Action Alert: Call Congress and say No to ABA in Healthcare

Post Reply New Topic

It is expected that Congressman Mike Doyle will be presenting an amendment to the Healthcare Reform Act of 2009 today and it may include language for ABA. Those of us that are not in agreement with ABA being named in the Federal legislation are hoping to call, fax and email to let Congressman Doyle and other leaders know ABA should not be named in the Federal legislation.

Please join us and call, fax or email Congressman Doyle's office and ask them to please remove any mention of ABA in his amendment

Here is the contract information:

Phone: 202-225-2135
Fax: 202-225-3084

legislative assistant to Doyle on this matter

Email: [email protected]

Also contact your own representatives of your state.

I realize some will say ABA without aversives is fine, but I have not seen any proposal that clearly states aversives, restraint and seclusion should be limited in any way. The proposals are open ended and leave the door open to the continued abuse, restraint and seclusion of children and now adults if the federal legislation leaves it open ended.

Thank you.

I am not in the US so can't help, but I'm wondering why there is federal legislation that might include ABA specifically, but no legislation on the use of restraints/aversives/seclusion, since that's supposed to be worked out at the state level.

That is exactly why I called.

the last thing we need is for it to be named in Federal legislation and part of Healthcare Reform Act of 2009.

Congress has hearings on Restraint and Seclusion and all the abuse in our public schools, then want to turn around and name ABA in federal legislation under both the Autsim Insurance Policy and Healthcare Reform?

The vote has been postponed until after August.

It is really important we get the message out to others that don't want ABA named in federal legislation to call.

OK, I have been reading the blog posts on ABA therapy and pros and cons.

I have to ask, why are you so concerned with the health care coverage for ABA practices, if you dont practice ABA yourself? I understand people don't believe it is a good for their children, but there are people out there where ABA has been beneficial.

Why are we trying to stamp out anyone using ABA when it has proven to be beneficial to many children with ASD or other types of learning disabilities.

OK, ABA was never used with me, but some of my best friends are NT parents that have used ABA with their kids and it's worked wonders.

I have no idea why some people on the spectrum think ABA is evil.

That would be because we have listened to those autistics who have had ABA used on them.

I note, in the above, that you have listened to "NT parents" who have "used ABA with their kids". Does that "with" mean that the kids got to use ABA on their parents, not just the other way round?

Finally, what does "it's worked wonders" mean? Usually, the measure applied has nothing do do with reducing the stress levels of the child (which can be done via understanding, acceptance and accommodation), but only with how well they succeed with pretending to be normal.

I also think that you will find that comparative studies, where ABA has, or has not been used, show that there is no evidence that the treatment has any greater success, versus normal progressive development. I.e. coping strategies develop naturally, whereas forced behavioural changes may be, at best, superficially effective.

Because some people think that justifiable lying is still a lie.

Just a reminder that there is nothing about restraints/aversives/seclusion that is ABA-specific, and the other way around. Also, n ot all ABA programs are merly focused on getting the child to pretend to be normal; some actually do incorporate modifications to the enviromennt that are accommodating to the autistic. Some of ABA's legacy is actually used everywhere and is considered not at all abusive (eg. the functional behavioral assessment/analysis to find out why a child is "misbehaving"). Then again, I do agree that there is no reasont o include ABA specifically in the healthcare package, because there are other support/treatment methods (RDI, TEACCH, etc.) that may work better for some autistics and of course some ABA programs *are* bad. If I were to decide what went into the healthcare package for autism interventions, it would be open-ended in the sense that the specific method is not mentioned, but the method/amount of time spent ont herapy/etc. should be determined by whoever is going to decide such matters in individual cases (here it is the clinician having to provide written documentation about the person's needs to the insurance company, who will then usually fund it but sometimes not).

Do behavioral modification plans alone work?