> >>  IARET:http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/picrender.fcgi?artid=1286137&blobtyp...

> >>  Welcome to the hall of mirrors.

> > I don't know about that organization. The behavior analysts I know
> > focus on positive reinforcement and are completely repulsed by the
> > misuse of behavioral analysis as punishment of the kinds used by the
> > Rotenberg Center. They use positive reinforcement first and if they do
> > use punishment, it would be something like a time out or taking away a
> > reward, not physically invasive punishments like electro shocks.

> > They are certified by this organization:

> >http://www.bacb.com/

> This is behavior analyst doubletalk to justify aversives. It's right
> out of IARET's position statement.

> http://www.bacb.com/index.php?page=57

> 2.10 Treatment Efficacy.

> (a) The behavior analyst always has the responsibility to recommend
> scientifically supported most effective treatment procedures.
> Effective treatment procedures have been validated as having both
> long-term and short-term benefits to clients and society.

> (b) Clients have a right to effective treatment (i.e., based on the
> research literature and adapted to the individual client).

> > The ones I know don't use the kinds of punishments that are used at
> > the Rotenberg Center.

> Are you saying they use different punishments, or are you saying
> they don't use punishments at all? If the latter, they are probably
> violating their "Treatment Efficacy" standard. If you have the
> chance, please ask them about their views on the use of aversives,
> what they think about their certifying organization's position, and
> where do they draw the line if they think aversives are sometimes
> acceptable. I'm curious. And you might be surprised by their answers.