A survey of state policies regarding the use of restrictive/aversive behavior modification procedures

Abstract

A survey was conducted of the state policies regarding the use of restrictive/ aversive behavior modification procedures with mentally retarded persons. Policies varied substantially with respect to both scope and length; however, the overwhelming majority required that behavior modification programs be developed through the interdisciplinary planning process. No consistent pattern emerged with respect to the review and approval process for the use of aversive procedures. Approximately 75% of the states appear to permit the use of restraint as a treatment modality. Policies direct only minimal attention to the issue of training staff to implement aversive procedures. From the results of the survey, a model for the use of aversive procedures was developed and is presented.

The effectiveness of contingent restraint on aggression, self‐injury, and property destruction of institutionalized mentally retarded persons

“…One relatively aversive technique that has gained some degree of acceptance is the application of either personal or mechanical restraint contingent upon the emission of the inappropriate behavior. The use of restraint procedures to modify the rate of a behavior is apparently permitted in 75% of the states (Spreat & Lipinski, 1983).…”

Prevalence of severe behavior disorders in persons with mental retardation and treatment procedures used in community and institutional settings

“…An extensive literature exists on the prevention, treatment and management of behavior disorders in persons with mental retardation ( e g , Cipani, 1989;Hile & Vatterott, 1991;Matson & Gorman-Smith, 1986;Mulick & Schroeder, 1980;Schroeder, Mulick, & Schroeder, 1979;Spreat & Lipinski, 1986). Treatment of severe behavior disorders, however, remains difficult, and the method of treatment currently is controversial (e.g., Butterfield, 1989;Matson & Taras, 1989;Mulick, 1990).…”