ABSTRACT
The Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB®) created a third level of certification, the Registered Behavior Technician™ (RBT®) in 2014. The RBT® was created based upon the requests of stakeholders who wanted to credential those individuals who make direct contact with clients under the supervision of a Board Certified Behavior Analyst®. There has been tremendous growth in the number of RBTs® with over 60,000 individuals certified to date. The BACB® recently sent out a newsletter outlining changes to the RBT® certification, including the processes of training, supervising, and becoming an RBT®. These changes represent a number of potential concerns. The purpose of this paper is to highlight these concerns and to propose solutions to improve the RBT® certification.
Subject(s)
Autism Spectrum Disorder/psychology , Autism Spectrum Disorder/therapy , Behavior Therapy/standards , Certification/standards , Professional Role/psychology , Behavior Therapy/methods , Certification/methods , HumansABSTRACT
In 2014, the Behavior Analyst Certification Board (BACB®) initiated a program for credentialing behavior technicians. The new credential, Registered Behavior Technician™ (RBT®), is for providers of behavioral intervention to a wide range of individuals with mental health needs and developmental delays, including individuals diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder (ASD). The RBT® would represent the entry-level position within the range of the BACB® credentials. Despite the increasing acceptance of this newest level of credential from the behavioral community, the authors of this paper have substantial concerns with the RBT® credential as it relates to the delivery of intervention to individuals diagnosed with ASD. The purpose of this paper is to detail these concerns and propose remedies that would ensure that individuals diagnosed with ASD receive effective behavioral intervention.
ABSTRACT
Supervised visitation centers (SVCs) have developed rapidly across the United States. Increasingly, courts are restricting contact between abusive intimate partners and their children by ordering visitation or exchanges to occur at SVCs. This article describes some of the key lessons the authors learned over 18 months of planning and then another 18 months of implementation at a SVC developed specifically to serve families for whom domestic violence was their primary reason for referral. The authors have organized their experiences around five major themes: (a) battered women in supervised visitation, (b) how battering continues during supervised visitation, (c) how rules at the SVC evolved over the first 18 months of implementation, (d) the importance of well-trained visit monitors, and (e) the need to embed SVCs within a larger context of coordinated community responses to domestic violence.
