02/06/2025
Is all behavioural science ‘bad science’? Maybe not quite … Cognitive Behavioural Therapy, for example, may be beneficial to some who struggle to manage their own self-regulatory processes and it is essentially something one applies to oneself. It is not something imposed on you whether you want it or not. This is THE problem with Behavioural Support as it is almost always something that is done to another person – often a person who is vulnerable and/or has difficulty communicating and consenting to the ‘treatment’. A behaviour plan is a prescribed recipe for interaction and caregivers are all expected to follow the same plan/recipe. Somehow, this is supposed to provide ‘consistency’ of approach for the person being supported. However, as anyone knows, you can give ten different people a recipe to follow and you will end up with ten different dishes – the plates of food might look something alike, but they will all taste very different.
Dan Hobbs used to say "the most important skill we can teach caregivers is judgement". PBS plans on the other hand, pre-make decisions for the caregiver – they give the caregiver something that tells them exactly what to do when Johnny, for example, hits his head or swears. When caregivers don't really need to think for themselves, there is little accountability for actions. Caregivers can just follow the recipe and if there’s any questions later, they can say "I was following orders/I did exactly what I've been told to do". So, such plans can also become an ass-covering exercise. Behaviour plans rob caregivers and careseekers of the chance to manage natural 'rupture and repair' interactions and so they often undermine any work there is going on to build connection, companionship and community. What's more, even the best behavioural programming only usually 'works' for a while before it eventually stops working or there is drift. So, these plans need constant monitoring and updating which means more 'expertise' and lots more money down the plughole. Often the resulting data evidence that we do see from behaviour plans is over short periods of time. All looks good for a while but come back in 6/7 years and then what?! Back in the day, even Skinner's rodents eventually stopped responding to his operant conditioning techniques. Skinner learned to deal with this by simply stopping data collection at the first sign of any 'regression'. He didn't report this of course but his own assistants testified to this way back in the early 1960s.
