Content Index

A functional behavior assessment is virtually mandatory whenever one works with a child’s behavior. The intent is to make a hypothesis about the function of the behavior. Knowing that, we can test the hypothesis and then find alternate ways that the child may reach those goals. Finally, we can then teach new skills to reach the goals more appropriately. Embedded in this description is of course, thought.

One of the constructs that is vital to understand about human beings is that they create themselves. Personalities are only influenced but not created by genetics or environment. Helen Keller and the ‘elephant man’ created elegant selves despite egregious influences of both genetics and the environment. This article explores the ‘elegance’ of self and expands to consider a group theory of culture.

The functional assessment requirements of IDEA ’97 have provided an impetus for the consistent implementation and interpretation of the functional behavioral assessment or FBA. Unfortunately, it also ignored the history of children with emotional and behavioral problems who create the most difficult issues for education and clinical services. This omission occurs because of the unwillingness or inability of practitioners to identify the differences between children whose behaviors are predominantly the result of deficits and those whose difficulties are primarily the result of distortion.

Since school is likely to be the first and most powerful socializing environment outside of the home that children in this society will face, it seems incomprehensible that more effort is not made in helping children with the adjustments that they need to make. Instead, the teaching and administrative staff tend to view the children who fail to adjust as ‘interlopers’, who need to be removed as quickly as possible so that the rest of the children can achieve academically.

This is an article about assessment. It is built upon three concepts: 1) that interactions between people create thoughts in the other person which may be helpful and/or harmful; 2) that this interrelatedness extends to all of the people who regularly populate an individual’s ecosystem; and 3) that these regular participants need to take responsibility for the whole, not simply draw attention to a part. These concepts might suggest that referral and assessment for professional clinical services may be ‘toxic’ as presently implemented.

The question of ethics in human services is unfortunately not always a priority consideration for the people involved. We cannot have failed our children so consistently over such a long period of time, and have considered very seriously or deeply the ethics of what we are doing. This article does not presume to present all of the ethical issues which might be considered in human services, but hopes to highlight the need for thought about ethics and how our decisions conscious or nonconscious impact our expectations, implementations and outcomes.