Controversial Treatment “Elimination Diets”:Pro and Con to Controversial Treatment

QUESTION

Numerous controversial treatments are promoted for individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder. Almost all behavior analysts agree that these treatments lack sufficient empirical support. For this assignment we will be discussing “elimination diets”.

Using in text references, list all references in APA style. Also, research the treatment in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis or other professional ABA journals.

• Fully describe the Controversial Treatment “elimination diets”from at least one reputable source.
• Discuss at least one pro statement that supports the use of the treatment. These may come from experts, therapists, parents, or others. Also, discuss at least one con statement that opposes or refutes the treatment.
• Summarize these statements and evaluate your findings. Discuss at least three relevant ethics codes that you have learned in this course thus far. Evaluate the controversial treatment using at least three of the BACB ethics codes.
• Explain how to effectively evaluate treatments to determine if they are evidence based or not.
• Explain, in your conclusion, how you would discuss the importance of using evidence-based strategies with colleagues and the families with whom you work while also respecting other professions and the people involved.

Use the following template to better help organize:

Heading: Controversial Treatment “elimination diets“ In this section, you will begin by fully describing a controversial treatment using information from at least one reputable source. Describe what it might look like to implement the controversial treatment. Topics to choose from include: facilitated communication, sensory integration, hyperbaric oxygen chamber, elimination diets, chelation therapy, and floortime. Message your instructor for approval on a topic not listed. This section is worth 10% of your grade.

Heading: Pro and Con to Controversial Treatment In this section, you will discuss (in your own words) one pro and one con regarding the controversial treatment, provide significant context around these statements, and cite information from a reputable source. Direct quotes should not be utilized, as you can convey your understanding in your own words. This section is worth 20% of your grade.

Heading: Evaluation of Ethics In this section, you will evaluate the controversial treatment using at least three of the BACB ethics codes and justify your own opinion on the topic. You may provide the specific code numbers and titles of the codes you discuss. You will not copy/paste the code description. Discuss the relevance of the code to the topic in your own words. Cite and reference the BACB Ethics Codes for Behavior Analysts. For a distinguished score, you will also justify your own opinion on the topic. This section is worth 30% of your grade.

Heading: Effective Evaluation In this section, explain how to effectively evaluate treatments to determine if they are evidence based or not, using specific examples of behavior analytic procedures for evaluation. This section is worth 10% of your grade.

Heading: Communicating with Colleagues and Families In this section, you will explain how to communicate the importance of using evidence-based strategies to colleagues and family members (also discuss the difference in how you will communicate to each party) and use at least one recent scholarly resource. This section is worth 10% of your grade.

ANSWER

Controversial Treatment “Elimination Diets”

Elimination diets involve the removal of specific food groups from an individual’s diet with the belief that it can alleviate symptoms related to autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The elimination diets are often advocated to target gastrointestinal issues, behavioral challenges, or sensory sensitivities associated with ASD. The diets typically exclude gluten and casein, proteins found in wheat and dairy products, respectively. While elimination diets are widely promoted, their empirical support is lacking, and most behavior analysts agree that they should not be considered evidence-based treatments for ASD.

Pro and Con to Controversial Treatment

Pro Statement: Advocates of elimination diets argue that certain individuals with ASD might have sensitivities or intolerances to certain foods, which could exacerbate their symptoms. They believe that by removing gluten and casein, these individuals may experience improvements in gastrointestinal health, communication skills, and social interactions.

Con Statement: Research in the field of applied behavior analysis has shown limited empirical support for the effectiveness of elimination diets in treating core symptoms of ASD. A study published in the Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis (Woods et al., 2015) found that elimination diets did not result in significant improvements in problem behaviors, communication, or social interactions among individuals with ASD.

Evaluation of Ethics

Three relevant BACB ethics codes in evaluating the controversial treatment of elimination diets are:

 Responsibility: According to BACB ethics code 1.01, behavior analysts must base their professional decisions on behavior-analytic principles, empirical evidence, and applicable laws and regulations. Elimination diets lack sufficient empirical support, and thus, recommending or implementing such treatments without substantial evidence would not align with ethical standards.

 Non-Discrimination: BACB ethics code 1.05 emphasizes the importance of avoiding discrimination in professional practices. It is crucial for behavior analysts to avoid promoting treatments that may not be effective or evidence-based solely based on personal beliefs or biases.

 Integrity: BACB ethics code 2.09 states that behavior analysts should provide accurate information about behavior-analytic services. When considering the use of elimination diets, behavior analysts should be transparent about the limited empirical support and potential risks associated with the treatment.

Effective Evaluation

To effectively evaluate treatments for evidence-based practices, behavior analysts should rely on rigorous research designs, such as randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews. For example, behavior analysts can examine studies that compare the effects of elimination diets to control conditions or alternative interventions. Additionally, systematic reviews of multiple studies can provide a comprehensive evaluation of the overall effectiveness of a treatment. Conducting functional analyses to understand the function of behavior can also guide the selection of appropriate interventions.

Communicating with Colleagues and Families

When discussing the importance of evidence-based strategies with colleagues, behavior analysts can emphasize the significance of relying on empirically supported treatments to ensure the best outcomes for individuals with ASD. They can share research findings and encourage collaboration in seeking effective interventions.

When communicating with families, behavior analysts should approach the topic with sensitivity and empathy. It is essential to acknowledge parents’ concerns and perspectives while providing clear and accurate information about the evidence supporting or refuting a specific treatment. Behavior analysts can involve families in decision-making, consider individual preferences, and discuss alternative evidence-based interventions that align with the family’s goals for their loved ones.

Conclusion

The controversial treatment of elimination diets lacks sufficient empirical support and raises ethical considerations for behavior analysts. By adhering to BACB ethics codes and advocating for evidence-based practices, behavior analysts can ensure that individuals with ASD receive effective and appropriate interventions. Communication with colleagues and families should be guided by respect, transparency, and a commitment to promoting the best possible outcomes for individuals with ASD.