(September 26, 2021 at 11:43 pm)Helios Wrote: ABA relies on an outdated view of Autistic Neurology and is highly suspect in the long-term treatment of Autistic children. I also find it to be ethically dubious.
https://link.springer.com/article/10.100...21-00201-1
I take it you haven't watched the documentary in the OP. The view that a lifelong state of dependency/institutionalisation is a bad thing and to be avoided/prevented does not amount to an outdated view of autistic neurology. Also, from wiki, first three items on ABA efficacy:
Quote:
- A 2007 clinical report of the American Academy of Pediatrics concluded that the benefit of ABA-based interventions in autism spectrum disorders (ASDs) "has been well documented" and that "children who receive early intensive behavioral treatment have been shown to make substantial, sustained gains in IQ, language, academic performance, and adaptive behavior as well as some measures of social behavior".[91]
- Researchers from the MIND Institute published an evidence-based review of comprehensive treatment approaches in 2008. On the basis of "the strength of the findings from the four best-designed, controlled studies", they were of the opinion that one ABA-based approach (the Lovaas technique created by Ole Ivar Løvaas) is "well-established" for improving intellectual performance of young children with ASD.[92]
- A 2009 review of psycho-educational interventions for children with autism whose mean age was six years or less at intake found that five high-quality ("Level 1" or "Level 2") studies assessed ABA-based treatments. On the basis of these and other studies, the author concluded that ABA is "well-established" and is "demonstrated effective in enhancing global functioning in pre-school children with autism when treatment is intensive and carried out by trained therapists".[93] However, the review committee also concluded that "there is a great need for more knowledge about which interventions are most effective".
