Tag Archives: TIBA

Be a buffer, solve a barrier: Actively caring about harms caused by ACES

Featured

Posted by in collaboration, Community, Education and Trauma-Informed Behavior Analysis, enriched environment, resources, TIBA, trauma, trauma-informed behavior analysis, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , ,

Between 1990 and 2018, countries spent between 2.67% (Europe) and 3.6% (USA) of their GDP to treat harmful behavioral, medical and other effects of trauma (Bellis et al., 2019). Evidence shows that several medical areas are impacted by ACES (adverse childhood experiences; see Nadine Burke Harris’ incredible TED Talk on ACES). These harms increase in a dose-dependent way, with higher number of ACES related to greater risk of medical harms (Anda et al., 2008). Some of the medical harms that are increased after trauma include an increased likelihood of disease in adulthood (particularly obstructive pulmonary disease; ischemic heart disease; and autoimmune disease); greater number of infections; dental problems; asthma; sleep disturbances; and pain and gynocological disorders (Koita et al. 2018; Anda et al., 2008; Dong et al., 2004; Dube et al., 2009; Wyman et al., 2007; Lanier et al. 2010; Bright et al. 2015; Paras et al., 2009; Reissing et al., 2003).  

A small solution that goes a long way

Specific buffers (see Purewal et al., 2016) can actually protect against the harmful impacts of ACES on medical health. The particular buffers found to reduce harm include getting enough sleep, eating nutritious food, having access to mental health care, experiencing a safe relationship with someone, exercising regularly, and practicing stress relief techniques that allow someone to experience calming down (such as a simple mindfulness technique). Adding buffers may be a set of seemingly small actions, but they contribute to preventing problems from becoming larger, and may help solve challenges related to why a behavior plan is just not working. (Solving basic problems in the behavioral environment regarding access to needs can be an area consistent with the ethical imperative behavior analysts have to address conditions interfering with service delivery; see BACB, 2020, 2.19).

Image shows 6 buffer areas with an icon for each, including a lungs icon for mindfulness, an apple icon for nutrition, a bed icon for getting enough sleep, a heart for mental health care, two adults for having a safe relationship, and a picture of a person exercising. The text says "Be a buffer. Solve a barrier".

Install buffers, solve barriers

Although the buffers make a big difference in preventing from harms and protecting against future ones related to ACES, many individuals and families face major barriers related to access, information, resources, or behavioral needs. These barriers can reflect resource inequalities, individual differences, and cultural challenges that prevent many from experiencing the benefits.  How could we leverage “buffers and barriers” policies to protect against harms (and truly embody the preventative arm of behavior analysis)?

One of the difficulties with beginning to implement buffers for individual clients is that behavior analysts may be hesitant to devote precious resources to this new and potential preventive area. To assist teams in understanding further how policies might affect our clients, their caregivers, and our staff, Cusp Emergence is engaged in developing resources and collecting feedback about their use. Some of the resources provide examples for conversations we could have with others, while others are visuals to help others easily understand the buffers and barriers (such as the “Be a buffer. Solve a barrier” downloadable pdfs in this article). We also have lists of policy ideas for interested agencies, risk benefit assessments to aid in their implementation, and examples of how we define buffers for individual clients, families and staff. Use our contact us form below to let us know which resources are your favorites or what else would help you more actively approach this area. Oh, and stay tuned for more on this incredible topic. Soon we’ll be be exploring buffers in more detail, including sharing some ways we integrate it for our clients, how it can be meaningful for caregivers and staff, and some of the research on each one.

conversation-about-buffers-and-barriers-1Download

New 4h course: Autism, TIBA and Ethics

02 Wednesday Feb 2022

Posted by in Autism, BACB CEU, Behavior Analysis, behavior cusp, CEU, collaboration, continuing education, contraindicated procedures, Cusp Emergence University, CuspEmergenceUniversity, ethics, Fetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , ,

Last time I wrote, I shared some ideas about this intersection. Today, the new course is up! Before you go check it out (and claim your February 2022 coupon for 20% off by typing ASD2022)– during the introductory month of the course)- learn why I’m so passionate about screening for trauma in a population so many behavior analysts have been working with (for some, virtually their entire professional lives).

Have you ever worked with someone in pain? How do we know if they’re currently hurting, whether it’s because they are sick, it’s related to interventions we chose, or from experiences we reminded them of? How would we know if that was the case? Did that person cower, freeze, or grimace? Did they flinch, close their eyes, seem to “zone out”? Perhaps someone has run away, played repetitively with the toys they had, or fallen asleep at school? Sometimes, respondent behaviors may be giveaways that people are experiencing fear or in pain, but successful avoidance behavior can hide that pain. Other times people have been through experiences making them more likely to use aggression or property destruction. In the least, we should consider whether our interventions cause harm. This harm could include causing our clients distress or pain, exposing someone to additional risks, detracting from their quality of life, failing to program in sustainable ways that transfer to the maintaining environment, and so much more.

A new training is up on Cusp.University on the intersection of autism, trauma informed behavior analysis, and ethics. By the time we near the end, we have discussed and revisited the idea of contra-indicated procedures. Given that lists exist for diagnoses of autism alone, why isn’t there a list of best practices appropriate for clientele meeting diagnostic criteria for autism who also come to therapy with trauma histories? Why is it so difficult to find articles suggesting best treatment paths for individuals with both autism and trauma related experiences in the literature? In behavior analysis, answers to these questions may be related to our field, its historical publishing practices, and the ethical and pragmatic need to individualize procedures for each client.

In terms of publishing practices, a panelist in ABAI’s “Exploring Publication Bias in Behavior Analytic Research” (which included Galizio, Travers, and Ringdahl, 2021) stated,

“No intervention is guaranteed to work for every individual, every time, in every context.”

They suggested that authors writing about their research should include more detailed descriptions of the conditions under which successful implementation of the intervention occurred.

When we screen for trauma related or aversive historical situations and stimuli, we often learn things that

  • help us prioritize treatment,
  • document risks for certain procedures,
  • avoid or prioritize certain stimuli,
  • detect environmental conditions that are acting as motivational operations and conditioned MOs,
  • and ultimately, perhaps minimize harm to our client.

Screening for trauma can help to identify individuals with prior risk factors who are at risk for experiencing additional adverse events and aversive conditioning. Attendees learn in chapter 1 some facts about how being autistic is to be at increased risk for trauma, bullying, abuse, increased likelihood of experiencing foster care—and in chapter 3, learn about the higher rates of experiencing restraint, seclusion and being excluded from school.

But another effect of screening – one that should affect all behavior analysts—could be an increased awareness of the fact that behavior analytic procedures are being used all the time for this population at the intersection of autism and trauma. Perhaps the least we can do is to begin doing behavior analysis with people instead of to people, and to be transparent, inviting, and open in looking at options—and their likelihood of causing harm either now in the future.

Let’s look at this juxtaposition: we have a great ethical responsibility to do no harm, but also an ability to cause great harm. With using any behavioral procedure there comes a risk that we may do just that. This is especially true when we don’t have literature evidence that a given intervention is appropriate and effective for the person’s needs given their history and current situation. Perhaps they don’t actually need behavior analysis seeking to change their behavior as much as they need a roof, a meal, a bus pass, a blender, a respite provider, a ride to the doctor, a coat, a medication, a trip to the dentist… the list could go on and on. So clearly the first step is to see what the person needs.

When designing an individualized behavior support plan, two things are important to consider:

(1) the risks and benefits for the client themselves, given their needs, values, environment, etc., (e.g., the long- and short-term outcomes of procedures and decisions, and

(2) evidence the procedure is appropriate for our client.

In terms of evidence, when considering decisions in context of the literature, few studies provide sufficient detail in characteristics of the participants. So it is difficult to tell, reminds the panel, which characteristics were present for study participants received successful or unsuccessful interventions. Thus we can’t really tell how many of the massive number of papers on treating behaviors in autism, also apply and were conducted with individuals with autism who also had a trauma background. But statistics suggest many of them must have. In the science of behavior analysis, each subject’s behavior is its own control, so if we control our conditions and try to measure well, we may reveal additional elements of historical and current behavioral environments that exert contextual and stimulus control on the client’s behavior- and that change their needs. At times, historical aversive conditioning experiences may have contributed changes making it painful or inappropriate for clients to experience certain interventions. As we discuss in the new training, some of those conditioning experiences may even have occurred during and as part of behavioral treatment.

We can’t know for sure what our clients have been through. But when owe it to them to honor those experiences if they are comfortable sharing them.

Here are some of the things you’ll learn.

Course Objectives: 

1. List connections between autism and trauma in the research 

2. State different kinds or examples of trauma that may affect individuals with autism 

3. State supportive ways to ask about trauma histories

4. Select examples of how medical history can be related to trauma

5. State examples of repertoires beneficial for practitioners who serve clients affected by both autism and trauma

Ready to learn more? The new training offers hints from Dr. Kolu on how we begin the conversation about informed consent and screening for trauma, why assent is so important, how trauma and autism might intersect with medical needs affecting our clients, and more. And all the resources are available as free content in the preview section, so go grab that now! See you at a conference soon or find us online. And thank you for listening!

25 Things I Want You to Know: Ways I use trauma to inform my practice of behavior analysis

26 Thursday Aug 2021

Posted by in adults, Autism, BACB CEU, Behavior Analysis, boundaries of competence, CEU, children, collaboration, Community, continuing education, contraindicated procedures, Cusp Emergence University, CuspEmergenceUniversity, Education, mental health, resources, risk versus benefit analysis, TI-ABA, TIABA, TIBA, trauma, trauma-informed behavior analysis

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

This is the 21st article in a series on Trauma-Informed Behavior Analysis by Dr. Camille Kolu, BCBA-D

I often hear from educators and behavior analysts, “What do you actually do differently if your client has faced trauma, given your role as a behavior analyst?” In this bulleted series we’ll get there, but we’ll start with what I would want you to understand about myself as your client (or teammate!) who has experienced adverse experiences. Here we list 25 different things I want you to know. (As a hint, each thing we can understand about a person could be a bridge, if you choose to walk through this difficult thing to a shared place of understanding on the other side. We’ll explain in more detail in future posts, or you can check out our course library over at CuspEmergenceUniversity if you’re interested in expanding your boundary of competence). But first, if I were your client or team member – if my past involved trauma – I would want you to understand that now, with the presence of historical trauma,

I MAY:

  • have difficulties calming down when under pressure
  • have difficulties using “appropriate” behaviors even after years of programmed reinforcement for using them
  • have mental health concerns that have never been appropriately addressed because my behavior masks my needs
  • have medical problems that are going unaddressed because my providers have never asked me about my trauma history, despite it being a fact that it confers serious medical risks. (See the incomparable Nadine Burke Harris talk about her work on this, and the amazing takeaways, in her classic TED Talk– or see some of her research and outcomes on using screening tools)
  • be more likely to use certain “challenging behaviors”
  • and find it more reinforcing, even important, to use behaviors you would describe as challenging
  • use behaviors that are more resistant to change than you are used to as an instructor, therapist, parent, supervisor or friend
  • find certain interventions painful, difficult, or harmful
  • find some kinds of social interactions difficult or painful
  • have trouble controlling some of my bodily functions, but may not be able to describe to you why
  • experience “triggers” in the environment that you can’t see (but that an experienced provider could locate, document, and learn to help me explore or move with, as appropriate)
  • experience some times of the day, week, month, or year that are marked by aversive events for me that you won’t know about
  • may not be able to explain WHY this time is difficult or why I am using an “old pattern of behavior”
  • find it more difficult to perform, or to learn and remember new things than others of my age, skill level, or occupation – even if “on a good day” I can do this just fine. (By the way, have you read The Four Agreements? Do you know how important it is to take nothing personally and know that others are doing their best (and how critical it is for you to do the same)? If not go check it out.
  • use occasional behavior that is mistaken as “ADHD” or “ODD”, or more, but that is actually related to how I was mistreated
  • have been given misdiagnoses, treatments that didn’t work, or medications that made my problems worse or that interacted with each other in harmful ways that hurt my body and cognitive function
  • attempt to advocate but get ignored when I try to communicate pain, mistreatment, or a medical concern
  • be more likely to experience FUTURE trauma because of what I faced before
  • lack a reinforcing and useful repertoire (e.g., full complement of skills and things to enjoy), especially if I faced treatments that just tried to “teach me a replacement behavior” for a few challenging things I did, instead of understand and grow me as a person in the context of my own community, needs and desires for my future
  • be part of a long line of marginalized people or one of multiple generations exposed to trauma
  • have a chance to change our lineage… if you help

After all, I AM:

  • a human being with interests, feelings, and great potential for growth and joy
  • more likely to experience certain risks (I may be at greater risk of losing my educational or therapeutic setting, go through harmful discipline practices, be exposed to law enforcement interaction, for example)
  • in need of understanding, an informed supervisor and system of support, and someone who will document my challenges so we can work on them, but not emphasize them so much they ignore my strengths, needs and skills
  • capable of much more on my best day than I show on a hard day… but I am always doing “my best” at the time, given what I have been through and what I AM going through, and despite what it looks like

Taking these points as a starting place, future posts in this series explore what I NEED as a person who may have faced these things, and what I DO as a behavior analyst who cares. We’ll also share some of what I need from my supervisors or systems administrators! What would you add to this list? What are some of your action items?

Self-paced SAFE-T Assessment Training is here!

16 Tuesday Feb 2021

Posted by in adults, Autism, BACB CEU, Behavior Analysis, behavior cusp, Behavioral Cusp, CEU, children, collaboration, Community, continuing education, contraindicated procedures, Cusp Emergence University, CuspEmergenceUniversity, Education, ethics, mental health, resources, risk analysis, risk assessment, risk versus benefit analysis, supervision, teaching ethics, TI-ABA, TIABA, TIBA, trauma, trauma-informed behavior analysis, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

It’s finally here! We have learned so much from workshop attendees, trainees and supervisees in this area over the past several years, and appreciate the attendance, feedback and support of everyone who has taken the training or used a version of the SAFE-T Assessment. Coming on Monday, the booklet and training for assessing trauma-related factors affecting our clients of behavioral services, are available ONLINE as a self-paced course. This course provides a download of the new and expanded SAFE-T Checklist booklet, which contains several tools enabling the screening and documentation of over 200 trauma-related factors, and a Risks and Needs form to help teams understand (and document) how these factors confer risks (and converge in risk factors that must be solved or mitigated to protect our clients, teams, and ourselves). The booklet contains an extensive reference section and team supportive tools as you use your new knowledge to better align your team’s skillset with the Ethics Code, and the individualized needs of behavior services clients after trauma.

Several of our behavior analytic and collaborator clients across institutions, educational facilities and private companies clients have shared that learning to assess risk factors related to trauma, and to apply this information to their teams’ FBAs and risk mitigation plans, took their skillset to the next level – essentially affording them an opportunity to acquire an important behavioral cusp for their teams.

Some new components of the booklet include:

  • An optional buffer/ resilience score to assess whether protective environmental and therapeutic components of a client’s plan are in place (to understand some ways that trauma gives rise to medical and behavioral challenges and some buffering factors that can help, please see the book or scholarly articles by Dr. Nadine Burke Harris (e.g., Oh D.L. et al. 2018), who is the Presidential Scholar for 2021’s upcoming Association for Behavior Analysis International’s conference. She will address the critical topic of breaking the intergenerational cycle of adversity, and screening for ACES (adverse childhood experiences).
  • Table of potentially contraindicated procedures (cross referenced with items and risk clusters assessed in the Risks and Needs form)
  • Information about over 50 risk clusters (groups of related risks in the 6 assessed sections of the SAFE-T Assessment)
  • Cross-reference tables showing, for each item we screen for, the location(s) in the SAFE-T Checklist
  • Infographic on components of a trauma-informed FBA
  • Brief templates for Risk Versus Benefit Analysis and Risk Mitigation Planning
  • The IPASS (Inventory of Potential Aversive Stimuli and Setting Events) tool and instructions
  • References (organized by topics) covering over 40 areas or topics of literature related to trauma (including relationships of ACES to medical problems, ACT and intellectual disability, ACT and anxiety, foster care and adoption, the relationship of abuse to pain, drug use and trauma, and much more).

Time required: The course includes about 4.5 hours of video content in 12 lessons, each followed by a brief quiz.

Price (includes 4.5 CEU course and SAFE-T Assessment booklet download): $189.99

For $20 off through the end of February, use the coupon code “SAFET20”.

To register: cusp.university

Upcoming: Brief webinar series on TIBA in partnership with Connections-Behavior.com

28 Thursday May 2020

Posted by in adults, Autism, BACB CEU, Behavior Analysis, CEU, Community, continuing education, Education, Education and Trauma-Informed Behavior Analysis, supervision, teaching behavior analysis, teaching ethics, TIBA, trauma, trauma-informed behavior analysis, Uncategorized

≈ Leave a comment

Tags

, , , ,

Now that the annual conference for ABAInternational is past (whew!), Cusp Emergence is excited about upcoming webinars and online conferences (New Hampshire and FABA, I’m looking at you!). First up is a partnership with Connections-Behavior.com: We will look at trauma-informed behavior analysis in two parts, on June 1 and 15. Register here for this CEU opportunity!

“Trauma-Informed Behavior Analysis” is redundant. Here’s why I use it anyway.

03 Monday Jun 2019

Posted by in adults, Behavior Analysis, boundaries of competence, children, collaboration, Community, contextual fear conditioning, Education, ethics, extinction, renewal effect, TIBA, trauma, trauma-informed behavior analysis, Uncategorized

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,

“Trauma-informed behavior analysis”: Redundant term or useful phrase?

This is the 16th article in a series on Trauma-Informed Behavior Analysis by Dr. Teresa Camille Kolu, Ph.D., BCBA-D.

Trauma-informed behavior analysis, abbreviated TIBA, is a phrase I’ve been using for a few years now to describe what I do to people outside behavior analysis. I do this because it helps them to understand how I apply the science, and not to suggest that “regular” behavior analysis should not address trauma. From those behavior analysts who have not been to my trainings, I often hear the question “Isn’t it redundant to describe behavior analysis as trauma-informed?” I would argue that the short answer to this question is “yes”. However, this article describes why the more important and longer answer is “yes—and it’s still useful”.

About this outline: As one of our current projects at Cusp Emergence, Dr. Camille Kolu is aggregating several years of data (including feedback from existing BCBAs, educators, foster parents, and social workers) in writing a set of articles on the topic of applying the science of behavior analysis to behavior change after a person has experienced significant trauma. This topic comes up frequently on behavior analytic forums. Please note that this brief outline does not describe the SAFE-T model (by which we advocate appropriate supervision, functional assessment, risk documentation, and environmental modification and training) or solutions to all the challenges it raises. Check out the other blogs on this topic, email us if you’d like to provide comments and questions, or see cuspemergenceuniversity.com for CEU and training opportunities.

Background: How is “trauma-informed behavior analysis” redundant?

I. The ethical practice of behavior analysis already requires it.

  1. We individualize (see BACB Compliance Code item 4.03)
  2. We should practice within our expertise (1.02)
    1. People whose lives are changed by major traumatic histories are changed in ways that distinguish them and their needs for specific supports, much like people who engage in serious self injury or have eating disorders are distinguished as a sub population who can benefit by specific expertise and training. We accept clients only if we are appropriately trained (2.01)
  3. We are already tasked with taking history into account, including analyzing functional relationships (3.01) and referring to consultation for medical needs as appropriate (3.02)
  4. We should refer and collaborate when needed (2.03a and 2.03b)

II. The application of behavior analysis already covers it (see Baer, Wolf and Risley 1968, 1987)

  1. Appropriate ABA tackles behavior of meaningful social significance, which it (behavior that is related to historical traumatic or aversive events) certainly is
  2. Appropriate ABA is conceptually systematic, and treatment of behavior after trauma may be conducted within the conceptual basis of behavior science
  3. We already have interventions that can be applicable and effective with this population (see our resources page for a partial reference list) including treatments for post traumatic stress disorder, using acceptance and commitment therapy principles from behavior analysis, and schedule related procedures including NCR for challenging behaviors; or see Fahmie, Iwata and Mead 2016; Iwata, Petscher, Rey and Bailey 2009; Richman, Barnard-Brak, Bosch and Abby, 2015)

III. The underlying science of behavior analysis and work on learning and behavior already describes phenomena related to behavior after trauma (see literature on reinstatement, contextual conditioning, respondent behavior, extinction in multiple contexts, etc)

  1. Laboratory work on extinction challenges from a respondent conditioning perspective can help us understand some of the unique challenges people face after experiencing trauma (see Bouton 2004)
  2. In basic research, “renewal” (return of behavior that was previously extinguished, after exposure to a conditioned stimulus- see Bouton and Bolles 1979; Harris 2000) is stronger with respondent behavior than operant behavior (Crombag and Shaham 2002)
  3. But younger behavior analysts may not have been trained to adequately appreciate respondent conditioning’s effects on behavior, and to teach others how to work with behaviors that are not operant. They may over-rely on using consequences to change behaviors, leading to criticism that “this stuff doesn’t work with my client impacted by trauma”. (Respondent conditioning is an item on both the 4th and 5th edition task lists, although respondent-operant interactions (see 4th edition, item FK-16) has been removed).

The current state: How is the phrase “trauma-informed behavior analysis” still useful (even needed) if it’s technically redundant?

I. I believe it’s helpful to both practitioners and client base.

  1. For practitioners: widespread practicing out of expertise incurs huge risks to clients, agencies, individuals and communities.
    1. Many people assume that the application of behavior analytic principles to trauma affected populations requires no nuances, and have harmed others
    2. There are not widely available risk assessments and tools to help those of us in this subarea document and collaborate as effectively as we need to
    3. There is not a collective understanding of how the collaboration can work, and many behavior analysts proceed unethically (although unintentionally)
  1. For clients: People needing the service are thwarted by bad (or just uninformed) press about ABA or and many think that ABA would be ineffective, harmful, or contradictory to their trauma-informed colleagues’ practice. This phrase gives me a way of introducing my services and assuring the recipients that I
    1. will, and do, consider their history of trauma as something that informs everything I will do for them
    2. will still be practicing behavior analysis, but from this specifically informed perspective
    3. honor both their specific background and their individual needs, using my own training and expertise in behavior analysis informed by additional experiences with social workers, those in the foster family community and others

II.  This phrase also gives me a way in, to talk to groups who haven’t had good experiences with behavior analysis

  1. including professional educators, school psychologists and therapists who have attempted collaborations that failed because clients’ trauma was overlooked or the practices were ineffective
  2. and including foster and adoptive families for whom the practice of “everyday ABA” included go-to strategies that were not (or at least not at first) helpful to their clients
  3. or people who haven’t had ANY experiences with behavior analysis (in my practice this includes people from these groups):
    1. Lawyers and courts
    2. Court appointed special advocates
    3. Social workers
    4. Trauma therapists
    5. Foster families and adoption agencies

Dreaming of the future

My goals include that one day in the near future,

  1. Treating behavior after trauma is a specialty in which behavior analysts can readily obtain experience from several field experts, similar to how they gather expertise specifically in treating behaviors such as severe self-harm, pica, or disordered eating, or behaviors in people with autism or genetic differences, or those in pediatric or geriatric populations.
  2. For recipients of behavior analysis, it will be simple and easy to find several options for treatment for behavior after trauma, from people with appropriate understanding, training and supervision, that can help them and collaborate effectively with other members of their team
  3. There are multiple funding streams to readily serve the population (examples: foster care, social workers, etc)
  4. And “everyday behavior analysis” is no longer viewed as contradictory to the support that would benefit people with historical experiences described as traumatic

Takeaway: I agree that saying behavior analysis should be “trauma-informed” can be redundant, since the basic science is rigorous enough to describe why our behavior is changed after and challenged by trauma. But I use it because it helps communicate what I do to people who have a specific history, and to help other behavior analysts understand how to establish an ethical approach to the intense documentation, risk mitigation, collaboration, and assessment that is required while using existing behavior analytic procedures to support those affected.

What’s your take? Send me a note or share a resource any time.

See or add to our growing reference list related to behavioral treatment of trauma.