On a tangent it has made me re-read O'Nions and Neons (2018). I think their arguments in there quickly fall down and are largely not credible.
https://twitter.com/Richard_Autism/status/1361286959860080647
At least some of them anyway. Probably explain later.
"Once anxiety or aversion have been triggered by
demands, parents report that increasing pressure on
the child to comply can precipitate more severe forms of
problem behaviour (e.g. threats, meltdowns, destructive...
demands, parents report that increasing pressure on
the child to comply can precipitate more severe forms of
problem behaviour (e.g. threats, meltdowns, destructive...
behaviour, harm to self and others; Newson et al., 2003;
O’Nions et al., 2018). This is in line with other work
with children with developmental disabilities,
O’Nions et al., 2018). This is in line with other work
with children with developmental disabilities,
... which describes distress, arousal and attempts to physically escape from demand contexts (Lucyshyn et al., 2004)." p389.
The point to this quote is that PDA demand avoidance behaviours are seen in non-autistic persons.
Yet it is contradicted by this:
"As we have described, and as Malik and Baird (2018)
also note, the mechanisms underpinning and maintaining"
Yet it is contradicted by this:
"As we have described, and as Malik and Baird (2018)
also note, the mechanisms underpinning and maintaining"
"avoidance in the context of ASD appear to differ from
those in disruptive behaviour disorders in general – motivated to a greater extent by a need to regulate negative affect triggered by demands (Brewer et al., 2014; Lucyshyn et al., 2004, 2015)."
those in disruptive behaviour disorders in general – motivated to a greater extent by a need to regulate negative affect triggered by demands (Brewer et al., 2014; Lucyshyn et al., 2004, 2015)."
The point I making is that, O'Nions and Neons, seem to be arguing for PDA to be seen as part of the autism spectrum, especially accounting for the next quote. 
I.e. that PDA needs special interventions because it presents differently in autism.
My concern here, is that if you accept their arguments against using behavioural based approaches to PDA, it would also surely be applicable to those non-autistic persons with PDA.
Especially, when they are arguing against viewing PDA as an interaction between autism & various comorbids.
Mainly as they are concerned that CYP with PDA's actions are viewed as wilful, or they would experience reinforcement based approaches, that are common parenting interventions for disruptive behaviour.
The point here is that surely, non-autistic CYP with PDA would also experience said common parenting interventions that contain reinforcement based approaches.
If a person is distressed enough to present PDA social demand avoidance behaviours, or disassociate, into roleplay/ pretend; using reinforcement based approaches, which might punish the person, are likely to aversive, regardless if they are autistic or not.
Likewise, it would be easy for the person to become traumatised if they are not allowed/ enabled to self-regulate and avoid aversive experience, to reach their optimum arousal level.
I would also challenge the view that PDA behaviours are not by choice. If one pays attention to the PDA literature, and the questions in the tools used to research/ dx PDA.
Said tools often contain questions that assess for the person manipulating other's/ getting their own way. Or committing potential criminal acts that require intent, like harassment.
For some PDA behaviours, in some circumstances its accurate to describe at "that avoidance and demand-related problem behaviour are a result of the child’s wilfulness". Thereby, can be reasonable termed "defiant". Contradicting O'Nions & Neons interpretation.
I am not entirely sure, why O'Nions & Neons are suggesting using PBS to describe PDA behaviours, as that is based on ABA, which uses ABC method; that focuses on observable behaviour, not accounting for a persons cognitive processes.
Which to me seems bonkers, if you are trying to work someone's anxiety/ distress levels, which is inherently a cognitive construct. Anxiety/ distress are meant to drive the demand avoidance behaviours.
I think that is it. Short version:
There arguments, can be used as justifications for diagnosing PDA in non-autistic persons.
Some PDA behaviours can be viewed as wilful.
Probably best not using functional analysis from PBS to investigate PDA.
There arguments, can be used as justifications for diagnosing PDA in non-autistic persons.
Some PDA behaviours can be viewed as wilful.
Probably best not using functional analysis from PBS to investigate PDA.
*Their arguments, can...*
@threadreaderapp Please could you unroll?
Ta in advance.
Ta in advance.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
