Alternative opinions of ABA?

[kpjigsaw]

We are strongly considering starting an ABA programme for our son, and it's been very useful looking at some of the posts on here about it. It seems that a lot if parents have found it to be very valuable which is why we are considering it. I was just wondering whether anyone has had a bad experience of it - I don't mean an individual poor tutor or whatever, I mean does anyone feel it didn't work or was even detrimental? Just trying to get a balanced view as it seems all the negative opinions are held by the 'professionals' rather than people who have actually experienced it.

Any thoughts?

"It just seemed an awful lot of effort to have gone to for such minimal rewards."

this seemed like more of a personal judgement, tbh.

agree that on some level cost/benefit has to be weighed out.

but when you research those costs - actually, if done properly, and integrated fully then ABA is no more expensive than what we have been offered several times for dd1 - ie institutionalised childcare, with access to lots of sensory rooms, and lovely outings in the community.

if the one can be afforded, then so can the other, especially since under one regime, she would regress, and end up needing more care, and under the other she would make gains - however minimal and unimportant they may seem to some.

I suppose a knock on effect of our programme at first was that it gave MY life structure and I learnt a great deal that has helped enormously. I also became part of a community that wasn't a jumbo ASD/SN community, but ABA in our local area. I made many good friends that way and met many w*nkers!
I think it is typical to get "hooked" when you start, probably whatever you do, and that is probably a good thing, but if you are still "hooked" some years later, I'm not sure that is a good thing at all.
To me, they key elements of ABA that were not available elsewhere were intensity, 1:1 and data tracking, assessment and response. If that had been available elsewhere then I would have been delighted not to run my own programme. When we started our home programme 13 years ago there was NOTHING else for our 2.5 year old DS, I might have liked another choice of some combination by 5 years old or so.

society does have to judge, as a group, yes. and yes, the decision is not ot fund ABA widely.

but the resoning often given for the decision id nonsensical, and doesn't stack up.

if that judgement is being taken (by whomevr, at whatever level) it shoudl be taken with full knowledge of

a) the costs
b) the efforts
c) what it actually entails, and so on.

basing decisions and judgements on a load of half baked theories and not much research at all is not really a way forward...

imo, your opinion came across as more of a judgement, that is all.

of course we all form opinions on what we read.

maybe it struck a chord with me as I know I have been judged for what I have done/thought/been through with dd1 - all under the guise of "having an opinion"

hmm.

without actually wanting to get too much further into this - I really am not at all gung-ho ABA-is-the-only-true-way-and-nothign-else-matches-up - I do a lot of therapies with dd1 which do not even begin to collect data etc.

anyway, the OP was asking for negative experiences of ABA - and I would still be very interested in hearing about these.

but to wial that you cannot critically judge another person's ABA programme, without really knowing anythign about it other than what was written in an article you read several year ago - going a bit far, tbh.

you have no way of knowing what gains were actually made on that programme - we have all gained far more out of dd1's ABA programme than the actual concrete skills she has learned.

discussing ABA objectively is perfectly possible, and I would welcome you to do so.

Right good, glad that's cleared up!

I agree that decisions should be made at society level, but I don't agree that wrt ABA they are being done rationally. I would be interested in Mr Justa's opinion if he is brave enough to state it on here (and I certainly don't blame him if he isn't). It appears to me that if the diagnosis and treatment were provided by the NHS for developmental delays such as ASD (which it is in nearly every other diagnosis) then ABA-type treatment would be the norm, perhaps not in terms of home-based programmes, but coordinated programmes or centres or parental training or something a bit more efficient which, provided was quality controlled, would be blardy great!

I think probably that an important part of this lies in a throrough assessment process (which costs) and proper research endorsed by the government in order to assess which children will be cost-effective to fund. By this I mean their net cost to society over their lifetime as a result of the intervention or not. There is some research but because ABA happens in all kinds of variations and some is poor quality due to parents having to go 'underground' there is possibly not enough to base whole policies on (although what their is is very positive).

'Yes, I am sure that is true. But ABA has to be assessed by outsiders too, surely?'

Yes Justa, you are absolutely right. One of the frustrations of ABAers is that no-one will independently evaluate their programme (except for independent EPs who are considered biased by LAs). I've probably extended hundreds of invitations to LA personnel to observe/evaluate/look at our data, but not one has been taken up. When I engineered for the Autism Advisory teacher to sit in our living room she refused to even open the folder of progress.

A result of government research would (I believe) indicate good rationale and long-term cost-saving for ABA principles but that would require an injection of cash initially for training and overhaul even if the actual implementation is inexpensive. But these are times when the government is attempting to remove the little accountability their is or parents redress to save money. (although there is some relief in the idea of a big shake-up).

'so this is not an anti-ABA rant, not at all, but I do think it is possible to think highly of a therapeutic approach and not see it as useful in all situations, or for every delayed child.'

I think really this is a cost issue. Whilst ABA is so expensive and inaccessible generally, it cannot be applied widely, whatever the morals behind it. A delayed child still needs some support to 'catch up' to give them the best chance of accessing their education alongside their peers. There are always things to learn.

but surely, justa, you are making that decision without knowing exactly what eg the hypothetical ABA programme for yuor ds2 woudl entail?

if someone walked up to me and told me they would fund for dd2 what dd1 is getting - a fully tailored, individually created curriculum, to explore and develop her strengths, whilst working on her well, not so much weaknesses, but less-strenghts, iyswim?. while giving her a rich and varied curriculum, with room to explore new hobbies and old talents? and to deliver that in whatever environment suited her best, whether fulltime school, or part time school with part time tutors (given some of her strengths are years ahead of where they shoudl be)?

I'd grab it, tbh.

it wouldn't mean that dd2 would be in the same school as dd1, nor on the same programme.

it would mean exactly as I said above - that dd2 got an individually created curriculum to best develop her potentials.

I have oftne said that I wish that dd2 could have the same educaitonal opportunities as dd1. I wish we could afford to do the same for her.

'I'd like to fund a full ABA programme for DS2, here's a blank cheque'

Take it, Take it! - and give it to me - yay!

You know, what you say makes a lot of sense. How on earth would you 'fit' ABA into his life on top of all the things that you, as a knowledgable, consiencious, thinking parent have arranged to meet his needs well already?

It would be crazy and disruptive to have a big overhaul of his current 'programme' when you are getting results.

The thing is though. You (and I know you well enough to know this is true) spend a lot of time thinking about what your children need and when, and you evaluate what is working and are open to alternatives and ideas which you then evaluate and test. Your methodology is quite analytical for someone NOT collecting data and evidence.

In fact, a good number of MNers are the same. They see good results without having to embark on an ABA programme because of the sheer amount of work and energy they put into assessing and reassessing their children's needs and researching the solutions. It is possible to have extremely good outcomes this way and it happens. I would be brave here and suggest that it is the careful analysing of need and solutions coupled with the demand for a level of accountability that makes a programme successful. It's what makes ABA successful.

The trouble is though, that ABA is the alternative to ill-thoughtout 'crap' quite often that is full of illusion and 'referrals', and 'support' and 'observations' and 'reports' and a whole host of other things that have no direct benefit for our children.

How on earth would you say 'no thank you, your nursery and that 1:1, with targetted support won't meet his needs, so I want a differnet nursery with a different 1:1 with targetted support as that will meet his needs.' To make that argument you need to have evidence and data that illustrates the difference. Pretty much neither setting will keep data. But ABA methodology taken into those settings will be able to show which 'arrangement' will ensure that your ds makes progress.

Sounds like they should set themselves up to offer 'consultancy' to other schools then.