|Your response||Response example|
|Is this an ethics violation?||2.05?||Codes 3.01, 4.02-04, 4.09 – Rather than address the motivating operations, the RBT used a restrictive procedure, escape extinction, without an assessment or authorized treatment plan.|
|Was this response problematic with regard to professionalism or the client’s treatment program?||
In my opinion, this situation violates the client’s rights and is too intrusive of a response. This response is unprofessional in that we do not want to make a more intrusive/punishing environment for our clients unless otherwise stated in their plans
|Yes, the response caused a behavioral escalation which included new behaviors in addition to escape. With regard to professionalism, the response supported a belief that ABA is controlling and restrictive.|
|When/how might feedback be delivered by the supervisor?||
Since the situation seems to be maintained by escape, I would likely want to see the RBT be more responsive to what the client’s threshold for work is and reinforce just beyond this threshold with escape from work, or be teaching the client to appropriately ask for breaks.
|Immediately – this response should not be repeated at the next session. The supervisor can suggest non-contingent breaks and increasing reinforcer delivery for task completion|
|What types of additional training might improve this supervisee’s performance?||
I would want to reiterate extinction and reinforcement/punishment with this RBT. It is very likely that the situation the RBT created may have reinforced inappropriate behavior rather than appropriate behavior.
|Training in options for addressing noncompliance and also options for adapting programs when the client is having an off-day. In general, the supervisee might benefit from an opportunity to analyze motivating operations and come up with options for how to address various MOs.|