The association for behavior analysis international position statement on restraint and seclusion

Abstract

A task force authorized by the Executive Council of the Association for Behavior Analysis International (ABAI) generated the statement below concerning the techniques called restraint and seclusion. Members of the task force independently reviewed the scientific literature concerning restraint and seclusion and agreed unanimously to the content of the statement. The Executive Council accepted the statement, and it was subsequently approved by a two-thirds majority vote of the general membership. It now constitutes official ABAI policy. The position statement is posted on the ABAI Web site (www.abainternational.org/ABA/statements/RestraintSeclusion.asp). The purpose of the position statement is to provide guidance to behavior analysts and other professionals interested in the position of ABAI on these controversial topics. In extreme cases, abuses of procedures erroneously used in the name of behavior analysis are not defensible. On the other hand, behavior analysts acting ethically and in good faith are provided with guidelines for sound and acceptably safe practice. To the extent that behavior-analytic positions influence public policy and law, this statement can be presented to officials and lawmakers to guide informed decision making. At the conclusion of the document, a bibliography is provided of articles and presentations considered by one or more task force members in developing the position statement.

Functional analysis and treatment of problem behavior exhibited by children with fragile X syndrome

“…Treatment components were applied in accordance with a least restrictive treatment philosophy (Vollmer et al, 2011); starting with reinforcement, then if necessary, adding redirection (cf. Lydon, Healy, O'Reilly, & McCoy, 2013), response blocking and protective equipment (cf.…”

Professional Practice and Ethical Issues Related to Physical Restraint and Seclusion in Schools

“…Certainly, best-practice guidelines for restraint and seclusion call for brief and limited applications, for use only as part of a multi-component intervention package that includes function-based reinforcement contingencies and team-based decision making about criteria for use of restraint and seclusion (e.g., APBA, 2009;CCBD, 2009aCCBD, , 2009bVollmer et al, 2011).…”

Treatment of Life-Threatening Pica with 5-Year Follow-up

“…Not only do restrictive practices impose limitations on an individual's ability to participate in leisure, social, and educational opportunities, they often require a substantial amount of financial and staffing resources which are not typically sustainable, especially in community-based residential settings. It is important to note that the use of restrictive procedures can be effectively and ethically applied and may be necessary under situations when client safety is at risk, the client/caregiver has provided informed consent, and the principle of least restrictive treatment is applied (Vollmer et al 2011). However, response blocking, contingent aversive consequences, and the use of seclusion, restraint, and protective devices, which are some of the most common approaches to managing severe pica (Sturmey and Williams 2016), can also be associated with a variety of negative outcomes.…”