If We Treated Adults How We Treat Kids
There would be a justified uprising
Evidence is not?ethics
I am a self-professed nerd. I love science, research, and data. I love to read and learn. It’s very important, however, we don’t conflate evidence with ethics, nor objectivity with callousness.
Insisting on following evidence-based practices is one thing, but persisting with said practices despite widespread outcry from those harmed by the very same is abusive.
ABA and dog?training
A long time ago, I was a young and na?ve dog trainer, just learning the ropes in the positive dog training industry.
One evening in class I was getting a little ahead of my dog, focused more on the instructor than on the sweet girl at the end of the leash.
The instructor stopped me and handed me what is normally the dog’s end of a leash to hold in my hands. They asked me to hold on and do my best to follow along as they raced ahead through the exercise.
Even though I was athletic, and interested in doing well, I still struggled because they were going too fast for me to keep up. They knew the course better and knew what they were going to do before I did. I had to think about each move while they were able to move more naturally and by memory.
Why did they do this?
To help me understand my dog’s perspective, to try and give me a small taste of what it might be like to be on the other end of that leash. It was a salient learning opportunity for me, one which highlighted the importance of compassion and empathy when working with any sentient being.
We’re not?puppies
Although we would all agree it’s offensive to compare human beings to animals, the methods used to manipulate the behaviour of Autistic and disabled people are eerily similar to those I learned in animal training and behaviour classes.
“We’re all animals, we all learn the same way,” we used to say to those who balked at the use of behaviourism with children and other vulnerable people.
Well, yes and no. Certainly we are all influenced by the consequences of our actions — both reinforcing and punishing — the former increasing the likelihood of us repeating the behaviour, the latter decreasing that probability.
However — and this is an important ‘however’.
We’re not dogs, for fucks sake.
Firstly, our brains are much more complex, and we are capable of higher-order thought processes not found in other species. For example, the prefrontal cortex of a human being is 4 times larger than that of a great ape, despite being incredibly genetically similar in many other aspects.
More importantly, we’re not apes, for fucks sake.
There is an incredible amount of support for ensuring primates in captivity receive adequate enrichment, socialization, and stimulation. There has long been a growing movement amongst animal trainers to provide choice when working with animals, a concept which has been around for well over two decades.
There are more organizations and individuals out there campaigning against cruelty to animals than there are fighting against the inhumane treatment of Autistic and disabled individuals.
That just goes to show where the priorities of the general population lie.
Comeuppance
In the autistic self-advocacy community, many of us (myself included) have made comments, usually out of anger and frustration, that we should do these things to ABA practitioners, to show them how it feels to be treated in such a dehumanizing and disrespectful manner.
We usually say this in response to particularly egregious incidents of mistreatment or abuse toward autistic and disabled people, and it’s (mostly) hyperbolic. Generally speaking, we wouldn’t wish to inflict violence on someone else, unless a vulnerable person were in immediate danger and we could protect them.
I have a slightly different idea.
We should indeed subject ABA practitioners to a taste of their own “medicine” (snake oil), but just its mildest forms, because those are bad enough that any independent-minded person would immediately take offence.
Just imagine.
Earlier I wrote about an ABA practitioner, whom I have thusly called White Man With Beard, or WMWB for short. He was an unpleasant sort of fellow, arrogant and narrow-minded in the worst ways. He would be the perfect subject for my little experiment.
WMWB doubted the authenticity of nonspeakers who progressed from not communicating using written or typed words to being able to spell and communicate using assistive technology in a short period of time, once given access to said technology.
According to WMWB, this was suspect because these individuals were “suddenly” demonstrating capabilities they had never (outwardly) demonstrated before.
No shit, Sherlock, they didn’t have access to the technology necessary to do so previously.
The assumption being not writing or typing words means people don’t have any of that knowledge in their brain, accrued through listening and reading and otherwise learning. WMWB officiously determined it was therefore not credible that they could spell and write in short order.
My experiment
When sir doubts-a-lot wants to continue spewing his ignorant messages, the interaction might go something like this:
WMWB: “Can I continue to have the floor, please?”
Me: The expectation is that you engage in conversation respectfully, which includes presuming the competence of non-speakers, regardless of your preconceived biases.
WMWB: “…but I just want to say that — “
Me: Nothing further will happen for you until you have shown me what I expect.
WMWB: “I don’t know what you — “
Me: There will be no conversation until you have followed through with my direction.
领英推荐
WMWB: “What direction? I don’t know what you want!“
Me: [engaging in planned ignoring]
WMWB: [starting to raise voice in frustration]
“Don’t ignore me! I’m trying to — “
Me: I do not respond to yelling, you’re going to have to sit down and calm down until you’re ready to do as I’ve asked.
WMWB: “Calm down?! I’m only mad because you’re — “
Me: If you do not sit down and calm down, you will lose your screen privileges for this evening.
WMWB: “You can’t do that, that’s not fair! I’m just — “
Me: You have five seconds to be sitting quietly in your seat, otherwise I will mark down on your chart that you get no electronics this evening.
WMWB: “What?! I am only trying to — “
Me: 5… 4…
WMWB: “Fine, I’m going!“
[stomps over to chair and sits down, glaring at me angrily]
Me: Well done! [I clap condescendingly, then write about the exchange in the staff logbook, taking care to paint myself in the best possible light, while making clear how noncompliant WMWB’s behaviour was].
That felt good to?imagine
While it did feel good to play out that theoretical scene in my mind, I don’t think I could do so in real life, regardless of how much WMWB and ableist behaviourists like him anger me.
If I did, I’d be no better than them. And while I’m sure I’m frequently hypocritical (because humanity), I do not venture to treat people in ways I would never, ever want to treat another human being, or be treated myself.
Let’s assume both sides are correct here (they’re not, but let’s play pretend). Assuming ABA and a more respectful, relationship-based approach achieve the same results (they don’t, I know — we’re pretending, remember?).
On one hand, a practitioner has used manipulation through rewards and punishments to elicit the desired response from a human being. This usually occurs in the context of an imbalanced relationship, where the practitioner has authority over the victim — I mean, person.
On the other hand, we presume the competence of individuals, seeking to meet their needs and reduce their stress through accommodating environments and providing accessible communication. We work alongside people in mutually respectful relationships, incorporating their interests and helping them reach their own goals, rather than goals we developed for them.
I know there are good and bad actors on all sides of this argument, and while I’m picking on WMWB today, it’s not really about individual practitioners. It’s about an entire exploitative industry which is based on ableism and eugenics.
I acknowledge there is nuance I am not exploring here, most things are not as black-and-white as we’d like them to be. That said, there would never be enough nuance or grey crayons in the world to ever convince me that treating a human being like a dog in training is okay.
? Jillian Enright, Neurodiversity MB
Related Articles
When you join medium, as a member you’ll have access to unlimited reads for only $5 per month. If you use my referral link, I’ll earn a small commission, and you’ll earn my undying gratitude.
If you’d prefer give a one-time tip, you can support my writing on Ko-Fi — also, it’s free to follow me on Facebook and LinkedIn!
More related?articles
References
Brando, S. (2012). Animal Learning and Training: Implications for Animal Welfare. Veterinary Clinics of North America: Exotic Animal Practice, 15(3), 387–398. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cvex.2012.06.008
Broderick, A. (2022). The Autism Industrial Complex: How branding, marketing, and capital investment turned autism into big business. Myers Education Press.
Preuss, T. M., & Wise, S. P. (2022). Evolution of prefrontal cortex. Neuropsychopharmacology?: official publication of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology, 47(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41386-021-01076-5