should continue to listen and do better. Part of this involves sharing what we have learned with other practicing behavior analysts who are willing to listen. The purpose of this entry is to spread the word regarding one such change: we should no longer be setting client goals solely because of the “social stigma” that displaying or not displaying certain behaviors may cause.
When I was just getting started in the field, I learned that one reason for targeting a particular behavior was that the behavior excess or deficit was socially stigmatizing. The rationale for this was that the child would ultimately suffer if we did not help them correct the behavior, as it would make them stand out against their typically developing peers. I do think this is a reflection of our societal values at the time, and have thankfully seen change occur. However, this change has not yet spread across the entire practice. Knowing what I know now, it is clear that there are major flaws with upholding this societal preference, and I question the ethics of programming based solely on that rule that I once learned. I am sorry to those who I worked with under that assumption, and I am taking this opportunity now to reach those who continue to practice under those guidelines with the hope that you will also learn to do better.
The first thing to understand is that the “norm” that we are holding our clients to is completely made up by those who have held power in society and is what continues to disable members of society. When one is attempting to make someone fit better into the expectations of such a standard, one has to ask themselves, “Who is this benefiting?”. I can promise you that the answer is rarely ever going to be “my client” especially when mental health is taken into consideration. Second, deviation from this norm is expected and is a wonderful thing in terms of the evolution of a species and culture. We should not be generating behavior intervention plans to reduce or eliminate behaviors solely because they deviate from this norm. It is also important to recognize that many of us who are generating the therapeutic programming possess our own biases for what is “normal” which depends on our own cultural background and learning history. Who the heck are we to make this decision for another human being? It is critical that we recognize our own biases, acknowledge them and let them go in this context so that we can keep the values and goals of our clients in mind.
To put it as clearly as I possibly can - We should never target a behavior solely because it is socially stigmatizing! I am not being naïve when making this statement. I have worked in this field for quite some time now and have seen kids get picked on because they are different. I have seen parents try to protect them or to push for “normalcy” within their own expectations of what normal is. I think this is where we have to remember our purpose and who we serve. I understand that some of these beliefs and practices are embedded within certain cultures, and while we should be sensitive to culture, we should also be discussing ableism and acceptance of neurodiversity with parents who are asking you to target “socially stigmatizing” behaviors that I would argue are unethical to target.
That being said, we have more work to do given the current unfortunate stigma that is attached to difference. It would be wonderful if we lived in a world where being different could always be seen as beautiful, and many are fighting hard for that world. In the meantime, we should support our clients in becoming better equipped for the current world. We should be teaching skills like assertiveness, what to do when someone is bullying them, how to say no or negotiate when they don’t agree, the power of setting and keeping boundaries, skills to identify and work towards their own values and goals, and coping skills to get through those tough moments that every human being has. This is by no means an exhaustive list, nor are these skills that we should only be teaching autistic children or others with disabilities. These are useful skills for everyone. For those with differences that do perhaps carry a stigma in the current world, we should also be keeping an eye out for internal ableism so that we can support them. A growing understanding of the human condition through the science of behavior has given us powerful tools, such as Acceptance and Commitment Therapy, that can offer support in developing a more flexible identity across contexts and a different viewpoint on the expectations put forth by society.
Still, it doesn’t end there. Behavior Analysis is so much more than ABA intervention for those with developmental delays. We are a science of human behavior and have the tools to generate change at the societal level. We should be using our science to alter the discourse around deviation from the norm to create a more accepting world. We need to be working with parents, teachers, and other members of the communities that we work in to teach them that different does not equate to broken or bad. This is a call to action for all behavior analysts to re-think any treatment plan that is in place for the sole purpose of reducing social stigma. It does more harm than good in the long run, and I argue that we have a different role to play in these situations. One that spreads individuality and acceptance.
Four human body figures all shaded in blue with no features and small pink heart in each body. from left to right - adult woman figure. child girl figure with rainbow oval in head. boy child. adult male with rainbow oval in head. Children figures holding hands. all on green grass and blue sky background.
