However you choose to vote–your vote is important!
Don’t forget to cast your ballot.

Best wishes and thanks for participating in the process. [smile]

Neither does reiteration that ABA necessarily equals torture.

And the fact remains that ABA-validated techniques in and of themselves are not torture: however, what any individual practitioner makes of them and uses them for could fall within the definition of torture.

And if you cannot understand that, then you really aren’t so intelligent after all, that you could have a go at anyone for having higher qualifications.

I am a successful professional. I was in the local paper that is seen by millions as an “Innovator”. I am asked by media about news stories in my uindustry and sometimes quoted. I give online and offline talks/presentations.

Just because I made the point that a phd doesnt make someone an ethical voice.

ABA is not – in and of itself – torture; nor is it entirely useless. But it is not the be-all-and-end-all in teaching: there has to be account taken of the student’s own developmental level and developmental rate (Vygotsky has a lot to say on this, particularly in relation to the

Just wanted to reiterate that.

You have a serious problem going on there. You seem to resent anyone successful in academic and professional pursuits, and that is what the autie-hate brigade pick up on… and use against us! You never thought that you might actually be wrong in thinking in such black-and-white terms? The world doesn’t work like that, and it’s time you got used to it.

And just because you obviously didn’t read what I wrote: I do NOT approve of anything that is used with the target of making a person who is autistic look like they’re not. But I DO approve of things that allow people to learn… proper sensible learning programmes, sensibly thought out, with frequent assessment of comprehension and application, providing feedback appropriately. And some of that is – almost by virtue of what education is – will be behaviourally oriented.

Now, theasman, do everyone a favour: if you want to be taken seriously in any sort of debate, you could try leaving your Mengele comparisons and your very unwarranted hatred at the door.

Otherwise, you won’t be giving yourself any credibility at all. And that will be your own bloody fault. Grow up.

theasman: “We call that the stockholm syndrome”

I’m autistic, I’m the father of an autistic child and I’m an autism-specialist educational psychologist, and I have a couple things to say about this demonisation of applied behaviour analysis because of its association with what has to be a seriously crappy study by someone who I cannot see as being anything but ‘a real shit’.

I got through my Open University studies because the materials were based very clearly on Skinner’s idea of linear programmed instruction, which was derive from empirically-obtained data on how learning happens. AGA is – in and of itself – not the problem: it’s what people use it for that can be the problem. When ABA-validated teaching is used correctly and for the right reasons (i. e., not to turn an autistic child into an outwardly ‘non-autistic’ one), there is no problem; accusations of any Stockholm syndrome are as sensationalist in this case as the Turd’s claim of a 47% ‘recovery’ rate because of discrete-trial training. Sorry to have to out it this way but this is how I consider that sort of calling. When I was teaching mathematics to resit students, had it not been for the discrete-trial teaching method, many of the students would not have made it at all: let’s face it, the reason why they were there was because they did not – for whatever reason – pick up mathematical concepts at the same rate as their peers did but when shown things in simple, clear and smaller steps, their performance improved and they felt ‘less stupid’. This was a correct application of behaviour-analytic work: the use of behaviour-analytic techniques to teach eye-contact or to prevent stimming is an incorrect one.

This is not to say that I would approve of the sort of approaches in behaviour-analysis that are based on a very simplistic notion of what will act as a suitable reinforcer for the child… that’s one great way to piss a kid off with the thing used as the reinforcer (yes, there are studies on this). But I don’t believe in throwing babies out with bathwater either. I’ve used some aspects of behaviour-analytic methodology in working with my daughter, and I employ other aspects with students when I get to present courses I design.

ABA is not – in and of itself – torture; nor is it entirely useless. But it is not the be-all-and-end-all in teaching: there has to be account taken of the student’s own developmental level and developmental rate (Vygotsky has a lot to say on this, particularly in relation to the <Zone of Proximal Development)… it is useless, for example, to try to reinforce a behaviour that is not within easy ‘learning reach’ of the student (i. e., outwith the student’s ZPD) since it is as yet not within ‘learning reach’, and no amount of reinforcement will alter that (and, furthermore, continued reinforcement coupled with constant failure will almost certainly result in serious self-esteem loss, as well as discomfort otherwise, for the student concerned).

Just my two-penn’orth as the above credentials, as well as being a Visiting Lecturer in Autism Studies (educational psychology being my teachign subject when I do it) in a UK university.

Go to http://www.thomas.gov,
and type “autism” in the search engine. Currently there are 46 bills that come up. Some of them are window dressing, some are preludes for next steps, and some might actually make a substantive change, requiring only the signature of the Exec. if they could be passed.

Example,
Fairness in Autism Treatment Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)
HR 5028 IH

TEACH Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)
HR 2390 IH
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide a refundable tax credit for education and training expenses relating to autism spectrum disorders to increase the number of teachers with such expertise.

S.937
Expanding the Promise for Individuals With Autism Act of 2007 (Introduced in Senate)
H.R.1881
Expanding the Promise for Individuals With Autism Act of 2007 (Introduced in House)

H. CON. RES. 303
Recognizing the importance of autism awareness, supporting efforts to increase funding for research into the causes and treatment of autism and to improve training and support for individuals with autism and those who care for individuals with autism .
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
(2) supports the goal of increasing Federal funding for aggressive research to learn the root causes of autism , identify those affected by the disorder, determine the best methods of early intervention and treatment, expand programs for individuals with autism across their lifespans, and promote understanding of the special needs of people with autism ;

Etc.

Don’t take my word for it, look at the bills, read the text and contact your representatives if there is legislation that you see in the best interest of your, and others’ children. If not, I believe that we should, as a community, be cultivating relationships with many policymakers and legislators, as well as groups who are advocating for overlapping goals of interest to our children. I realize that one advocacy organization is somewhat concerned with legislative issues beyond the vaccine controversy, but as long as so many are stuck there, I believe that is going to be down to individuals to act in our own and collective interest to keep in contact with our legislators and advocates if we want to be more than a single issue constituency and observers of events where we wish to see change, given that the wheels of progress already move too…too…slowly.