The etiology and treatment of significant societal problems: Behaviorists diving into murky Waters with Strangers.

Abstract

In January of 2007, I edited an issue of the International Journal of Behavior Consultation and Therapy (IJBCT) (see Golden, 2007) encouraging behavior analysts to consider the problems of children who are non-responders to the typical behavioral techniques and suggested that behavior analysts consider literature and clinical approaches from other sources. Specifically, these children included those with attachment problems, exhibiting difficulties with and behaviors. In this issue, I am again appealing to behavior analysts to broaden their focus to include populations that are not normally the purview of these professionals. In the 2007 issue of the Behavior Analyst, Kangas and Vaidya presented data on the number of presentations that dealt with each of the applied categories of topic areas at the annual conventions of the Association for Behavior Analysis (ABA) from 1980 to 2007. At the 2007 annual convention of the ABA, in the combined categories of Clinical, Family, and Behavioral Medicine (C/F/BM) there were a total of 107 presentations compared to 325 presentations in the combined categories of Developmental Disabilities and Autism (DD/AUT). That means that there were three times as many presentations at the 2007 convention about DD/AUT than there were about C/F/BM. At the 2009 convention, I chaired a symposium in which I outlined likely reasons why behaviorists more frequently deal with individuals with DD/AUT than with other types of disorders or problems. They are as follows: 1. The black box (Uttal, 1999) of their inner world is much less complicated to study. When clinicians deal with individuals with emotional and moral behavioral issues, they have to contend with the possibility of complex underlying psychological constructs such as: higher level cognitions, ambivalent emotions, nuances of social interaction, consciousness, a conscience, and sense of self- and other-perspectives. 2. The identification and delivery of reinforcers and punishers are much easier to identify and control. Clinicians and parents can control computer or TV access, preferred toys or items, social reinforcers and tokens, to name a few reinforcers that work well with children with DD/AUT. It is a lot more difficult (not to mention, unethical) to deliver contingently and/or limit access to tobacco, sexual activity, drugs/alcohol, gambling, prostitution, on-line pornography, the excitement of an ambulance arriving when cut your wrist, charging over your credit card limit, criminal behavior, etc. The point is, the clinician cannot use these as reinforcers, but if these are the individuals' most reinforcing activities, how do you compete with them? 3. The ramifications of following through and being consistent are much less drastic. When individuals with DD/AUT escalate their behavior during a tantrum, the worst ensuing consequences are usually either: aggression toward others, self-injurious behavior or running away to no particular destination. Not to minimize the seriousness of these behaviors, but they can be easily handled through environmental manipulation. However, when individuals with behavioral or problems escalate their behavior, the clinician is faced with consequences such as: threats/hurtful verbal statements, suicide/homicide or threats of these, running away to a life of homelessness, alcohol/substance abuse, elicit sexual activity, false allegations of abuse, triangulation of caregivers, and physical/sexual assault. 4. There exists a much narrower network of negative influences and there are more limited environments. Clinicians helping children with DD/AUT become frustrated when they must change the behavior of family members and school personnel in order help the children they serve. With individuals who have and behavior problems, there is a much wider sphere of influences and there are many more environments that impact behaviors. …