Aspies For Freedom

HI!  I am posting loads because I am learning so much!  I posted at the end of the barack obama thread about my years ago work doing ABA and I stumbled onto loads of criticism and negative comments about it on another site.  I will repost what I wrote about it so you know where I am coming from, and then I would love to know what you think about why it is not a good thing, or if you like it? or if you think it should be used only in certain populations (very severe, very mild etc)? or at all or what.
I really don't think the goal should be to make everyone into sunny cheerleader rainbow socialites, it should be make it so people have greater access to what they want and need and to give them a better chance to participate in the world in ways that add to tthe quality of life.  Anyone who wants to give people a complete affect makeover is nuts and doesn't share my aspiephilia.  Maybe that is what you don't like? People who think everyone should be socially "normal" or the same?

Applied Behavior Analysis... It means using the environmental factors that maintain behavior to help acquire new or change old behavior.  By identifying Reinforcing events, you can kind of "see what a kid likes" and provide those things contingent on performance where success is likely and builds on itself. Many Many times the behaviors generalize and allow the child to participate more fully and be able to let people know what their needs are with much greater clarity... thereby reducing frustration and broadening the scope of social and learning possibility.  I haven't done it in years and I don't know what's in vogue these days, but when I did it, we used a thing called

discrete trial training.... REALLY labor intensive but FUN and super satisfying if it is done with consistency and joy.

It is a system of teaching that breaks interaction and performance down to measurable and achievable units of behavior for the child and gradually increases the level of complexity ... for example.  

Like, in learning to name objects, we assume a lot when we can speak, but for kids who can't, we can't assume they are willfully avoiding it or just plain can't do it, we have to look at the basics of language.  We first have to accept that the sound for something is that thing's functional substitute.  

For a child that doesn't appear to make this connection, repeating the sound in the presence of the object, combined with an interactive requirement ("touch", or "Put" or "Point to") and assitance in achieving the result can led to future responses with a greater level of independence.   And eventually with repetition, a measurable and consistent level of successful performances of the task,  and appropriate reinforcement (what the child really likes or wants) The child eventually will be able to "identify" (point to etc. )  the object in the presence of other objects and in novel situations.  

Here's an example of what one little part of the training can look like.  Say you want a kid (supposing she has already mastered some sort of "come here" and "look at me" behaviors) to then point to out otherwise identify an object, You would place the object on a table with no distractions around and say touch the Apple... or whatever.  Then depending on the child's level of receptive language you assist in the action by varying levels of prompting.  Sometimes the child will be able to do the task with no prompting and that would indicate a more sophisticated level of receptive language skills.  Then you take the training up a notch... but it always must be carefully monitored.  data is key.  

But for a child with no receptive language at all, you have to start very small and clear. Starting with hand over hand and each time to success.. (teacher holds the child's hand to touch, then reinforces .  No matter how great the level of prompting, the teacher reinforces the child with attention (praise, a small verbal "party" if the kid likes that,) or access to something they prefer or "a break" at the end of a set number of trials if that is appropriate.  

Then gradually, based on a consistent percent of correct responses for a set number of sessions (probably 20)  in that activity with a prescribed number of trials (sessions probably 10-15 trials each) you can, in the next session reduce the amount of prompting. Pointing would be an example of a reduction.  then gesturing, then a nod, then independent performance with no visual cue.  The you can start with another object, do the same, the fade in other objects and switch places between objects all over many many sessions.  They usually catch on pretty quickly after they "know" the rules...then there are many many different programs all of which kind of line up to get the kids responding to, identifying and interacting with the world around them.  

It's pretty awesome actually.  Of course within the discipline there is always a lot of debate about how you get stuff to generalize to the classroom environment, to the home environment etc, but the successes I have seen have been incredible and while some kids may sometimes seem "robotic" to some (i say diversity is a good thing),and there are plenty whose affect is a damn sight better than it was when they couldn't tell anyone how miserable they were or give people some sort of sign that they've had enough and were about to freak out or if they were in pain or hungry or needed affection or hated to be touched etc.  It is a great device for increasing the probability of successful interactions with others which can give them a better shot at happiness. Just because they are autistic doesnt mean they don't feel and need people.  Wow. I can't believe I remembred all that.

Out of what I've heard I think it could be a technique that might have a potential of improvement to teaching kids usefull skills. There has been alot of anti-ABA mentality on AFF at least earlier, and when that went on I hadn't much a clue of what ABA was, and I got the impression of most of the other members didn't know it either.

Many of the members thought that ABA is the kind of treatment seen in Judge Rotenberg Center where they give an electroshock for unwanted behaviors - It is indeed called ABA, but it is far from the kind of treatment young children on the spectrum receive, which is often rather called EIBI or the Lovaas technique (Lovaas/Løvaas is norwegian btw).

The Lovaas technique had use of punishment until some point in the 70's or 80's though when it had received alot of criticism from the media.

I agree. I do think that it is probably possible to do ABA right, as long as aversives aren't used, and it isn't used to supress neutral or positive autistic traits. Most of the ABA programs out there don't do it right, though, since they often try to do things like suppress stimming or force eye contact.

OH!!! that would totally suck if they did that.  Yes, there was an aversives controversy (those old journal articles made me sick to my stomach but back then, everyone believed in spanking too whether the kid "needed it" or not...jeez..)  but that was resolved.  Not only was it crap for the person being taught, they learned that there can be horrible "side effects" from aversive control in that way.  (corporal punishment)  but it is SO much better than that now.  INterestingly, that research produced enough data to show that things like that can leave emotional scars (behavioal "residue") which only come up later and cause an apparent apathy... like non-responding because of the conditioning that nothing you do matters, you're just going to be punished anyway..or the child attempts to reinact it on others (animals, other people, self).  What you suppress with violence comes out in violence. Fear is a motivator but at way too great a cost and long term crap results.   That is why the focus is so much more on ignoring unwanted responses, redirecting  and really praising and reinforcing the desired behavior.  Thanks for pointing all that out to me.  If anyone has any questions about how stuff is actually done in ABA now, I will try to answer or get the answer if I don't know.  You are definitely the population who should be aware of these things.

Yeah lovaas rocks.

If stimming is the best reinforcer and it isn't dangerous, then sometimes the stim object is used as a reinforcer contingent on a more interavtive response (there was debate on this)... and there are SO many opportunities for reinforcement, that acess is not really too limited.  AND if you can figure out the function of the stim, (like if it relieves stress or if the person loves having things in his or her mouth or if there is some kinaesthetic automatic pleasure) then you can substitute other behaviors which sometimes replace the function of the stim... like let's find out if the kid has an ear infection before we stop him from hitting his ears.  or if in the presence of relaxing music, the stim becomes rhythmic, use that and dance or tap in rhythm...which is more responsive to the environment.  

I think you just have to pay attention.  Some tasks requiring hand coordination need to reduce hand flapping just because of practicality.. so "hands down" might precede "touch the apple." But it was always done to increase the probability of success in the task and the environment. And always with a positive and fun attitude.   Most of the people I worked with were able to ignore and work around most stim stuff and found that as skills increased, the intensity of stim decreased... maybe not completely... which is totally fine.  Whatever works.  But they ended up becoming so involved in the traning that "catch the ball" actually became anticipated and the stim kind of left the room... first for a trial or two and eventually sometimes for a long time.  (personally I think everyone of every sort "stims" all the time, some just hide it better than others.)  

As for the eye contact thing, Idon't know what the literature is saying these days, but I never had a kid who didn't acquire that and do better.  When they began looking at me, the level of what I felt was affection for me and responsiveness to me increased.  they initiated more hand holding and hugs and the opportunity to get them to look at what I was looking at or share focus ( a key element of sharing and teaching )went way up.  My experiences may have been unique... but it became what appeared to be less aversive and more natural as time went on.. didn't take much data on that.  I would love to know how that is working out in the literature or in people's lives...

Isn't lovass' first name Ivar????? COINCIDENCE????