1. After decades of applied research, the field of b ehaviour analysis has developed a wealth of conceptually systematic approaches and procedures for helping society with their problems. However, empirical evidence does not appear sufficient to sway public opinion (Bailey & Burch, 2009). After reviewing articles published in The New York Times Index from 1970 to 1994, Foxx (1996) concluded that public opinion of behaviour analysis had been damaged by a number of factors. One damaging factor may be a history of unethical practices by some behaviour analysts (Foxx, 1996). This includes the unrestrained distribution of aversive consequences during the behaviour modification era and events such as the Sunland Miami scandal of 1972 (Bailey & Burch, …show more content…
In making such an assessment, we must familiarize ourselves with the literature concerning said treatment. If this assessment shows a danger to the client, we are obligated to intervene, regardless of the potential damage to our professional relationships. However, if there appears to be no danger, Brodhead (2015) further advises translating the treatment into behavioural terminology and establishing whether use of the proposed treatment would negatively affect the client’s goals. If this is the case, the Checklist for Analyzing Proposed Treatments should be consulted before objecting to the treatment (Brodhead 2015). Following consultation, Brodhead (2015) states that our decision to intervene should be determined by the extent to which the treatment will negatively affect our client’s goals and the risk to our professional relationships. This process ensures that a safe balance can be struck, between maintaining our professional relationships and striving to ensure the safety and wellbeing of our clients. This is important for the continued promotion of behaviour analysis, but also to ensure that we are well placed to intervene when it really