First, I want to thank Not Another Autistic Advocate for taking the time to talk and listen to me with patience, and for all of the emotional labor they put into educating the world. They inspired this post by teaching me and helping me see the autistic perspective on this particular issue. Please, if you haven’t already, check out their page here.
What is ABA? If you look this up literally anywhere people can answer questions, you will find as many unique answers as there are sources. The practitioners will say something along the lines of: “it’s the application of the science of learning and behavior.” Supporters will say it’s “the miracle therapy– the gold standard of autism treatment.” Opponents will say “it’s dog training for children, something forced upon autistics to try to make them normal.”
So who’s right?
Well, what if I said everyone was right?
Defining ABA
The problem stems from the fact that ABA itself is not well-defined. The very technical definition would be the application of the science of behavior. This leads to practitioners and supporters alike discrediting and discounting opponents by saying that behavior and contingencies are everywhere and you can’t avoid ABA. This definition though is really only relevant to the field itself. When opponents, or even non-professional supporters, talk about ABA, they are talking about something far more specific. And deep down, I think we all understand that.
Sticking to the very specific scientific definition usually just leads to a pointless argument about semantics. We need to understand that all sides are speaking different but otherwise mutually intelligible languages, and pretending not to understand doesn’t move anything on either side. There needs to be forward momentum, because people are being abused and traumatized, and arguing about semantics just prolongs solving that problem. The technical definition can be saved for discussions within the field and nerding out about behavioral science. We are the only ones who are multilingual on this subject. It’s our responsibility to engage in a way that’s actually productive.
So what is ABA when considering meaningful discussion? It’s a practice utilized primarily with autistic people. That’s about the only common ground you can find once you’ve gotten over semantics. Even the use of the word “therapy” cannot be considered universally accepted for a variety of reasons not relevant to this particular post.
ABA and autism
Most of us who have been listening have altered the way we practice. This can lead to temptations to #NotMyABA, which I have previously strongly cautioned against. It can also lead to the response that will shut down some practitioners from a productive conversation the fastest: “But that’s not ABA.”
Cue the behavior science nerd rage.
It is ABA! Reinforcers and punishers and contingencies are everywhere! You can’t escape it! That’s how environments work! You’re constantly interacting with your environments! EVERYTHING IS ABA!
To the autistics out there: I understand that that’s not what you’re talking about, but many practitioners truly don’t.
To the practitioners out there: You’re getting into semantics again. Shoving your deeper understanding of behavioral science down everyone’s throat isn’t a productive conversation. There is a general practice experienced by far too many autistics, and it is the complete opposite of what you’re describing. Even if you have the world’s most progressive practice, even if you’ve never heard an autistic person describe something you do as part of their experience, even if, based on everything you’ve heard, you’re doing everything right (doubtful), you are in the extreme minority. You are one in a million. That’s not a good thing. That’s all the more reason to uplift these voices.
What is wrong with ABA?
You may have seen some rage-inducing claims made about ABA, such as its main goal is to make autistics normal and to squash autistic behavior, or that it’s conversion therapy. Many claim it’s grooming and sets autistic people up to be abused later in life, or that it leads to autistic suicide.
All of that is true. There is data and research to support it.
ABA is an incredibly new field, created by neurotypicals for neurotypicals. Even if it’s not your goal, the original stated goal of ABA for autism was to make autistics indistinguishable from their typically-developing peers. Why? Because autistic behavior was “weird” and “scary,” and made others uncomfortable. Again, even if you wholeheartedly disagree with that sentiment now, the techniques that were developed, the goals, the assessments, all of your training, was with that as the end goal in mind.
That means there is rot at the root. The problem exists at the very inception of ABA and has been woven into it as it’s grown through the years.
And it’s been doing a lot of that.
If we want to undo the harm, we have a lot to comb through and weed out. We should be analyzing every single detail from every single angle. That includes angles outside of the ABA world.
Is all ABA abuse?
Recently, there’s been discussion as to whether all ABA is abuse. It’s hard to accept a blanket statement like that sometimes, but then again, disagreeing with it can lead to minimization. As the field continues to polarize over this subject, more and more efforts are being made to silence criticisms of ABA. Though there have been some half-hearted acknowledgments that there is abuse in the field, the overall message from defenders is that we need to de-emphasize these stories and focus on the positives of ABA.
Who is that really helping though? Seems like you’re acknowledging that there is indeed a problem, but that we shouldn’t talk about it.
I certainly understand the concern that these stories are turning parents away from behavior analytic services, but is that necessary a bad thing?
Hear me out.
If the problem is this prevalent, maybe parents shouldn’t start until these issues are resolved. Sure, there are some of us who are listening and working to do better, but not everyone is. And that’s a pretty big risk to take, especially when you’re a parent with a child newly discovered as autistic, and you have no idea what to look for. When you start actively blocking out criticisms and stories of abuse, you start to make a pretty strong case for abolishment and that maybe all ABA really is abuse. Certainly, if you push out the reform-minded folk, it eventually will be. There won’t be anyone left who’s trying to do better.
Minimizing focus on abuse and boosting the “good stuff” only makes the people in charge feel more comfortable. It’s the definition of talking over marginalized groups and silencing victims. It’s the wrong move if you really want positive change to happen, and it’s a really bad look for the people you claim to be trying to help. No one should have to stay silent for others’ comfort. That’s the definition of masking. It’s harmful and perpetuates abuse.
No one likes to hear they’ve done harm, especially if we truly care about our learners. But plugging our ears and shutting it out isn’t going to help anything. Deal with your personal discomfort, then stand up and do better. You owe it to the entire disabled community.
So can ABA be reformed?
By the most general definition, what I am doing here is not ABA reform. Consider that, in order to reform ABA, one would need to strip it down to its skeleton and remove the bones, then rebuild it with a completely different base. You would be left with something completely unrecognizable as ABA as we know it. What BCBAs would call reformed ABA, most opponents would call ABA abolishment. It’s the same goal but with 2 different terms, and in this case, the two are not necessarily mutually intelligible. This is what can lead to genuine misunderstandings and a complete loss of forward momentum when reform-minded BCBAs and autistics attempt to engage one another.
To BCBAs, what we are doing is ABA Reform. To autistics, ABA can’t be reformed and, because our end product looks nothing like the ABA they experienced, it is ABA abolishment.
This blog is meant to talk to practitioners, mainly BCBAs, which means I have to speak our language. In the language of BCBAs, this is still ABA. Calling it ABA abolishment will shut me out of the audience I need to reach. My goal is to create positive change from the inside, and I can’t do that if I’m alienating the ones whose behavior needs to change. The hope is, with this explanation to both sides, we can close up gaps in communication and continue working towards improving the practice.
I do believe that the science of learning and behavior can be applied in a way that is positive and not harmful, but that goal alone creates an excellent argument for dismantling ABA and starting over. I can’t say I’m against the idea either. Given ABA’s history and origins, and the amount that would need to be changed, it’s not unfair to question if the result can still be called ABA.
So if you describe your methods of practice to an autistic person and they say “but that’s not ABA,” just take it as a freaking compliment and move on. Don’t worry about trying to correct the terminology. It’s just a different way of describing the same goals.
I’m OK with my practice being unrecognizable as ABA. Frankly, I’m less concerned with what we call it and more concerned with the actions themselves. Dismantle, abolish, or reform– the point is to do better. We need to keep learning and listening. We need to do away with harmful practices completely, and reframe our goals. No one needs to be indistinguishable from their peers. All people, regardless of neurotype or ability, should be nothing less than empowered to be their best selves. If you really want to help, that is the only goal you should have.