Noam Chomsky on ABA

The vast majority of us within the #ActuallyAutistic community stand opposed to Applied Behavior Analysis (ABA). Developed in the 1960’s and building on work done in the 1940’s and 1950’s in Behavioral Psychology, ABA is essentially anything from “dog training” for kids at its best and “conversion therapy for autistic people” and torture at worst. As a person who underwent ABA I find it upon me to speak up and provide a view from someone who has been there, not as a parent of an autistic child or a casual onlooker. The autistic community stands united in denouncing ABA.

If ABA is so bad, then why is it so prevalent in the “treatment” of autism? The confusion over ABA stems from a number of issues, with the main ones being that it is supported by the United States’ biggest autism “charity”, Autism Speaks. Autism Speaks is in reality an organization which denies the agency of autistic people and the validity of the Neurodiversity movement. Beyond that, ABA is often the only insured modality for autistic children covered by insurance in the US and much of the OECD countries.

The opposition to ABA, however, is not only a political issue, but also one of ethics and of science. ABA supporters love to claim how it is based in science, facts, and peer review. Nothing could be further from the truth. As early as 1959 Professor Noam Chomsky tore apart the entire premise of the “science” behind ABA. I recently came across this blog post about the theoretical roots of ABA and Professor Chomsky’s rebuttal of them which I found interesting. I hope you enjoy and it helps shed light on this important topic.