Ethical Considerations
Ethical Considerations with the Use Of Punishment:
(b). the procedure is delivered in a compassionate and caring manner
(c). the treatment method has been assessed formatively to determine its effectiveness and is immediately terminated if it does not demonstrate effectiveness.
(d). the intervention is sensitive and responsive to the overall physical, psychological, and social needs of the target individual.
2. Least Restrictive Alternative: Less intrusive procedures (i.e., Positive reductive approaches) should be tried and found to be ineffective before more intrusive (i.e., punishment-based interventions) methods are employed.
3. Right to Effective Treatment: There are individuals within the field that ascertain the failure to a use punishment procedure that evidence-based research has shown to suppress self-injurious behavior (SIB) that is to the client's is unethical because it denies the client the opportunity to come into contact with an effective treatment method and may maintain a dangerous or an uncomfortable state for the target individual.
4. Policy and Procedural Safeguards: Institutions and individuals providing applied behavior analysis services can ensure the use of punishment-based interventions are safe, humane, ethical, and effective by drafting, implementing, and following a set of policy standards, procedural safeguards, and evaluation requirements.
***For more information about ethical concerns with the use punishment-based interventions please refer to:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1286137/pdf/jaba00098-0065.pdf
- Right to Safe and Humane Treatment: Any behavioral intervention, regardless of whether it is a punishment procedure or not, must be physically safe for ALL involved and contain no components that are degrading or disrespectful to participants. Interventions are considered safe when they put neither the target individual nor the caregiver at psychological, social, or physical risk. There is no definitive list as to what is considered to be humane treatment, however, the majority of behavioral analysts agree that the following elements must be present for an intervention method to be considered humane:
(b). the procedure is delivered in a compassionate and caring manner
(c). the treatment method has been assessed formatively to determine its effectiveness and is immediately terminated if it does not demonstrate effectiveness.
(d). the intervention is sensitive and responsive to the overall physical, psychological, and social needs of the target individual.
2. Least Restrictive Alternative: Less intrusive procedures (i.e., Positive reductive approaches) should be tried and found to be ineffective before more intrusive (i.e., punishment-based interventions) methods are employed.
3. Right to Effective Treatment: There are individuals within the field that ascertain the failure to a use punishment procedure that evidence-based research has shown to suppress self-injurious behavior (SIB) that is to the client's is unethical because it denies the client the opportunity to come into contact with an effective treatment method and may maintain a dangerous or an uncomfortable state for the target individual.
4. Policy and Procedural Safeguards: Institutions and individuals providing applied behavior analysis services can ensure the use of punishment-based interventions are safe, humane, ethical, and effective by drafting, implementing, and following a set of policy standards, procedural safeguards, and evaluation requirements.
***For more information about ethical concerns with the use punishment-based interventions please refer to:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1286137/pdf/jaba00098-0065.pdf